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 : Zeev's Turnips -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Carl R. who wrote (299)	12/9/2000 6:52:13 AM
From: Bosco	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 644

Hi Carl - fwiw, there is a squeeze going on here against the FLSC. OOH, if the judges tries to define "voter's intent," people attack them for creating law usurping the legislative authority; OTOH, if they leave it to the locals, as they should be, people attack them for being vague and thus vulnerable to fraud. I ve not read their opinion, but I think it is a fine piece of "return punt" to let the Republican packed USSC to decide the ultimate outcome! To be respectful, I certainly do not see either FLSC or USSC are political hacks. As Zeev has pointed out Message 14980921 Both Lewis&Clark and the FLSC have followed the guiding principle whereby voters are paramount. Incidentally, no one seems to complain that Gov Bush has also won the absentee case [postmark etc] So, are we talking about one side's hypertechnicality is acceptable and the other side is politically motivated? Personally, instead of seeing this as the precursor of darkness, I think this is the finest hour of American democracy Message 14978535 I don't rule out the possibility of small scale violent. I mean, there are always people who can't resolve their difference w/o using brute force. However, I think the most people are enlightened enough to accept this evolutionary moment of the American revolution best, Bosco