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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: aladin who wrote (48215)	9/30/2002 11:56:12 AM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Is Forrester a serial killer or something? No, and to make it even worse in your view, John, I think the single most critical issue that should be on the table today is campaign finance reform. As we all know, the degree to which those with tons of money control political outcomes threatens the very concept of democracy, let alone its practice. And Torricelli is a serial offender when it comes to finding ways around those laws. Got caught. Well, my arguments with myself and others are familiar and won't surprise you in the least. 1. If we ever get back to a season in which campaign finance reform is back on the table, the Dems are more likely to do that seriously than the Reps. Witness the last round of voting. So Dem control of the Senate. 2. I am reasonably conventional in my views about choice and gun control. I simply will not vote for an anti-choice candidate or one opposed to gun control. If my choices were between dumb and dumber here, I would simply not vote. Once again, Dem control of the Senate. 3. I think social security as presently structured is one of the great inventions of American politics. Not that the structure should not be tweaked. For instance, it should not be possible to balance the budget by borrowing from it; the financing should change so that the taxable limits came off--right now it's regressive taxation--the person with an annual income over $100,000 should pay the same percentage, at least, as someone with under $20,000; etc. So clearly tweaking is needed. But the structure is a wonder. That's Dem control of the Senate. To at least keep it. 4. We remain in one of the great uncommented upon crisis in American society, health insurance, largely because the Clinton administration blew the opening it had. I favor national health insurance. That ought to get a few posts. 5. The present national embodiment of the Republican party is a war first party; moralistically and offensively wishes to control women's bodies and ignores the dangers of guns; can't wait to dismantle social security; wishes to punish critics of American society; forgot what the Constitution says about protecting individual liberties (Ashcroft); is laying waste to the few environmental protections that exist; etc. etc. etc. So, I'm opposed to Rep control of the Senate. You asked. Let me hasten to add, I'm not putting any of this forward to debate it. The debate would quickly change this thread from one about foreign affairs to domestic ones. Just offering it as reasons for why I will vote for Toricelli. I was asked; there it is.