BuffettNews.com

buffettbride wrote:Is beating this dead horse anything like spanking a monkey?

i agree with LIPH on the NY thing... i don't think i ever beat a dead horse... but as for spankin my monkey... well

tomsawyer wrote:This is hilarious. If Buffett were supporting Bush, some of the well-known
free speech lecturers on here would be singing quite a different tune...

You're simply assuming that - there's no actual basis to believe that the free speech lecturers would feel differently if JB supported Bush.

Believe it or not, there are some folks who support the principle of the situation, not just the politics.

I look at it this way. I like his music. He may be a political moron, but his music is good. I do not care who he supports, just keep recording records and touring.

This is not new for Buffett. He simply has concerns about the world around him, just like many of us who don't record and sing.

Many feel particularly compelled to act now because of the current administration.

At least maybe something other than a White House Press release or GOP talking point might get heard. Otherwise we are left with lazy corporate media (CNN, networks) or blatently biased FOX, or the propaganda infotainment shows on the AM dial and Pat Robertson daily dose of hate etc etc.


Questioning and debate is good.

If it weren't for Buffett I would have never heard of Greenpeace (he mentions them in the liner notes for Son of a Son of a Sailor). I may not agree with everything they do but back then (70s) they weren't nearly as controversial as they've been in recent years.

buffettbride wrote:Is beating this dead horse anything like spanking a monkey?

At least with spanking the monkey ya get some satifaction for your efforts ...

Nada. The people lecturing the hardest are indeed the ones supporting
the politics, and there would be a different group of lecturers and
complainers if it were Bush. Im not a huge fan of either, so kind
of see it from a less biased POV than some. And no...I cant "prove"
this point anymore than you can prove yours....but any reasonably
minded person following the threads will indeed plainly see that both
the folks doing the lecturing and those doing the complaining are doing
so based on their own political beliefs....at least those that are lecturing
or complaining the loudest.

I don't understand the name calling. Someone said Buffett was a political moron. I'm in the center and I think there are plenty to make fun of on both sides of the fence.

tomsawyer wrote:but any reasonably
minded person following the threads will indeed plainly see that both
the folks doing the lecturing and those doing the complaining are doing
so based on their own political beliefs....at least those that are lecturing
or complaining the loudest.

Only if they start with the assumption that everyone is motivated by their choice of candidate... frankly reasonably minded people would probably resent you putting everyone into that same one-dimensional box.

I post about a celebrity's right to support whatever and whomever they want, regardless of which side I support, because I believe adamantly that a "celebrity" has the same right to express their views as everyone else. I'll defend Bill O'Reilly and Michael Moore both because it's about the principle, not the message.

People here are, for the most part, a lot more intelligent and a lot more thoughtful than you think.

Of course, there are exceptions....

tomsawyer wrote:This is hilarious. If Buffett were supporting Bush, some of the well-known
free speech lecturers on here would be singing quite a different tune...and those that are so upset now would be giving the lectures. NOBODY on here
has questioned any entertainers RIGHT to express political opinions. I
think some people would prefer that entertainers VOLUNTARILY choose
not to do so, for any number of reasons.

That's a pretty broad assumption. I don't disagree with celebrities voicing their opinions. It doesn't affect me one way or another. I just keep wondering why we have SO MANY threads on the same topic.

Key Lime Lee wrote:People here are, for the most part, a lot more intelligent and a lot more thoughtful than you think.

We are? Who knew

LIPH wrote:

Key Lime Lee wrote:People here are, for the most part, a lot more intelligent and a lot more thoughtful than you think.

We are? Who knew

Well, I did qualify it to say there were exceptions...

Ilph wrote:I just keep wondering why we have SO MANY threads on the same topic.

To take up the space formerly occupied by threads which were deemed too enjoyable and therefore deleted.

rednekkPH wrote:

Ilph wrote:I just keep wondering why we have SO MANY threads on the same topic.

To take up the space formerly occupied by threads which were deemed too enjoyable and therefore deleted.

I wonder who Kenny Chesney is backing in the election.

LIPH wrote:I wonder who Kenny Chesney is backing in the election.

Whichever candidate likes cheese.

Well, geez....I dont believe I called a single person unthoughtful
or stupid, nor did I feel the need to get personal with anybody. Some
of the folks here are indeed both intelligent and nice....and know
how to disagree without being a disagreeable person. But at least
nobody has felt the urge to remind me how few posts I have therefore
rendering my opinion less than valid. But then again, others might
argue that the number of posts is often inversly proportional to the
degree to which one has a life, so opinions will vary:)....anyway, you
fellas can entertain each other with with the witty relplies, and I
will leave the politics to the politicians on here.

tomsawyer wrote:Well, geez....I dont believe I called a single person unthoughtful
or stupid, nor did I feel the need to get personal with anybody. Some
of the folks here are indeed both intelligent and nice....and know
how to disagree without being a disagreeable person. But at least
nobody has felt the urge to remind me how few posts I have therefore
rendering my opinion less than valid. But then again, others might
argue that the number of posts is often inversly proportional to the
degree to which one has a life, so opinions will vary:)....anyway, you
fellas can entertain each other with with the witty relplies, and I
will leave the politics to the politicians on here.

why am I confused by this???

ph4ever wrote:

tomsawyer wrote:Well, geez....I dont believe I called a single person unthoughtful
or stupid, nor did I feel the need to get personal with anybody. Some
of the folks here are indeed both intelligent and nice....and know
how to disagree without being a disagreeable person. But at least
nobody has felt the urge to remind me how few posts I have therefore
rendering my opinion less than valid. But then again, others might
argue that the number of posts is often inversly proportional to the
degree to which one has a life, so opinions will vary:)....anyway, you
fellas can entertain each other with with the witty relplies, and I
will leave the politics to the politicians on here.

why am I confused by this???

Too many drugs before lunch?

Key Lime Lee wrote:

ph4ever wrote:

tomsawyer wrote:Well, geez....I dont believe I called a single person unthoughtful
or stupid, nor did I feel the need to get personal with anybody. Some
of the folks here are indeed both intelligent and nice....and know
how to disagree without being a disagreeable person. But at least
nobody has felt the urge to remind me how few posts I have therefore
rendering my opinion less than valid. But then again, others might
argue that the number of posts is often inversly proportional to the
degree to which one has a life, so opinions will vary:)....anyway, you
fellas can entertain each other with with the witty relplies, and I
will leave the politics to the politicians on here.

why am I confused by this???

Too many drugs before lunch?

or not enough!!!