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 (312)	12/9/2000 8:29:01 PM
From: Bosco	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 644

Hi Carl - maybe we can agree to disagree as far as the FL SC is concerned. I certainly see the FL judicial system being consistent most of the time. The difference is that you ve deemed those who ruled in Gov Bush's favor impartial. Language is a strangest thing, but doing that, you have certainly make a strong accusation to those who have made rulings against your wishes. Maybe you are right, or maybe not. We can discuss for eternity whole our grounds without moving an inch :). Speaking of language, while I can appreciate your dark view from your pov. However, I think it is dangerous to use inflammatory language in public arena. One simply doesn't know who are reading this stuff. I mean, SbH has to repeatedly explain to you the problem with his B&W text problem <vbg>, that goes to suggest a lot of readers have inject their own sensibility into other people's postings. You are certainly at liberty to do what you please; however, as a cyberfriend, I would like to reiterate the power [and sometimes danger] of words. At the very least, I don't want anyone quoting me for their action, especially terrible action. But it is only chicken little me speaking <VBG>! Back to the case, as I ve said before, FLSC is open for attack just USSC is open for attack. However, personally, I'd like to maintain my good faith [or maybe bad faith, as Sartre put it :)] in the judicial system. Interpretation and activism are not objective. FLSC has been consistent. One has to ask, has USSC been consistent? I am not a legal eagle, so I can't comment. However, I'd be very interested --- itching with anticipation, really --- to see the ruling from the USSC and how it attempts to reconcil the state right issue. Just for that last point of possibility, this episode is well worth the price, don't you think? I mean, a lot of these issues like state right and judicial primacy etc etc will be clearer for future references Anyway, I ve rambled enough :) best, Bosco