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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (11562)	10/10/2003 2:02:32 AM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793640

Know something? We don't give a ***! The Australian saw the election as a demonstration of "the American genius for embracing new ideas and new people." The editorial concluded, "Australians too easily dismiss the achievements of famous political outsiders who achieve high office in the US—and too readily mock self-made individuals who break the stranglehold of the political machines." Somebody got it right. Of course, it would be Australia- -another bunch of brash, exuberant people who refuse to play by the old fogey's rules. The Independent found the recall mechanism an "undesirable" arrangement* Undesirable? What was undesirable here was Gray Davis. It "is profoundly anti-democratic OKaaay. Once again: Will somebody explain to me how a free, honest election can be "anti-democratic"? Aren't elections what democracy IS? The Financial Times also opposed the recall process, declaring: "The procedure was intended as a safeguard to remove the most incorrigibly corrupt I would suggest the Financial Times take another look at Gray Davis. I think they will find he could be used as the definition of "incorrigibly corrupt".