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 : Rande Is . . . HOME -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kanetsu who wrote (43051)	12/10/2000 6:20:56 AM
From: RinConRon	Respond to of 57584

K, Kudos to you. Brilliantly, truthfully, and refreshingly written. I echo your thoughts and envy your Churchill-like ability to express them.

To: Kanetsu who wrote (43051)	12/10/2000 9:11:10 AM
From: bob	Respond to of 57584

Thank You...

To: Kanetsu who wrote (43051)	12/10/2000 10:40:14 AM
From: DlphcOracl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 57584

OT Regarding the election... The ONLY real issue regarding Election Follies 2001 is: are procedures for counting votes in Florida established PRIOR to the election being followed? In my opinion (and, obviously, the US Supreme Court's opinion), they are not. The most disturbing aspect of this farce is that it highlights how this country has become paralyzed and held hostage to an army of lawyers and lawsuits, not just regarding the election, but in all aspects of life. It seems as if the most important principle is not to be found in the US Constitution or the Bill of Rights -- it is guaranteeing the individual's inalienable right to file a frivolous lawsuit, and have a lawyer perpetuate it through our legal system for an interminable amount of time, at great expense to the victim of the suit. The ability of Al Gore's lawyers to neutralize the results of a Presidential election for well over a month is a chilling reminder of how the US has change from being a nation of laws to a nation of lawyers. How sad. P.S. Greg S.'s allegation that there was an orchestrated attempt to deny Democratic votes to be counted or to prevent certain Democrats from voting is too ridiculous to comment further on. Having lived in Chicago for over a decade, it only takes about 1-2 years to develop a "Jesse Jackson filter" -- his only principle is to find at least one controversial topic per month to inject an ill-informed opinion into, to assure that his name and picture find its way into the media.

To: Kanetsu who wrote (43051)	12/10/2000 10:48:30 PM
From: Jim Kendall	Respond to of 57584

The rule of law is all that matters. In the long run it won't matter much whether we end up with Gore or Bush. But above all we must maintain the rule of law in resolving the matter. If we abandon the rule of law, we will become a different nation forever after.

To: Kanetsu who wrote (43051)	12/11/2000 1:23:21 AM
From: Greg S.	Respond to of 57584

I realize my last post regarding this election fiasco was a bit inflammatory, but I did not mean to offend anyone. Apparently it touched a nerve with some people. I found a lot of misunderstandings in those colorful posts I received in response. I'll do what I can to clarify my point of view. First I want to mention that I'm not a Democrat. I'd also like to say that I don't approve of the way either party is handling this situation. I thank those of you that were .. ahem .. at least civil in your responses. I don't really have time to make a personal response to each of you. I'm not asking anyone to feel guilty for being white and male. But I am thankful. And I think that in exchange for leading, well .. a privileged life, relatively speaking, I should at the least make myself aware of the hardships others may be facing, and not dismiss them as invalid. I also can't prove that shady stuff did or didn't happen surrounding the election. But it DOES happen all the time, and all I'm asking for is for people to pay attention to it, and to seek out justice and the truth. I don't think this is happening, and it angers me. If I may, I'd like to shift the argument to something I find slightly more interesting, and that is the election is effectively a TIE. The margin of error in the voting process greatly exceeds the margin of victory, to such a degree that no one whose ever taken a statistics course would possibly declare either candidate a winner. And both candidates just want to win, and both still think they can (or have) won. The problem is our country doesn't deal well in the event of a tie. Or it doesn't define a tie nearly broadly enough. Or, we could shift the argument back to something even more interesting .. like what the market is going to do on Monday. :) -G