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: i-node who wrote (600592)	2/13/2011 1:08:00 PM
From: bentway	Respond to of 1570969

Meet the GOP's Gay Candidate for President 'FRED WHO?' A LONGSHOT, BUT OPENLY GAY CANDIDATE BREAKING GROUND By Mark Russell, Newser Staff newser.com Posted Feb 13, 2011 10:04 AM CST (NEWSER) – The Republicans' best-formed candidate for 2012 isn't Romney or Huckabee: It's Fred Karger, a little-known conservative and longtime GOP operative—who happens to be openly gay. Karger is pounding the pavement in Iowa and New Hampshire, reports the Guardian, and he would be the country's first homosexual candidate for president. "I am a fighter and I am trying to change the Republican party and to open it up to everybody," said Karger. "If every gay person left the Republican party and went to the Democrats, that would be stupid." His campaign explicitly acknowledges Karger's unknown status—the slogan on his hats and T-shirts is "Fred Who?" But even if he doesn't win the GOP nomination, Karger thinks it is important for people to see an openly gay person make a run. "I am doing this for younger people," says Karger. "I am fine now. I am happy in my skin. But when I was growing up it was hell. I don't want anyone to go through that. That is what motivates me to make my voice heard. No more Mr Nice Gay."

To: i-node who wrote (600592)	2/13/2011 3:59:30 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1570969

> And yet it snows at least once every year. Untrue, of course. But the comment is hilarious. A "big" snowstorm in Dallas is 1" or 2" and is gone in a day, maybe two at most. I lived there 15 years and never saw a 6" snow, and only one significant ice event. That's exactly what I've pointed out to Tim. But apparently it can be more than one or two days depending on the weather. In early February it took a week for the city to recover. That's a lot of business lost. Don't get me wrong; in Dallas, 1" of snow totally confuses drivers who don't understand that driving in snow is a little different from driving on dry pavement. But it is nothing snow equipment will help. I would also add that I can count on one hand the number of major hills in the D/FW metroplex. Besides all that, the schools and businesses all shut down when it snows even 1". Total overreaction. EDS was closed here for three days last week, even after the streets were totally dry. Tim's theory is that whatever shuts down business should be anticipated and oovered by the city. The case that started this discussion was NYC. NYC gets a major snowstorm [20 in] roughly every 6 years. Tim feels that the city should have the equipment and deicing materials on hand that would handle such a storm even though it happens only every 6 years. Well applying Tim's thesis to Dallas...shouldn't the city of Dallas have some equipment and deicing materials on hand to handle the one snow storm they get each year?