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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Augustus Gloop who wrote (69814)	12/28/2004 9:53:12 PM
From: crdesign	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

AG, I think you know as well as I do the three posters I asked to be banned were nothing more than troublemakers that got a rise out of kicking sand in everyones eyes whom they thought didn't act like them. I asked them politely in PM's to lighten up, see the whole picture so to speak they called me a$$hole, demolib (whatever that means) and countless other unmentionables. I picked the worst of the bunch to be put in the LT penalty box. I welcome other points of view. I come from a Quaker community... we practice tolerance. Those three were over the top. They belong in a oneliner comedy cabaret. Drunks find that stuff funny. I don't want a onesided thread either. I think most of us here can process individual thoughts and perspectives. Not those three... I've been here since Voltaire and the QCOM gang went from boom to bust. Genuinely seeking a fair forum, Tim

To: Augustus Gloop who wrote (69814)	12/28/2004 10:19:07 PM
From: SOROS	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 89467

I did a quick scan of the recent posts, and the 3 fellows who got the boot were obviously rude and crude ALL the time. I will watch this fellow you speak of and all others. Hopefully, we can see the difference between viewpoints and just being a total A$$ to others. I am certainly not a liberal or a Republican stoolie. I have problems with abortion (especially people who are against capital punishment but see nothing wrong with abortion), special rights for gays as if they are equal to handicapped people, welfare for those not willing to work, being disrespectful of one's country just to be crude, too many social programs with no defined or applied criteria, government telling private business how to run (unless they are hurting others), being disrespectful of the military, uncontrolled freedom of speech when it hurts children (allowing uncensored media and internet in schools and libraries), . . . on the other hand, I have a problem with government using "security" to dismantle the Constitution, government handouts to corporations, excessive military action based on inconclusive evidence, close links being allowed between big business and government, etc. etc. Then, there are many issues where BOTH parties fall way short -- allowing various contributions and gifts to be made to politicians from individuals and corporations, spending huge amounts of tax money on elections -- every qualified (have a set criteria to rule out loonies, etc.) candidate should be given equal space in every newspaper and perhaps the top few magazines to list their positions on the top 50 issues. This would cover almost everyone who votes anyway (those who read). That's it. Each candidate can list their feelings on each issue. No commercials. No radio. No millions of dollars spent. No dinners, fund raisers, etc. Every American can read where each candidate stands on every issue and make a decision. Simple. Fair. Gets rid of a lot of fraud and saves millions that could be put to good work. I could go on, but the point is, I think I am pretty balanced in my pro/con of each party and viewpoint. Now that I have offended everyone. Carry on. I remain, SOROS