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.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: hobo who wrote (1255)	1/16/2001 3:23:21 PM
From: Bald Eagle	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

RE:on the one hand you have a president that could not get his P* in his pants** That's better than having one who couldn't keep it in his pants, IMHO. RE:does that mean you would agree with what was written in that PM ? I have no idea what was in the PM you speak about. She threw me off her thread because she disagreed with me and didn't even try to argue logically. Isn't that what a narrow minded bigot would do? Someone who shuts out other people without even trying logical discussion. BTW, where did the "white house" come into this? Why do you assume I am a Republican? Actually, I'm not. Is this just another sign of your (and Poet's) blind narrow minded bigotry? I think so.

To: hobo who wrote (1255)	1/17/2001 10:42:11 AM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

where are the "values" of you self-righteous people ? where is the decency you people so much squawk about ? I really don't see how or why other people should be deemed without value and indecent, because of the wrongdoing of this particular poster. It was a very puzzling post. I suppose this person is a member of many groups: It depends on who draws the diagrams. But I can't imagine why anyone--anywhere--should be disparaged or insulted for the wrongdoing of another individual. Everyone is responsible for their own words--for their own behaviour. At least that is what I believe. The bible teaches that Jesus died for the wrongdoings of others. This, to me, is an evil doctrine. If you are religious, and if this is what justifies your post, then we must agree to disagree. I think it is monstrous to blame anyone for the words or deeds of another. I believe the perpetrator of an act is the only party responsible for that act. I don't know what groups you belong to, and (of course) it is of no relevence whatsoever; But I think I can safely surmise that you would resent being slurred and denigrated for an act committed by someone else in one of your groups. I have known Poet for quite awhile. I thought the remark aginst her was tactless in timing, untrue in content, and very ill considered, and certainly unkind. However, I am biased. I don't condemn a person on the basis of one post. None of us are always, and without fail...superior to the human condition. You, of course, had every right to your retort. I thought the first four lines of your post were admirable. I thought it was very appropriate. You were responding to some specific remarks, and you were responding to the person that was responsible for them. When it went into the plural, however, I was confused and disappointed. It just doesn't seem the way to make a better world. We are all a part of many groups. I don't think the village should be burned down because one person stole a horse, and I did not see the relevance of the venomous continuation. Only one person was responsible for that post...but it seemed like others were being blamed. This is just my opinion given without rancor, and in good faith. I hope you will take it in the spirit given. Back to trading...