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 : Al Gore vs George Bush: the moderate's perspective -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: long-gone who wrote (6208)	11/15/2000 5:48:22 PM
From: quasar_1	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10042

From My Cold Dead Hands... Is there not class warfare pushed by Gore Clinton? Of course there is. This is an old demo canard. They brought this up as a criticism to Bush's tax proposal. It was a losing strategy. The American people did not/will not fall for it—to their credit. I'd like to cut taxes, but I wouldn't do it until the debt is substantially paid down. That famous left winger Alan Greenspan agrees with me. BTW...The surplus is a mirage. We are taking the surplus money from the SS trust fund (that which doesn't have to be immediately paid in benefits) and calling it a surplus. Both parties are lying about this. Some in each party have pointed this out to their credit. I all for deciding it by the New Mexico Method - a game of chance - a single hand of 5 card stud perhaps. Now you're talking. I think they should hold it in Las Vegas...pretty girls and free drinks... the 2 amendment is a God given right... It is a man given right AND a responsibility. God doesn't carry a gun the last time I checked. It is by the consent of the governed. right woth fighting & making the other guy die over... Why is this worth killing over? Do you think for one minute that any armed insurrection would not be met by overwhelming force from the state. Do you own an F15? If not you lose. How can your little pop guns compete with a totalitarian state if this is what you fear? Do we want to live in a society where we have armed violence in the streets? Should this become the Gaza strip? Let's say everyone who bears arms rises up against the state. What will be left? Like the mutually assured destruction theory in regards to nuclear engagement, the aftermath of an armed insurrection against the US government would leave us a society where anarchy reigned. There would be no winners! Should ordinary citizens be allowed to have helicopter gunships? How about surface to air missiles. How about backpack nuclear devices? Where does it end? Is there no limit to the armament one individual can muster? Once again, many deliver a simplistic answer to a profoundly difficult question. I don't think any interpretation of the words or the spirit of the second amendment would allow for individuals to arm themselves with bio weapons, chemical weapons, backpack nukes or other weapons of mass destruction. So where do we draw the line? This is where the debate should center. All of this leads to the larger question. Has our ability to find progressive common ground decayed so much that we are left with the choices of unlimited personal armament vs. elimination of personal ownership of guns. Once again this is another false choice promulgated by extremists on both sides precisely because there is no answer. Extremists provide the false choice to empower their extremism. This is all 'mind control 1A'...and the vox populi just regurgitates it ad nauseum... Q