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: Amy J who wrote (280022)	3/14/2006 6:55:15 AM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575627

re: If you want a fair playing field and if you want to see women organize into an effective political force, then you need to take away all the financial assets (advantages) that men have in today's society and implement the requirement that 50% of all Congressional slots go to women. There's nothing more fair than having equal representation of each gender. Or public financing of all national elections. Which has the side benefit of eliminating the special interest influence.

To: Amy J who wrote (280022)	3/14/2006 10:22:07 AM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575627

"The other problem you have is realizing that both men and women discriminate against women... If you want a fair playing field and if you want to see women organize into an effective political force, then you need to take away all the financial assets (advantages) that men have in today's society and implement the requirement that 50% of all Congressional slots go to women." I'm aware of this. I learned that women discriminate against women when something as innocuous as the Equal Rights Amendment failed to pass, because not enough women voted for it. As for the rest, it'll never happen, unless women are educated, participate, convinced to vote their interest and run for office. Your problem is with women, not with men. Many men run for office who aren't personally wealthy - they convice others to finance their campaigns. Women have enough wealth now to do this as well, and some wealthy and not wealthy men would support them.

To: Amy J who wrote (280022)	3/14/2006 11:02:16 AM
From: SilentZ	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575627

>If you want a fair playing field and if you want to see women organize into an effective political force, then you need to take away all the financial assets (advantages) that men have in today's society and implement the requirement that 50% of all Congressional slots go to women. You can't do the latter... remember, congressional seats are determined by district -- what would you do, declare that my district has to elect a man and the next one over has to elect a woman? I completely agree with the former, and I'd posit that the way to accomplish it is to institute public financing of elections. -Z

To: Amy J who wrote (280022)	3/15/2006 1:21:31 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575627

The problem for people like you, is understanding that it takes probably around $60 million plus to run for govt, and given that only SIX women are self-made rich, compared to oodles of men, those odds simply defy the situation. Don't you think it had to do with the electorate as well? Neither Murray[senator] nor Gregoire[governor]of WA state are rich...and both got elected to prominent positions. Only Cantwell of the three had her own money in the race.........and frankly, she's the weakest of the three IMO. But WA state was ready for women to take over. I don't think that's as true in states like Wyoming or Oklahoma. ted