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 : High Tolerance Plasticity -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kodiak_bull who wrote (12506)	2/19/2002 2:02:45 PM
From: Steeliejim	Respond to of 23153

Whew! Magnificent. I bow down in supplication. Except... I wasn't referring specifically to the current finance bill--although I thought all the limitations were on the use of "soft money" rather than on $$$'s that go directly to a candidate. I'm sure you'll staighten me out--again. But that's ok, 'cuz you just added further reinforcement to my decision to go Independent more than 10 years ago. As well as also reinforcing my belief that so much in current politics is motivated by who can produce the most money for a cause or candidate rather than on principle or what is good for individual rights or the country. And, yes, I acknowledge that what is "good for the country" is often in the eyes of the beholder. However, I have to believe that our forefathers, were they to witness the perversion of the conduct of business by government because of the influence of special interest money, would have been able to craft a Constitution that would have limited its adverse impact on the overiding intent of "one man, one vote." And, IMHO, I believe that anything that tries to move us back to "one man, one vote," is worth a try. "Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme merde," Oui. Jim And I use "man" in the biblical sense---gg