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.

Strategies & Market Trends : India Coffee House -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sea_biscuit who wrote (8723)	10/21/1999 2:57:00 PM
From: JPR	Respond to of 12475

I am talking about the people who opposed her, not those who elected her. Hopefully, that should put an end to the "swadeshi-videshi" crap, on which her opponent Swaraj's whole campaign was based on. In elections in India and US and everywhere else, anything goes to win an election. Remember that one of my favorite presidents BUSH did himself in by saying : READ MY LIPS, NO NEW TAXES. The opponents used it well. Remember several yrs ago, one of bright presidential candidates was drummed out of candidacy for sexual exploits. He was a presidential material. Anything goes. Don't you know that NJ and NY at logger heads as to who is better, bigger, prettier, richer, glamorous etc.

To: sea_biscuit who wrote (8723)	10/21/1999 5:18:00 PM
From: JPR	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12475

Dipy: Hope you are getting ready for HALLOWEEN? Are U going to go Trick-or-Treating? Does your mama allow you? Always go with your mama or a trusted adult. What costume you are going to wear? Just wear something to beat the day lights out of your neighbors. An inexpensive item would be a white bed sheet draped on your head and body with three holes, 2 for the eyes and one for the nose. Don't go to the Jewish or black peoples' houses with that hood. You may really scare them. That will be a neat trick though. I know you like Apples and not mushrooms. DON'T ACCEPT APPLES. Some bad people hide razor blades inside the apples. You don't want to eat blades, unless you are a professional sword swallower and blade eater. I would recommend using BJP, RSS, VHP, Shiv Sena and Bajrang Dal LOUTS life size replicas in a battlefield set in your backyard, where these louts are scattered around in dismembered body parts. Make it look as morbid as possible. That will scare the biomass out of anybody. But really have a nice Halloween.

To: sea_biscuit who wrote (8723)	10/22/1999 8:02:00 AM
From: JPR	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12475

"swadeshi-videshi" crap, Dipy: Vertigo Here is something, DIPY, that will disorient you sufficiently that it will knock your socks (& kilt) off and jolt you out of your kilter. Try using it and you wish you never made fun of us, pooping squatters. Do it at your own risk. You were sufficiently warned. toilet.com

To: sea_biscuit who wrote (8723)	10/22/1999 8:10:00 AM
From: JPR	Respond to of 12475

"swadeshi-videshi" crap, toilet.com What was that, man? Did you have the ride of your life? Felt like an astronaut in weightless space. Did you see the biomass flying in weightless random movements? Are you still shaking, man? This is better than the Disney Rocket take off. It was a nightmare, man. I may not want to do it anymore, my man.

To: sea_biscuit who wrote (8723)	10/22/1999 2:25:00 PM
From: JPR	Respond to of 12475

Soft Money and Hard Bargain NY Times OP-ED search.nytimes.com But the unlimited amounts that pour through the soft-money loophole are dangerous. failing to donate could hurt your company. - and a $50,000 or $1 million check filtered through a party as "soft money." By EDWARD A. KANGAS You could almost hear the laughter coming from board rooms and executive suites all over the country when Senate opponents of campaign-finance reform expressed dismay that anyone could think big political contributions are corrupting elections and government. On Tuesday, those opponents prevailed, blocking a final vote this year on banning soft-money contributions. But the innocent and benign system described by the Senators arguing against reform hardly passed the laugh test for those of us on the receiving end of the soft-money shakedown. For a growing number of executives, there's no question that the unrelenting pressure for five- and six-figure political contributions amounts to influence peddling and a corrupting influence. What has been called legalized bribery looks like extortion to us. The Senators who oppose reform would be far more credible and receive a sympathetic ear if they admitted the high cost of campaigns force them to focus on large contributors, rather than defending the system. Congress passed laws that would put corporate executives in jail for offering money to a foreign official in the course of commerce. Now some of its members express bewilderment when people note that there is something unseemly about making large payments to the campaign committees of American elected officials. I know from personal experience and from other executives that it's not easy saying no to appeals for cash from powerful members of Congress or their operatives. Congress can have a major impact on businesses. The solicitors know it, and we know it. The threat may be veiled, but the message is clear: failing to donate could hurt your company. You must weigh whether you meet your responsibility to your shareholders better by investing the money in the company or by sending it to Washington. Increasingly, fund-raisers also make sure you know that your competitors have contributed, implying that you should pay a toll in Washington to stay competitive. Unlike individual donations, most large corporate contributions aren't made as gestures of good will or for ideological reasons. Corporations are thinking of the bottom line. Will the contribution help or hurt the company? Despite the protestations of some Senators, everyone knows big checks get noticed. Like most Americans, corporate executives also now the issue isn't really free speech. (You'll notice that the First Amendment argument is more often made by the listeners, the politicians, than by the speakers.) Companies don't question their ability to speak forcefully. We have lobbyists and trade associations, and we provide many jobs -- all of which help us to be heard. And, as salesmen, we resent the idea that the only way we can get a chance to make an effective pitch about legislation is to pay a large fee. One clear sign of the growing dissatisfaction of corporate leaders with this pressure is the endorsement by more than 200 business and civic leaders of a campaign finance reform plan made by the Committee for Economic Development, a group of chief executives and academic leaders. This group, of which I am a member, is not saying that all political contributions are bad or corrupting. We know campaigns cost money. But we see what should be obvious to everyone. There's a big difference between a $1,000 contribution -- the current limit on individuals' donations to a campaign -- and a $50,000 or $1 million check filtered through a party as "soft money." The potential for corruption is minimal at $1,000, or even at the $3,000 level to which our reform plan would raise individual contribution limits. But the unlimited amounts that pour through the soft-money loophole are dangerous. Americans understand the influence of money. It's time to give elections back to democracy's shareholders -- the voters. Edward A. Kangas is the chairman of the global board of directors of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu.