| Author |
Message |
    
ligeti
Citizen
Username: Ligeti
Post Number: 49
Registered: 7-2002
| | Posted on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 11:10 am: |     |
Re: Paul O'Neill. I personally don't think employees should trash their former employers in public, and O'Neill has not handled this well. But I think he's telling the truth -- he was in a very high profile position, with witnesses everywhere, and too much of what he has claimed could be easily confirmed or disproven. Interesting that the Bush folks have not been very convincing in refuting his claims. And funny how a guy like Dick Morris has essentially done the same thing -- aired his Clinton dirty laundry -- and the blockhead media bullies (Hannity, O'Reilly, Coulter, Rush) throw themselves at his feet. He's a fountain of wisdom! In the end -- in this case -- conservatives lie about war and money, Democrats about oral sex. |
Reflective
Citizen
Username: Reflective
Post Number: 245
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 16, 2004 - 8:37 pm: | |
Ligeti
Hello!
Oneill didn't even write the book, a Wall Street Journal reporter did. the WSJ has said in an editorial that the reporter is a Clinton supporter. Nothing wrong with that but it's important to note the politics of the one who ACTUALLY wrote the book.
Oneill turned over 19,000 documents to him to write the book.
Oneill has basically disavowed the comments and book, and seems embarrassed. He should be.
So, respectfully, your entire post is a false one.
Are you by any chance that NY Times reporter who was kinda, slowly fired for similar false reporting? |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 1800
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2004 - 1:33 am: | |
Disavowed? Where? (what does the modifier "basically" mean, while you're at it).
"Seems embarassed"? Again, what does that mean. And how does a "basically" plus a "seems" equal "your entire post is a false one."?
1) he was in a very high profile position: Duh, yeah, his name goes on the money!
2) with witnesses everywhere: Yep, cabinet meetings are full of them.
3) too much of what he has claimed could be easily confirmed or disproven: True again.
Let me know when I get to something false... |
Dave Ross
Citizen
Username: Dave
Post Number: 6138
Registered: 4-1998
| | Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2004 - 10:00 am: | |
That O'Neill didn't personally pen the book is irrelevant.
The claim that O'Neill seems embarrassed is a judgment call and by no means factual.
The initial post here by ligeti is a list of facts (which Tom points out) culminating in an opinion.
Opions can't be false. You can consider them wrong, but an opinion is a value judgment based on facts.
Facts in themselves can be true or false.
So, respectfully, Reflective's claim that the "entire post is false" is false. |
sbenois
Citizen
Username: Sbenois
Post Number: 10607
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2004 - 10:07 am: | |
quote:The initial post here by ligeti is a list of facts (which Tom points out) culminating in an opinion.
Re: Paul O'Neill. I personally don't think employees should trash their former employers in public, and O'Neill has not handled this well.
this is an opinion...
But I think he's telling the truth -- he was in a very high profile position, with witnesses everywhere, and too much of what he has claimed could be easily confirmed or disproven.
this is an opinion...
Interesting that the Bush folks have not been very convincing in refuting his claims.
this is an opinion...
And funny how a guy like Dick Morris has essentially done the same thing -- aired his Clinton dirty laundry -- and the blockhead media bullies (Hannity, O'Reilly, Coulter, Rush) throw themselves at his feet.
this is an opinion...
He's a fountain of wisdom! In the end -- in this case -- conservatives lie about war and money, Democrats about oral sex.
this is an opinion...
So where exactly were those facts?
---> Brought to you by Sbenois Engineering LLC <-
Hey, it also wouldn’t look good coming out of a motel with your wife’s best friend saying you were just planning a surprise birthday party for her husband...- Arturo November '03
|
Dave Ross
Citizen
Username: Dave
Post Number: 6139
Registered: 4-1998
| | Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2004 - 10:21 am: | |
"he was in a very high profile position, with witnesses everywhere, and too much of what he has claimed could be easily confirmed or disproven" |
sbenois
Citizen
Username: Sbenois
Post Number: 10612
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2004 - 10:24 am: | |
Well I guess you've come down a bit in your belief that the original post was "a list of facts".
---> Brought to you by Sbenois Engineering LLC <-
Hey, it also wouldn’t look good coming out of a motel with your wife’s best friend saying you were just planning a surprise birthday party for her husband...- Arturo November '03
|
Dave Ross
Citizen
Username: Dave
Post Number: 6142
Registered: 4-1998
| | Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2004 - 10:41 am: | |
I never meant to mean that. |
Reflective
Citizen
Username: Reflective
Post Number: 251
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2004 - 8:35 pm: | |
Shebenois
methinks davey is speaking out of both sides of his mouth to keep this thread going..
Even tho I am lol, the thread is becoming like an Iowa Dem debate where up is down and night is day.
|
hariseldon
Citizen
Username: Hariseldon
Post Number: 154
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, January 18, 2004 - 11:12 pm: | |
Judging by the quick reversal, I'd say that O'Neill was threatened and forced to recant - like Galileo. The threat to investigate alleged "security breaches" is clearly intended to intimidate.
As for Suskind-the left wing author, we all know what a bunch of pinko's the Wall Street Journal hires. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page