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 : Libertarian Discussion Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim S who wrote (3700)	5/16/2000 6:07:00 AM
From: chalu2	Respond to of 13062

Sorry to burst your bubble, but New Yorkers are not the cause of your problems. I doubt there is one New Yorker in 500,000 who knows anything at all about your issues with wolves, timber, Indian artifacts, spotted owls, mining, or anything else going on where you live. That's right--can you believe it?--the people here are not conspiring to ruin your life. I try to stay on top of current events, and I seem to remember something a while back about snail darters and spotted owls, but I simply don't know where these animals live, or what happened with them. I am sure my Congressman would not gain or lose one constituent vote because of his stance on wolf reintroduction. I don't recall ever having said that I am better than anyone else. Truth be told, it is you who are the ultimate elitist and classist. Only you and "your kind" are any good. Others such and Yankees (and Lord knows who else)are "bad", malevolent trash because they are presumably not like the elite group you belong to. I don't care about a man's race, his nationality, his ethnic group, or his state of residence. Your behavior leads me to believe that one or more of these things are of extreme importance to you, because you live to pile on stereotype after stereotype to fit your preconceptions. All of your posts reek of one prejudice or another. And, of course, anyone who expresses knowledge of the horrors of the Holocaust is "implying" that he is Jewish. Yet another of your stereotypes and prejudices. I know because my Polish grandparents suffered atrocities at the hands of Hitler. Here's what one of Hitler's top lieutenants said would be the ultimate fate of the Poles: "All Poles will disappear from the world.... It is essential that the great German people should consider it as its major task to destroy all Poles." Heinrich Himmler Three and a half million Catholic Poles died as slave laborers, through shootings, or at camps such as Oswiecim. Thousands of priests and nuns were slaughtered. Sorry, again, to challenge one of your stereotypes. I never concentrate on anyone's ethnic group or background (except to make a point of how foolish it is to do that), not because I'm better than everyone else, but because I'm no better than everyone else. Only people trying to elevate themselves to an "elite" class do that. You do that in your posts (at least as to educational and regional background--I strongly suspect there is an ethnic element here, too, but I can't prove it). That's why it is crucial for you to stereotype others--you are good because "they" are bad. You are noble because "they" are persecuting you. Everyone but "your kind" are dishonest filth. Again my apologies for shattering your myths, but New Yorkers (we are not in New England, by the way), don't know if Montana has no wolves, or a million wolves. I've never heard anyone in my life mention wolves, Indian artifacts, or spotted owls. We just don't know--get it? You couldn't find 0.1% of Yankees around here who would care if you killed every wolf and ate it for dinner, or imported 10 million more wolves and renamed your state Wolfsylvania. You'll have to find a new imaginary enemy. The conspiracy you need is not being hatched from here.

To: Jim S who wrote (3700)	5/16/2000 9:34:00 AM
From: Daniel W. Koehler	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 13062

Jim <<Only after making a HUGE point of your superiority as someone who knows the results of the Holocost. Don't play that game with those of us who watched the discussion develop. You IMPLIED that you were Jewish or that you had close Jewish affiliations. The question to confirm was not only reasonable, it was sympathetic to your position. But then you snarled like a beast and spun it around to attack the questioner as a bigot. Very Klintonian. You prove your "virtue" by humiliating someone. Deceit. Obfuscation. Your trademark.>> Well-stated! Wish I'd said that. Thanks for the support. Nice try with chalu2. But he's a one man UN and is drunk on the law and statism. His only tool is a hammer,so the rest of the world looks like a nail. And remember, never argue with a drunk. I, for one, am tired of his contributions on the board and will not respond to him. Daniel

To: Jim S who wrote (3700)	6/4/2000 3:02:00 PM
From: Dan B.	Respond to of 13062

Having just read this exchange, I feel compelled to add as simply as I can why I feel you are right. Re: "...Here's what you said: >>Plus, I said explicitly that they found it a states' right violation, plainly meaning that the state right of rape victims to sue was being impinged.<< I hate to tell you, pal, but WORDS MEAN THINGS. You can try to obfuscate all you want, but the meaning of your words are clear -- States don't have the right to sue because a person was raped." The above is correct, despite the fact that his statement repeats reasoning within the decision, since the context was clearly in representing the final decision itself, not reasoning within. What you were, and I am saying here, is so true, that the simple substitution of the converse word "affirmed" into the end of his sentence, would make it perfectly clear and correct, and perfectly in line with his purported agreement with the decision, as follows: "I said explicitly that they found it a states' right violation, plainly meaning that the state right of rape victims to sue was being affirmed.(by the court- as per context)" Dan B