|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
These complaints are all about style and nothing about substance. Fire
Lindsay for his appearance? That tells me more about you than it does about
Lindsay. I'll take substance over style any day. If O'Neill continues to
ineffectually lisp his way thru every interview for the next 6 years but
cuts my taxes the whole time and let's me save more tax free for my own
retirement, I'll take it.
By the way, you don't think West Wing is real do you? They're all real
pretty and well groomed.
So re-capping your list of specifics:
1) They're invisible (opinion).
2) They don't command respect (opinion).
3) They aren't articulate (opinion).
4) They might be God's gift to economic thought (opinion, but dismissed).
5) Can't generate confidence (opinion, but even Rubenski couldn't generate
confidence in this market).
Oh well, maybe Simms can come up with something. And frankly, I'd like my
pubilc officials to be a little less attracted to the klieg lights.
As for your comments on Thompson, is he a member of the economic team? I
thought he was Health and Human Services. Do you really want him out
announcing new HHS programs every week? I sure don't. If HHS dies a quiet
death, I would think Tommy Thompson was the best HHS secretary ever. I
would ask you how he flubbed the anthrax attack but I'm not interested in
your opinion of his appearance.
As for your comments on Ridge, is he a member of the economic team? I
thought he was Homeland Security. Do you really want him out announcing new
Homeland Security programs every week? I sure don't. If Homeland Security
dies a quiet death, I would think Ridge was the best Homeland Security
director ever. I would ask you how he flubbed being a figurehead but I'm
not interested in your opinion of his appearance.
Kent
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Johnson" <jejohn@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Kent Rollins" <kentr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 9:08 PM
Subject: Re[4]: [RT] One dummy down, more to go....
Hello Kent,
Specifics are tough to come by in these cases. Most of these guys and
girls are totally invisible, stand for nothing apparently and don't
command respect or attention. To me that immediately disqualifies
them from world-class status as national leaders.
Lindsay and O'Neill lack any shred of leadership. Neither is
articulate or particularly incisive--at least at the public level of
discourse. Perhaps behind closed doors they God's gift to economic
thought. But if they can't generate confidence in the markets, public
or are completely invisible, they are unfit. I personally would fire
Lindsay for his slovenly appearance. Anytime he talks it is vacuous.
Nothing said, just cheerleading and obfuscation. The other top
ecomomist (can't remember his name) is the same.
O'Neill's claim to fame is setting safety records at Alcoa. whoopie!
I didn't like Ruben's politics but at least he had a point of view
that was understandable and commanded attention and respect. The
majority of the audience couldn't care less what O'Neill has to
say--except perhaps to be entertained by some gaff.
Tommy Thompson has shown himself to be misplaced. He flubbed the
antrax scare at the start and never recovered. No one looks to him as
source of knowledge, leadership on those issues. I have heard no
coherent approach, guiding priciples, critique of the welfare, health
care, public health strategy of the administration.
Ridge is a no-show as head of domestic security. He has been a figure
head at best. Again no real plan, guiding priciples, effective
retoric from a bully pulpit etc.
Best regards,
Jim Johnson mailto:jejohn@xxxxxxxxxxx
--
Friday, November 8, 2002, 8:43:07 PM, you wrote:
KR> Exactly what is so bad about W's economic team? I would like to hear
some
KR> specifics from Simms and Johnson. Specifics.
KR> They got a massive tax cut though a Democratic Senate and they are
working
KR> to make them permanent and enact some more. They are working to
privatize
KR> Socialist Security. They are working to expand free trade.
KR> Those are positives. What are the negatives?
KR> Kent
KR> ----- Original Message -----
KR> From: "Jim Johnson" <jejohn@xxxxxxxxxxx>
KR> To: "M. Simms" <prosys@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
KR> Cc: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
KR> Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 8:29 PM
KR> Subject: Re[2]: [RT] One dummy down, more to go....
KR> Hello M.,
KR> I do agree with you that W's domestic team, esp the econ team, is weak
KR> and ineffectual. I hope he cleans house for the good of the US and his
KR> administration. But your assessment of there pressure on W is wishful
KR> thinking. He is bullet proof for longer than 6 months. The Pitt
KR> resignation would have had more political advantage for Bush had it
KR> been done the <day before> the election. It would have shown W to be
KR> concerned about corp corruption and all that blather the libs spout.
KR> In my opinion W is perfectly situated for re-election. Market has
KR> declined in first two years, rates get slashed. year 3 of election
KR> cycle clicks in soon, maybe already. market rallies into Nov, 04.
KR> Dem's will put Pelosi in as minority leader. she will embarrass the
KR> Dem's every day. Gray Davis will be a persona non grata by Nov, 04
KR> and W will attempt to retake California. Dem's are already switching
KR> parties in the Georgia house. This looks to me like a replay of
KR> Reagan's reign--tax cuts, economy pops, deficit that doesn't really
KR> matter
KR> W's vulnerability is that the economy is so broken it won't respond
KR> normally or there's another terror incident that can be traced to
KR> missteps of his administration.
KR> that's my wishful thinking :)
KR> Best regards,
KR> Jim Johnson mailto:jejohn@xxxxxxxxxxx
KR> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
KR> realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
KR> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|