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: haqihana who wrote (119962)	6/14/2005 9:27:30 AM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793689

You're comparing apples to oranges NO she;s not. She's making a point about drawing a conclusion from an unrelated and irrelevant basis to show how absurd JDN's post was. If the qualifications for a man to be president were based on the behaviors of Al Franken, Chris Matthews, and some of the frothymouthed commentators who appear nightly, I might conclude that men shouldn't be let out of cages, much less run the country. As befits their role as entertainment rather than news these days, no network wants some boring, sane expert who will drone on about actual legal facts. No, they want someone who will shout and create the feeling of excitement and conflict. The male lawyers have done the same thing-- there are more of them, so maybe you are inured to their antics, or maybe you equate men yelling as a sign of strength while in women you see lack of control. If I thought all men comported themselves like the legal commentators on tv, I would be burning my voter's registration card before I elected one. Vitriol and hysteria sells. Women are just doing what the men have done for so long. It just sounds different at a higher pitch. It has nothing to do with sex. Or qualification. But is is troubling that some think it does and are unable to discern the difference.