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: Peter Dierks who wrote (206690)	10/15/2004 1:35:24 PM
From: SilentZ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572953

> Pick a side, any side. No, you conveniently never mentioned Hillary. The first two had nannies, and had neglected to pay the nanny tax. Both of her first two choices were women. How is that for proof of sex based set-asides? Huh? I try not to pick sides until I have facts. I was thirteen years old in '93! But, I'm happy to call a spade a spade. I don't like the pick by Hillary if it was made for that reason. >The constitution granted the right. We suspect it has to do with the need for a militia instead of a huge standing army. You cannot bait me with this subject. Yes. And the Constitution also allowed for slavery. We amended it because slavery was wrong. I don't want to live in 1781. >Please read the post before responding; you are embarrassing yourself. Especially the part about ADVISE and CONSENT duties of the Senate. Until Tom Daschle, no Presidential appointee that I am aware of has ever been filibustered in the Senate. This is a clear abridging of the Constitution. Maybe he found one of those famous neolib loopholes, and just has not told us what it is yet. Whenever the Republicans find a new strategy which seems like it might be unkosher but procedurally OK, like DeLay's off-year gerrymandering, that's fine, but when the Dems do it, it's not. It was frankly, the only way the Dems could fight candidates that Bush clearly picked to thumb his nose at them. If what Daschle did was really wrong, the Senate Ethics Committee would've had his head, seeing as the Republicans control the Senate. It wasn't wrong, it's just that nobody though of it before. >Maybe you should have been born a couple hindered years earlier so you could have foreseen this and fixed it up front. Maybe you would have written a document that said, don't read this document, just do what feels good. OK... fine. I'm going to guy buy myself some slaves, tell my mom and my sister that they can't vote, and tell my boss he can go fire all of the women in the company for being women. -Z