In his “BYTE OF THE APPLE” column for BusinessWeek, Technology Editor, Alex Salkever outlines “why Apple shouldn’t vote for Gore.”
“The failed Presidential contender is a business novice whose board nomination raises more questions about Apple’s governance. In The Global-Investor Book of Investing Rules (Financial Times Prentice Hall), shareholder activist and gadfly money manager Robert Monks, with tongue planted firmly in cheek, coined a new rule for investors: Short the stock of any company employing a former Tennessee senator on its board. After all, Albert Gore Sr. sat on the board of oil giant Occidental Petroleum (OXY ) during a period of corporate misdeeds back in the 1960s. Former Senate Majority Leader Howard Baker of the Volunteer State was on the board of Waste Management (WMI ), another troubled outfit. Construction concern Stone & Young had on its board ex-Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson. It declared bankruptcy soon after his tenure.”
“Now comes 2000 Democratic Presidential nominee Albert Gore Jr., another former Tennessee senator, who has accepted nomination to Apple Computer’s (AAPL ) board of directors. If past is prologue, Apple shareholders better keep their eyes open and their ears peeled.”
Full article here.
I’ve sat here for some time trying to formulate a response to the vitriolic diatribe dispensed upon the opinion page here. I’m amazed at the depth of your hatred for Mr. Gore, but the shallowness of your arguments. So you can quote Rush Limbaugh. Yay. Now stop borrowing from the blowhard and use your own mental faculties to determine for yourself what effect Mr. Gore will have upon the company.
If you cannot perceive that Al Gore (yes, there’s a space between his first and last names) will cause damage to Apple, then by all means learn Win XP, and get your Borg on.
Otherwise, consider that Apple’s management may know what it’s doing, since it’s got a fairly strong track record following Amelio’s ouster.
That’s right…. Thanx(sic) Jason…. Too many years with spell checks takes it’s toll…
Well Back to work… Lunch it’s over… It’s been great practicing our right to free speech with you all…..
I hope that right NEVER goes away!!!!
Jason,
Robert Parry is a well-respected former AP and Newsweek journalist. He was responsible for breaking Iran-Contra. Perhaps you should do some research. Or better yet, try to refute the information in his article. Good luck.
Bobby
A Republican talking about honesty in campaign financing is oxymoronic!!!! Noooo Wait.. It’s Laughable…. Oh My Good that’s funny….
Check out the Multi-Million Dollar Contract Dick Cheney’s old company just Picked up….
Geezzz I love you Republicans for a Good laugh…
Good thing you really don’t believe your own propoganda….
You really Don’t believe it do You?
Eddy,
My only point is that if you are trying to make a point, use articles from non biased sources. No matter the content of the article, if I post a link from Rush Limbaugh’s site no one will take it seriously. No matter his past accolades, this author is obviously libreal and slants his article that way. We can rehash statistics all day, but at the end of the day George W. is still president. Complaining about the election just sounds like sour grapes. I guess if anyone really believed that the election was unfair, some of the democrat congressmen/women would have put forth legislation for change. The only difference I see is the use of electronic voting devices. What about the intimidation at the polls? Aren’t those unfair to the technologically challenged? I mean if the voters of Fla can’t punch a card, how are they going to work a tablet pc? (Apologies to any Fla residents)
Matt,
Just razzing ya!
Jason,
If you consider USA Today to be a non-biased source, then so be it. Owned by Gannett News Service, they are very much right-leaning IMHO. I try to get my news from as many sources as possible, including over seas.
To Bobby…Rush Limbaugh honest? And what the hell does Enron have to do with Gore. You might want to take a look at your beloved current president on that one! Get your history straight.
Although I voted for Gore back in the 80s during his first run for prez (he lost in the primaries) this was before he became a radical-leftist-enviro-loony (and infamous sore loser). IMHO Gore is about as qualified to be President as he is to be a director at Apple. I shudder to think how he would be dealing with Saddam right now, [repeat in low monotone]: “We’ll put Saddam’s nukes in a large LOCKBOX.”
Considering that the current economic climate is the direct result of Clinton/Gore policies (or lack thereof) in the late 90s, I fail to understand how Gore actually gets the nod for a job like this. Don’t you normally want someone with a track record of SUCCESS to be on your board?!
Since Gore is little more than an SNL caricature these days, he really has no foreseeable future in public life, which reduces his cachet by a considerable amount. Furthermore, Gore is a political FOE of the current administration and congress so that doesn’t help Apple. Adding insult to injury, he is demonstrably anti-corporate (except for Occidental Oil), loves taxes and regulation, and is tainted by Clinton misdeeds (remember “no controlling authority”?). Finally, since he is only moderately educated and of average IQ, I see no possible benefit to Apple on that front either.
Of course, there is that “avid Mac user and does his own video editing in Final Cut Pro” thing (don’t you love the use of the words “avid” and “final cut pro” in the same sentence in an Apple press release?). Then again, many of those posting to this forum probably have those qualifications so that can’t be the reason. It is more likely that the appointment has to be some kind of payback for a past favor.
Hard to say (or fathom).
-B
I am the only centrist posting here, apparently. A centrist is a person who believes that everyone has SOME good ideas, but no one has a monopoly on good ideas.
Al Gore was the first politician who ‘got’ the potential of the Internet, way before anyone else did. He coined the term ‘information superhighway,’ and beat it death in much the same way that he beat ‘lockbox’ to death in the last election. Even Newt Gingrich came to his aid after the Rushpublican National Committee made up the ‘invented the internet’ quote.
Bob Somerby’s Daily Howler piece is illuminating:
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh120302.shtml
I wish I had time to really get into a debate. I wrote from the heart about what I believe to be true. Gore does not appear honest, he made several blatantly dis-honest statements and acted in a vary dishonest way after the election. Honesty has to do with knowingly doing or saying things that are untrue.
As for our current President, I think he may be the most honest politician I have seen in a long time. I trust that what he says he means … not to be confused with always being right, but I believe that as far as he knows he speaks honestly. Fortunatly I have only seen a couple of times that he has been wrong.
As far as Rush goes, he is biased, not dishonest. I have no problem that everything he says to me is the truth as he sees it. I accept the bias because it largly matches mine. On the left there is Jimmy Carter – I disagree with nearly everything he says, but I believe he is telling me the truth as he knows it. So even though I would never vote for him for anything, I would belive him until I discover he was wrong then accept that it was an honest mistake.
Gore, and even more so Clinton, do not inspire that kind of trust. I feel like they will tell me what I want to hear knowing that it is not true at the time. As I said, in my teen years I DID believe Al Gore, but seeing him repeatedly act in ways that are unprincipled have pulled that trust away.
As far as Enron and history goes. Enron was run by appearantly dishonest people. The left has done their best to associate the president with them because they contriuted to his campaign. With rare exceptions, the left always accuses the right of dishonesty by assosiation because they do not like their honestly held beliefs. Enron is dishonest, they like Bush, so Bush must be dishonest – flawed logic.
… continues in next comment …
… continued …
From the otherside we tend to see two camps on the left, the Kennedys and the Carters that we disagree with ideologically (sorry I can not spell) and the Clintons and Gores who we distrust. Ironically, it is their public adoptation of our ideas that usualy demonstrate the lies. I can respectfuly disagree with the formor group, but I can not with the later … because what they say and what they do rarely match up. Generally when we say a person is dishonest it is because they are dishonest, not because they are associated with dishonest people nor is it because we do not agree with their ideas. Do you ever hear a conservative call Ted Kennedy a liar? No, you hear them say he is a liberal.
Bush and Limbaugh are both honest conservatives in my opinion. As I have mentioned there are honest liberals. In addition there are dishonest republicans — I would not want them on Apples board either.
My complaints against Gore are I do not trust him and he he brings this kind of contraversy with out adding any value to the company that I can see.
I hope I have stated my opinions clearly enough to drop out of this debate so I can get some work done. I love discussions, but I just don’t have the time and wigh I had kept my mouth shut – so to speak.
Good luck to all, those that agree with me and those that don’t have a great day!
HA! That was great! Very funny!! Eddy, I agree getting news from many different sources is the only way to filter out the bias from both sides.
I do think Al might be a helpful addition to the Apple board. I am sure he has a lot of connections and may sucessfully lobby for Apple products in the fed government. I know the navy recently switched to Windows, remember the ship disabled by the BSOD? If I were in a war, I would much rather be supported by Macs!
Honesty (Honestly)
As I said before, I am a centrist. I have actually voted for politicians on both sides of the aisle, because I trusted that these individuals would represent me, not some party platform.
Anyway, there are lots of things that bug me about the Democrats, but the biggest thing that bugs me about the Republicans is this utterly insane notion that ‘deficits don’t matter.’ That one came of age during the Reagan Adminisration, during which the national debt quadrupled, and is current with the Bush Administration.
To me, it is the most transparently dishonest thing in the national debate, on any level, ever. You merely have to look at the billions we’re spending in interest to see that deficits do, indeed, matter.
Republicans may hang the label of ‘tax and spend’ on the Democrats, but to me, it’s a damn sight better than ‘spend and spend’. Neither Reagan nor Bush ever submitted a balanced budget. Whatever Clinton’s facility with a cigar, I’d a lot rather have him watching the books.
I am sorry, but I must agree with Apple for choosing Gore. They are truly thinking different. Going with the conventional wisdom is always the safe thing to do, but taking calculated risks can bring much greater rewards. Apple is profitable which is more than can be said for a number of other tech companies. They are doing just fine. Adding Gore is not going to cause the company any significant problems. His contacts and government expertise may actually be of benefit. And, given his politics, he is a MUCH better fit for Jobs than would some stuffy conservative corporate white shirt and tie. To think that Apple would function with that type of board is plain nonsense. Jobs went this way once and what did it get him? Ousted that’s what. It won’t be happening again and that is good. Jobs is a true visionary and will give us excellent products. I’m sure the board is only to guide him regarding details that Jobs has little expertise in. I don’t see this as a bad move, we just need to rise above petty politics and look rationally at this. Conservative suit and tie types just don’t do well running Apple. If that were the case, Sculley, Spindler and Amelio would have been outstanding. Well, they nearly drove Apple into the ground. I do have to hand it to Amelio, though. He brought Jobs back and essentially saved the company. Gore will work well in this board, even if hand picked by Jobs. We just need to ignore the analysts. Both of Jobs ventures are really doing quite well. Perhaps Business Week would like to take a look at the board over at Pixar. They can then drive both companies back into the ground. Perhaps it is some Microsoftian plot to once again oust Jobs. I don’t know, but there are definitely worse things than choosing Gore.
For those who would choose a computer based on politics rather than other more rational reasons, I am glad they aren’t making any major decisions. I can see it now. Some corporate type says to Jobs, “You can’t sell a computer with no expansion slots, no floppy drive, a built in monitor and running the Mac OS”. Well, the iMac would have died as would Apple’s future. Perhaps those who use Apple machines don’t know how to “Think Different” enough.
The real Question is whatever happened to Charles Haddad?
Did BW fire him? The articles written by his replacements are back to the old “lets bash Apple” journalism that most neophyte writers like to do.
He must have asked for a raise.
By the way, do you really think that Al Gore could do any worse than Larry Ellison? The board is kinda like our house and senate… Just for show. Steve runs Apple and GW runs our country, so wake up!!
Hey Bob, You are not the only centrist… I find extreme liberals equally as annoying as extreme conservatives… It is just easier to get a rise out of the conservatives(Bobby is proof of that) … I am an Arch-Moderate at best…
I love picking on conservative,,, particularly right after they have spent their lunch hour huddle by the car radio letting Rush Limbaugh get them all frothed up… They are like wind up toys… Push their buttons and they say the darndest things…
“I am waiting for the old fall back arguement to appear on this thread… Apple is unpatriotic for selecting Gore….”
“Apple selection of Gore shows they do not support our troops.”
This is the REAL launguage of the Conservatives…
Stop nodding your head and REALLY listen to Mr. Limbaugh some time.. You will see him for the Idiot he really is…
Matt Dair wrote: “Stop nodding your head and REALLY listen to Mr. Limbaugh some time.. You will see him for the Idiot he really is…”
(I’ll tie this back to the discussion at hand in a moment but I can’t let this kind of ad hominem attack stand.)
Typically it is the liberal elite who work themselves into a lather by the time a Limbaugh show signs off for the day (he often talks on his show about his love for “tweaking the libs”). Hence the current effort to get a “liberal radio network” going to counter him. Yeah, like that’s ever going to work
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
Limbaugh may be one of the most self-assured men ever to take to the airwaves but that doesn’t make him stupid. He never graduated from college yet he can talk logical circles around the brightest pundit, politico, or academic. He is a self-made millionaire and is probably the most popular political commentator working today. Hardly the mark of an “idiot”.
Of course, as a Mac aficionado for, well, since the beginning, Limbaugh proves he is smarter than the average man or woman on the street (Mac fans usually are, whether on the left or the right). As such, even left-leaning Mac fans should appreciate him. In fact, take a look at his web cam sometime; he has a beautiful 23″ Cinema Display showing itself off to the world live for 15 hours per week. Apple probably gets more free air time from a Limbaugh web cast than any other place in the media so agree or disagree, he is a major Apple ally.
Actually, he would be perfect for the Apple BoD.
-B
The actual quote that Al Gore made regarding the Internet to Wolf Blitzer in a 1999 interview was “During my service in the United States Congress I took the initiative in creating the Internet”. Gore fans now tell us that the GOP “lied” when it claimed that Gore said he “invented” the Internet, however, this accusation is disingenuous.
If famous chemist, George Washington Carver had said “I took the initiative in creating mayonnaise” and then I said George “INVENTED” mayonnaise it turns out that neither one of us could be accused of lying. George DID invent mayonnaise and thus, his claim that he “created” it is pretty much spot on.
This cannot be said of Gore. He neither “invented” NOR “created” the Internet. The best he could claim is that he was an early political cheerleader for the further development of the Internet but this was in 1987 for Pete’s sake!
What IS true is that there are quotes from noted GOP members like Trent Lott and Dick Armey who mocked Gore for his statement but they did so using Gore’s actual phrase: “created” not “invented”. However, as I illustrate above, most people typically would understand the two terms to be pretty much synonymous.
If you want to read the best executive summary of the history of this debate (and the Internet) check out this well researched article by the editor of Reason magazine.
Cheers,
-B
Oh Beeblebrox Please…
Just because Rush never shuts up long enough for anyone to REALLY debate him does not make him an intelligent speaker… It is easy to when the debate when you control the forum…
Sorry, Rush’s constant “because I am right.” quips to anyone who disagrees with him hardly qualifies as an honest debate on any issue…
You should also keep in mind Rush in ans entertainer… Nothing More! I do give him credit for his Creative Zeal, even if I do not agree with it… And like most creative people Rush uses a Mac… Darn so we can’t damn him to hell…
Completely….
Trent Lott? Dick Armey? Mouth-breathers.
On September 1, 2000, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich addressed the American Political Science Association. His remarks were broadcast on C-SPAN:
GINGRICH: In all fairness, it?s something Gore had worked on a long time. Gore is not the Father of the Internet, but in all fairness, Gore is the person who, in the Congress, most systematically worked to make sure that we got to an Internet, and the truth is?and I worked with him starting in 1978 when I got [to Congress], we were both part of a ?futures group??the fact is, in the Clinton administration, the world we had talked about in the ?80s began to actually happen.
Al Gore is going to have a tremendous effect on Apple, leading the company to new heights. Now, if Steve could find a religious leader to join up……..
Interesting discussion.
It’s unfortunate that Matt D finds it necessary to respond Bobby’s well-written, sincere, respectful post with ad hominem attacks. I would have liked to have seen Matt — or someone come up with something more subatantial. Bobby- kudos for putting forth your point of view so effectively.
Whatever your position, I think we can say that putting Al on the board will alienate some of Apple’s market to some degree. I’m sure they must acknowledge this and accept the risk. I, for one, would not be willing to select someone so divisive if I were Steve. I think alienating customers is never a good thing and think it should be avoided like the plague.
the Switch campaign is the big focus in the company at the moment, as we all know. If we look at the psycology of liberals and conservatives, I would contend that liberals would be more open to switching platforms than conservatives. Conservatives tend to be more set in their ways and thus the harder sell. Bringing Al Gore on only makes this sell more dificult.
Then there is that honesty thing. This is an “each to his own” kinda deal, but for me, I don’t find Al honest, and I wouldn’t trust him to tell it to me straight. Frankly, I don’t think most Wall Street analysts would either, and they influence Apple’s stock price to a significant degree. Wall street trends more conservative in general.
Anyone who has arranged a push poll in advance in order to plant a seed of doubt in voters’ minds, cries for a recount in select counties that are heavily democrat and notiously corrupt with a history of election fraud favoring democrats, and completely disregard established state election laws utilizing a heavily weighted liberal state supreme court in order to invalidate an election has ethical issues and should not be sitting on any board, unless it’s a splintery pine one in the exercise yard or cafeteria of a federal pen. But that’s just my opinion.
disclaimer: I don’t like Bush either. I’m not for the war. Vote Libertarian.
Gore. Horrible. I felt sick when i read the press release. Disillusioned. Dismayed. It was like someone had destroyed the perfect fairy-tale Apple I believed in and replaced it with worm-eaten rotten putrescence.
I have been marred forever. I do own apple stock, and many Apple computers, I am more tech savvy than most people on the planet, I speak several languages… heck I would be a better choice for the BoD of Apple!
Apple is truly in a hole now though. Imagine how much flak they’ll get if they reverse the decision. I for one would applaud, and hope that they are never again so foolish.
http://www.corpwatch.org/issues/PID.jsp?articleid=6008
This article is right on track, with a caveat about politicians on corporate boards. Despite the fact that I wouldn’t trust ALGORE if he told me he was lying, the real issue is not political, it’s compotence. ALGORE ain’t got it…