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 : The Amateur Traders Corner -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tom Hua who wrote (4243)	12/14/2000 9:43:18 AM
From: rogermci®	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 19633

Half the people in the country don't agree with you Tom. I thought the way they settled it was most fair to both sides. I just thought your characterization of the high court is uncalled for. roger

To: Tom Hua who wrote (4243)	12/14/2000 10:34:33 AM
From: GregS	Respond to of 19633

Tom, The FL Supreme Court's activism had to be contained. What good option did the US Supreme court have, to turn it back to a partisan FL Supreme Court? Were they fair? Hell no they were not, they started this B.S. in the first place when they stepped on the FL Sec. of State. If the US Supremes hadn't acted, the FL Legislature would have stepped in, legally, and they would have been a true mess. IMO, the U.S. Supremes did the best they could here, and those who dissented offered no better realistic solution, instead they chose to crap on the majority.