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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (182578)	2/13/2004 4:42:19 PM
From: mph	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575173

Every article and every commentator must be looked at from the POV of their particular bias or agenda. That was the point I was making here. Do you honestly believe that I don't understand that premise? Actually, I do.. You've posted plenty of bile about Limbaugh and others of his stripe and spoken adoringly of Ivins and those like her. Rarely do I post articles from Ivins and rarely do I criticize Limbaugh mainly because I think he is fairly inconsequential in the grand scheme things. However, I must admit his hypocrisy is starting to smell up the joint. That's your partisanship showing. It would be helpful to you to evaluate these so called "pundits" from a more critical perspective rather than wholeheartedly swallowing their position whole if it jibes with your own predisposition. Like I've said before, you are coming to conclusions with very little data. You've posted on this board....for what? two weeks? If you had been here longer, you would understand that the articles I post reflect my position and not the other way around well, duh again, Ted. The bold-faced portion of your response above was my point to you in our last go-around. However, just a couple of days ago, you sent me this post: http://www.siliconinvestor.com/msg_multireplies.gsp?msgid=19798612 In that post you said: I never once said that........you've interpreted an article that I posted as saying that. And I might out that that's your extrapolation.......in truth, the article never once called the US terrorists. BTW, just for the record, I post articles that both support my views as well take a very different position from my views. It didn't take long to figure you out actually, though it does seem that you're a bit confused about your own posting record.<g> While I enjoyed your pseudo-psychological analysis and love the fact that you're a man in touch with your emotions, I haven't the time to play with you any more today. and, no, I've never signed anything "matt" and haven't a clue who that is. Have a nice w/e.

To: tejek who wrote (182578)	2/13/2004 9:29:19 PM
From: SilentZ	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 1575173

>You may not have discovered this yet but the current debate in this country is not just about partisanship, class struggles and the like. This discussion/argument/schism that is going on in this country is very fundamental to who we are as a nation and how we want to precede. Its been coming to head for at least 50 years. There are two very different ways of thinking and its pretty much evenly divided us. I would not be surprised if it leads to civil war. Agreed! Great point. -Z

To: tejek who wrote (182578)	2/15/2004 7:33:54 PM
From: hmaly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575173

Ted RE...There are two very different ways of thinking and its pretty much evenly divided us. I would not be surprised if it leads to civil war. That is an outrageous statement. Here you are, a guy who talked about his hate for war, even cruel sadistic dictators, and now you think the US will sink into a civil war, mainly I presume because you dems, disagree with the USSC's decision. And I presume, you remember that our civil war started, when the south disagreed with Lincoln's election, and the South seceded from the union. I sincerely doubt if your hints, that the dems are angry enough to start a civil war if GW is re-elected, are considered sane, except by an extreme minority, in your party. And I have no doubt, that if you dems keep it up, you will see your anger driving away everyone, but that minority. If people consider your party as the party of hate, then why wouldn't the people also want to do the same to your party, as the people want to do to other organizations of hate, such as the KKK,IRA, or Al Qaeda. No, I have no reason to believe anarchy and hate will cause another civil war, but I do believe, hate will cause the demise of the Dem. party as we know it.