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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (128411)	11/13/2000 6:52:13 PM
From: hmaly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1580229

Tim Re..I don't have much of a problem with negative campaigning as long as it is honest. Its dishonest and distorting campaigns that I find annoying. But that is what almost all negative campaign ads are; a distortion of the truth. For instance, many politicians might vote against a bill because the bill needs to be reworked, or there might be attachments which are bad. Even though that politician said that is what he was doing, an opponent 20 yrs later would say that he voted against that bill; even though he knows his opponent later voted for a better version of the same bill.. This type of campaigning is leading to bad bills because no one wants to veto something that could hurt later. Another good one, during the campaign Al stated Texas had the worst air pollution in the country. True, Houston is the worst metropolitan area, but air pollution is caused by several factors, one is the amount of pollution, but what really causes highly polluted air is stagnant air over a city. If the wind doesn't circulate the air, any city would have highly polluted air. Even your office bldg. would become highly polluted after several days if your air circulation system didn't work, and how many people drive their car around their office. LA supposedly has cleaner cars because of Ca. strict pollution laws, and LA is spread out more; but LA has many days where the ozone levels are dangerous. Of course Al doesn't have that problem in TENN. because Al has made sure the people are too poor to own a car. Same with AL,s whinning about Texas not providing ins. to the poor people. San Antonio probably is 70 to 80% Mexican. All of these people coming over the border are poor and have no insurance. And it is difficult to just get the basics and enough schooling for these people, much less provide ins. However, who was primarily responsible for the immigration problem. The federal gov. whose responsibility it is to patrol the border. But instead of providing help in the form of beefed up border patrols or grants out of their surplus, Al complains about Texas not doing the right thing. Al was the one who helped cause the problem, Al was the one with the money, yet Al didn't do anything about it, and instead started denigrating the people of Texas. I am not trying to say GW was perfect either, but ahere where I live Al did the bulk of the negative campaigning. As for the money, it costs money to communicate to millions of people. I see flaws in our current system but I can't find a system that I think would get rid of those flaws without causeing new problems that are as bad or worse.<<< For one thing we don't need 2 yr campaigns. We should do like they do in Briton. Limit the campaigns to 3 - 5 months. Another we don't need endless repitions of the same commercials. One night I was watching tv, in one 2 minute break, all four commercials, 3 AL, 1 GW, were all negative, and not only repeats of the same commercials I had seen earlier, 2 by Al were the same commercial. How stupid do these guys think we are? We don't need to see the same bullsh*t ten times a day, 2 months running. Nader is right. If we want to get the money out of politics, we need to provide the public money. We also need to outlaw all negative adds, and bring some civility back to the campaigns.