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 : Stock Attack -- A Complete Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: dennis michael patterson who wrote (36970)	12/2/2000 1:39:10 AM
From: eddieww	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42787

"Hard to know what that means in this context, as a vote for Bush is a vote against* the States' Rights thesis"* LOL! Yeah, it's absolutely hilarious to see the "states' rights" Republicans asking the Federal Supreme Court to intervene against a State Supreme Court over voting procedures constitutionally reserved to the State. This is kind of like the compx last winter: Just when you think it can't get crazier, it does. Probably Rehnquist pushed hearing the case as another stab at immortality (notoriety), and I'll bet they all wish they hadn't succumbed to his egomania now. Every time I think of the "blow job impeachment", I think of Rehnquist in his specially designed judicial robe with the stripes or chevrons or whatever they were. What a ham.