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.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Oeconomicus who wrote (133176)	10/20/2001 10:07:27 PM
From: GST	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

Bob: Why do you waste your time and the thread's time on this drivel? In case you had not noticed, it is "bad taste" to try to make political gains out of the terrorism now on our shores. Whether or not you agree with Craig and his Pat B. chorus line, it makes me want to puke to see Craig fly into propaganda overdrive in an attempt to take an irrelevant little shit like Pat B. and make him look like a thoughtful guy with something to say, and the only true "American Patriot" by exploiting the WTC attack. I am disgusted and fed up with this. I would feel the same way if a neo-nazi group was exploiting this situation to spew anti-Jewish hate campaign. In case you had not noticed, you are engaged in a revolting propaganda exercise.

To: Oeconomicus who wrote (133176)	10/21/2001 5:56:23 PM
From: craig crawford	Respond to of 164684

>> I actually would classify PB as a populist most of the time - in the sense of pandering to the common man and playing on his prejudices, not Webster's definition << how do you know that mr buchanan doesn't actually care about the common man? i'm curious, what makes you believe he just wants to use them for his own benefit. furthermore, separate the man from the message. tell me why the idea is faulty, rather than trying to attack the idea by attacking the source. pretend i never used buchanan as a jumping point. pretend i used alan keyes instead, who shares similar views. are you going to resort to attacking his character next? or are you going to tell me why putting national interests ahead of "mankind" or "humanity" is wrong? >> have tried to blame free trade, free markets and/or capitalism in general for what they consider an inequitable distribution of wealth. The main difference, IMO, is that pandering populists do it so that people who feel short-changed will be jealous of the rich and vote for the populist and Marxists do it so that those same people will hate the rich and empower the Marxists to confiscate the wealth and redistribute it (mostly to themselves). In either case, the average Joe is no better off than before.<< nowhere in this paragraph have you actually debunked the idea. once again you focus on the people behind the ideas. try telling us why the ideas of washington, hamilton, jefferson, lincoln, jackson, roosevelt, etc are wrong. >> I would also, obviously, take issue with your assessment of the current state of the nation as described in the sixth paragraph. Believe what you want, but if you really think we, as a nation and economy, are traveling to Hades in the proverbial handbag, you are mistaken. << ok, tell me why i am wrong and america is on the road to a utopian peace and eternal prosperity for all of mankind or humanity or whatever you subscribe to. >> Lastly, your final comment (implying that TR was a white supremacist bent on conquering the world for the Anglo-Saxons) deserves nothing but ridicule and scorn << i think you misunderstood me so let me clarify. TR was not against liberty for people who are not anglo saxons, he was just arrogant in believing that anglo saxons were superior and smarter and therefore had the moral authority to impose this on other nations. if freedom is imposed, is it really freedom?