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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (120117)	12/1/2000 3:40:47 PM
From: ratan lal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

It looks like a split decision (to me), with at least Scalia on the Bush side and at least Kennedy on the Gore side You are insulting the highest court in the land by calling them biased. If we are to believe that, then why not all the judges in the land. the white judge biased against the black litigant, the jew judge against the german, all judges against the foreign named litigants....... And then what would the difference be between us and banana republics where we constantly want to send our obervers?

To: Road Walker who wrote (120117)	12/1/2000 4:40:05 PM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

John, I just listened to the US Supreme court arguments. Very interesting. Agreed. I have to say (however painful it is for me to say this <g>) that I have a lot of admiration for the 4 lawyers who were able to think fast on their feet. It looks like a split decision (to me), with at least Scalia on the Bush side and at least Kennedy on the Gore side. In my opinion, the only one that was very easy to read was Ruth Gingsberg(?) - clearly on Gore's side. Scalia is most likely going to be on Bush's side if the court rules, but Scalia showed a lot of reluctance for US SC to get into this. On Kennedy, from the questions, I think he is either in the middle or on Bush's side. Joe