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 : Actual left/right wing discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (9280)	12/20/2010 9:41:17 PM
From: Brumar89	Respond to of 10087

Kinda funny for someone who doesn't believe in souls to bash Republicans for having no souls.

To: koan who wrote (9280)	12/20/2010 11:23:05 PM
From: Oeconomicus	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10087

"First, a poll today, said 52% of Republicans believe in creationism and reject evolution. Anyone who cannot understand evolution is not intellectually competent to be in the congress, IMO." Changing the subject, I see. Not surprising, of course. BTW, I don't think Gallup polled members of Congress, but 34% of Democrats and 34% of independents said the same thing. Not that this has anything to do with the price of tea in China. "That is simply not what existential law means. Whomever, you got that from clearly does not understand existentialism." Yeah, OK. I'll just take your word for it, then, 'cause this guy cleary doesn't know half what you know. UFB. Do you not realize that 'no, it's not' isn't actually an argument? "Third, the vote was in bush's favor by under 100 votes and headed toward Gore when the supreme court stepped in to stop it. I remember very clearly watching it." Oh, well then. As long as you say you remember it that way, I suppose this matter is settled as well. I don't suppose you'd have some links you'd like to share to news reports or anything, would ya'? You know, to substantiate these "facts"? Anyway, back to my question, which you apparently want to evade. I'll repeat that part of my post here so you won't get lost looking for it. Let's try this a different way. Perhaps you could try just coming right out and saying what you think to be dangerous to society about our legal system as it exists, how you would propose changing it, and to what ends. And I don't mean rattling off examples of decisions you don't like. I mean the system. Whaddaya say?