Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (981665)	11/15/2016 6:10:20 AM
From: Taro	1 Recommendation Recommended By TideGlider Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1570679

No, because she is smart, well educated with no government 'achievements' like Benghazi, Libya/Ghadaffi murders etc. - and no crooked activities.

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (981665)	11/15/2016 4:50:35 PM
From: one_less	2 Recommendations Recommended By Taro TideGlider Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570679

>>>Because she was so active and accomplished so much in government? Do you remember the crisis following the collapse of the USSR? Do you remember how the world was destabilized and world war seemed so immanent? No? Well no one else does either. Credit goes to Condi, she was an expert at Russian military and civilian relations. George Bush 1 had asked her to leave a highly accomplished career at Stanford to help manage this transition. George Bush 1 was so happy with her that he insisted his son consider her as Secretary of State. Do you remember all the foreign relations debacles she caused? No one else does either. She never tooted her own horn but she was the most successful Secretary of State in modern times. I wouldn't want to see her elected to president though because I hate to see a good woman ruined. I'd vote for her if she ran and pray for her if she got it.