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 (212612)	12/3/2004 7:00:59 PM
From: TigerPaw	Respond to of 1575523

the Clinton years will be recorded as dark days, If so I pray the light goes back out and never shines again. TP

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (212612)	12/3/2004 7:34:27 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575523

Interesting that you think the media is liberal but unbiased, except the media that is not liberal who are all unprofessional hatemongers. I can't help that it is what it is. They are the radio and tv equivalents of the Inquirer. Rather Biased, Jennings and Brokaw represent the TV version of the Inquirer IMO. So you perceive things differently than many. Whose many? Half the country thinks like I do. That's "many" to me. Let me set the record straight........any one who endorses the current president is a social conservative and a fiscal liberal..........the exact opposite of what I am. You endorse Bush and I don't. The second half of that appears to be a false statement. You supported legalizing perjury. No person could reasonably called a social conservative who supports perjury. Huh? Read what I wrote again. And frankly, you are rather hung up on this issue. I suspect you need to make us wrong so that you will feel more comfortable with your current position. Actually, Ted, I am only hung up on the issue when communicating with a person who is disingenuous about their political position. When you state that the dozens of sources I have provided are not liberal enough for you, that gets processed as information. Apparently, it gets processed but does not satisfy. ;~) As i have said many times, and should not have to repeat to you, President Bush does not represent my interests ideally. I am much more fiscally conservative than President Bush is. I am also a social conservative. Let me reiterate.........I am not a social conservative but a fiscal one. However, of the available choices, Bush was the better man by every unit of measure. By what measures? Okay........so he doesn't go to Nascar.......a lot of us don't. One was a draft dodger, the other a liar, and a liar about his military service, and a liar to the military about his service. No contest there. One was a draft dodger and a liar. One is honest and honorable; the other is a proponent of whatever policy he thinks is polling well this week. No contest. One is a militaristic, inflexible pit bull who has antagonized most of the world needlessly. The other is a seasoned diplomat who doesn't alienate and knows when to be flexible and when not. One is married to the sweetest, most human, caring wife. Who killed her boyfriend. The election is over. We have a leader in the Whitehouse. We need to allow him to lead rather than trying to divide the nation. Nice wish list but the country is divided, and most likely, will become more divided in the days to come. Accept it! promise you that history.......if its portrayed honestly in this country by that time....will note these days as dark ones for the US of A. IMO, the Clinton years will be recorded as dark days, and these will be recorded as days of honor and honesty with integrity restored to the Whitehouse. I'll get back to you in twenty years.