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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Paul van Wijk who wrote (793)	8/26/1998 12:30:00 PM
From: wallacestevens	Respond to of 67261

Paul, your posts have confirmed all my romantic notions about how wonderful and interesting the Dutch are.

To: Paul van Wijk who wrote (793)	8/26/1998 12:47:00 PM
From: j_b	Respond to of 67261

<<No matter how small we are, we see it as our duty to tell the world what is good and what's not.>> Although you may not have gotten this impression from my prior "so what?" post, I think you (and your countrymen) should continue to do as you have been. It never hurts, even when I disagree, to hear another viewpoint. On the drug issue, I think another approach is needed, and the Dutch approach at least has the value of being different from ours. Does it accomplish what we hope to accomplish? I don't know, but it's worth looking at. What we need are well thought out alternatives, and a way to test the theories. Having a working model such as yours should provide a good start. <<I hope you make the right decision when you get your 4 year change at the official poll.>> Unfortunately, the change in President often does not signal a change in direction. Neither party seems to actually represent principles, but rather special interests. Very little of a "radical change" nature is likely to get done in less than a decade, and would require changes in political attitudes, not changes in office holders.