Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Thank you.
I appreciate it.
Would a Hartz collar help? -g
Perspective is independent of wisdom.
Even the simplest of organisms has perspective.
Argh, I misspelled "interpretations".
Note to self: Use the darned spellcheck feature.
Thank you Castle, and thank you Mark. Those are beautiful interprations. As inspiring as the original quote.
I needed something like that today.
What do you think that means?
I'm curious.
This one is absolutely hysterical.
This quote on kindness is wonderful, alexed. Thank you.
It's a beautiful spring day here, finally. Not to mention Friday.
That's an absolutely beautiful story. As an adoptive mother who tracked down her daughter's biological family halfway around the world, I know how healing that kind of meeting can be.
Thanks, alexed.
That is a very good point, one we should certainly keep in mind. Thanks, Castle.
Nope, there are two of us.
I posted a story about bin Laden here earlier this morning, which I'm going to pull. Apparently it's no longer up on Drudge's site and I don't want to disseminate a story that may be false.
I love the genie story, alexed.
A quote for you this fine day;
"Show me a sane man and I will cure him for you."
- C. G. Jung (1875-1961)
Decca Records was right up there in the prescience department, it seems:
"We don?t like their sound, and guitar music is on the way out."
- Decca Recording Company, rejecting the Beatles, in 1962
This one's good (I found another good quote stash):
"Ideas are like stars; you will not succeed in touching them with your hands. But like the seafaring man on the desert of waters, you choose them as your guides, and following them you will reach your destiny."
- Carl Schurz (1829-1906)
Damn MS Word!
Neither can I.
Here's one that's amusing:
"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."
- Thomas Watson (1874-1956), Chairman of IBM, in 1943
Sometimes dispensing insight willy-nilly precludes one from learning.
i don't think anyone can actually "beat you to it" when it comes to favorite quotes.
I simply thought it was neat that I'd heard that quote for the first time just recently on this very thread.
How about this one?
"If two things don?t fit, but you believe both of them, thinking that somewhere, hidden, there must be a third thing that connects them, that?s credulity."
- Umberto Eco (1929-), Foucalt's Pendulum
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=317061
KOIKAZE has beaten you to it.
That's really lovely, Fred.
I'm trying to parse the meaning of that one.
Here's something a wee bit older than 32 years:
ERTHE TOC OF ERTHE
by Anonymous (ca 1000, UK)
Erthe toc of erthe erthe wyth woh,
erthe other erthe to the earthe droh,
erthe leyde erthe in erthene throh,
tho hevede erthe of erthe erthe ynoh.
translation:
EARTH TOOK OF EARTH
Earth took of earth earth with ill;
Earth other earth gave earth with a will.
Earth laid earth in the earth stock-still:
Then earth in earth had of earth its fill.
Even more amazing.
Perhaps he's coming around again.
Amazing! He never stops growing, does he? I love the word "winterlude". That's gotta be from his newest, as it's got that old-timey feeling he's championed in his recent work.
Thank you.
Cohen's voice always reminds me of a cow lowing....cockily, if that's possible. -g But apparently he's spent the last ten years in a Zen monastery and his new work is less full of itself.
I'll check the link now.
I don't have RealAudio.
Is that a song from his newest?
I saw a wonderful piece on CBS Sunday Morning today about two of the great singer-songwriters of the seventies, Loudon Wainwright and Leonard Cohen. The commentator praised both of their recent CD's very highly. Wainwright's in particular caught my eye.
Have you heard them?
If you'd like to toss some my way, I promise it'll come right back to you.
Hmmmm, I must've missed that one. Can I change my vote?
-g
Hi there alexed,
I read your posts regularly and always find something to smile at and think about during the course of the day. I particularly like the Lincoln quote today.
Have a good one.
Matt:
From your response to me:
Now, since you have chosen to make this a public issue, can you tell me what your stance is on "Don't talk about this person under any cicumstance" deals and why you think they are effective. Tell me your opinion and I'll explain to you my view. Let's decide if we need these and to what extent they go; and at what point they are needed, if at all.
You and I have been over this point both publicly and privately for months. You know what my stance is. You have told NW to stop posting to me. When he does anyway, there is no sanction. Think about what that says to the members here. Recently, I've been the focus of a couple of members' vitriol, but it won't always be me. They'll move on and the problem will remain the same.
It's certainly within your rights to address it now, address it later, or choose never to address it, just as it is within our rights as posters to participate here or not.
I'd like to be part of a community where respectfulness is a requirement, where members, on the whole, act this way because it's right, and on the occasions when they slip, the administration works actively to correct the situation. This may not be important to you. It may not be possible for you. I understand this.
With regard to this post to Bird of Prey:
Rumor has it Poet and this NW guy fight on SI.
SI offers the Ignore feature. So why aren't they using it?
Think about it for a minute. I know the answer.
Your rumors are incorrect. Please go to my SI profile. There have been no posts to him by me for months.The ignore feature is activated in my account. Please get your facts straight before you post them publicly in your role as administrator.
And finally, my public post was made only after I'd attempted to contact you privately on numerous occasions. I believe that having some simple rules of behavior, as well as a set of sanctions that you carry through is a legitimate request, one that would serve the entire community well as it continues to grow.
Charley Mike,
There have been no responses from me to that individual for months now. This was the first in quite some time and it was in response to yet another attack for a post I made to Matt.
Domestic tranquility will be restored when each member of this community treats the other with respect, and that includes respecting the other's wishes wrt contact.
Here's a suggestion: why don't you tell your mother or your wife that there is a woman on the internet to whom you have been posting against her wishes for seven months. Please include the facts that you threatened legal action at Silicon Investor for the right to post to her and that the majority of your friends there now no longer speak to you.
Neither your mother nor your wife deserve to be the focus of people's unwanted attention. And neither do I.
You need to leave me alone.
I do not intend to reopen our discussion of that here, and regret that you chose to do so. I think we should agree to leave SI issues on SI.
You have reopened the issue. The fact is the you have lost most of your SI friends over your stalking me on both sites, to the extent that a group of them got together and moved an entire thread to a moderated forum which excludes you.
Matt has told you to leave me alone.
You need to leave me alone.
My issues with SI have been about how you have intimidated them into letting you post to me there because of your legal threats.
Here is a synopsis of the past seven months of the situation.
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/msg.gsp?msgid=17208354
I have asked you over and over again to leave me alone. Matt has told you to leave me alone. LEAVE ME ALONE.
I'm sorry to interrupt all the food talk, but I've got a site management issue I'd appreciate if you'd address publicly, since my attempts to del with you privately have failed.
A week or two ago, there were a series of incidents which prompted me to ask just what the rules were in terms of unprovoked personal attacks on general threads, as well as on the Jail thread. I also asked about the implementation of an ignore feature and was told that a PM ignore feature "seemed OK" to Bob, but was not high on his list.
Here are the issues I'm bringing to the table:
1. I'd appreciate a codification of both the rules of engagement and the steps that will be taken by the administration if these rules are broken.
2. I am asking for a clarification of the complaint process. Perhaps a TOS form would work.
3. Once a person has made a TOS complaint, I'd like to suggest that the administrator who is dealing with the complaint reply by PM within a certain period of time, say twenty-four hours.
I've gotten very frustrated recently with lack of clarity here wrt these issues, to the point where I've scaled back on posting until this is addressed publicly.
Oh!
Now that's inspiration!
I was wondering where the inspirational quote of the day was! Thanks.
Good morning alexed,
Those were a particularly good bunch today. I loved 'em all. Thanks.
LOL. Oh, I can see how she'd bridle at madam.
March 23, 2002
Bush, in Monterrey, Speaks of Conditional Global Aid
By ELISABETH BUMILLER
MONTERREY, Mexico, March 22 ? President Bush called today for a "new compact" for global development by insisting that rich nations give foreign aid to poor nations only if poor nations undertake a broad range of political, legal and economic reforms.
"Pouring money into a failed status quo does little to help the poor, and can actually delay the progress of reform," Mr. Bush told the presidents and prime ministers of 50 nations gathered here for a conference on global aid to the developing world. "We must accept a higher, more difficult, more promising call."
Mr. Bush spoke on the closing day of the conference, when 171 nations signed the "Monterrey Consensus," an accord committing them to the goals of doubling development aid to the poor and halving world poverty by 2015.
Tonight, in a wide-ranging news conference, the president said no decision had been made on whether to begin a new round of drug interdiction flights over Peru. The flights, in which Peruvian fighter planes force down or shoot down suspected drug flights, were suspended last year when a plane carrying American missionaries was mistakenly shot down.
"We're analyzing not only what took place in the past, but the most effective way help Peru fight narcotics," he said. Mr. Bush will travel to Peru on Saturday.
The president also tried to lay to rest talk that Fidel Castro's abrupt departure from the conference on Thursday was the result of pressure from the United States.
Mr. Bush said there was "no pressure on anybody. Fidel Castro can do what he wants to do."
In his talk today, the president reiterated a promise of a 50 percent increase in American foreign aid over three years, and added that some money might be available as early as this year ? a counter to complaints from development agencies that the United States was moving too slowly in its new foreign aid commitments.
Mr. Bush's pledge meant that the total American foreign aid budget, if approved by Congress, would be $15 billion by 2006. The current American foreign aid budget is $10 billion.
Although Mr. Bush's pledge of aid fell short of the goals of the conference, the American commitment ? along with a promise of $4 billion more per year from the European Union ? was considered the most important developments of Monterrey, and proved, development experts said, that poor nations could exert powerful pressure on the richest nation in the world, particularly when the United States was asking many nations for help in the fight against terrorism. Mr. Bush's pledge of aid, which he first announced in a speech last week in Washington, was considered an abrupt change in Bush administration policy.
"It's a shift in political attitude that is very important," said Jorge G. Castañeda, Mexico's foreign minister. Mr. Bush, Mr. Castañeda added, clearly did not want to come to Monterrey "without anything to propose, without anything to put on the table."
Mr. Bush said that he would "jump start" his new aid program to make some funding available to nations that meet American standards of reform within the next year. Last week, development agencies had criticized him for delaying the start of the aid increase until 2004.
But Congress must first approve that money, and the Bush administration must also develop the specific standards for economic, political and legal reform, making it unclear how much new money will actually flow from the United States to poor nations this year. Mr. Bush has given the task of developing those standards to Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and Secretary of the Treasury Paul H. O'Neill, who this week in Monterrey expressed considerable skepticism about foreign aid.
"If we are going to have real economic development in the world, most of that will come from capital coming into those countries to create jobs," Mr. O'Neill said. "We are not going to do it with welfare."
Ari Fleischer, the White House spokesman, called Mr. Bush's move to speed up the aid an "indication by the president to do a little more, a little earlier." Mr. Fleischer said that the White House had no specific number in mind, but that it might be "a couple hundred million." Adding additional aid this year would not be part of the president's proposal for a 50 percent increase, he said.
Under that proposal, the foreign aid budget would grow by $1.7 billion in 2004, by $3.3 billion in 2005 and by $5 billion in 2006. Taken together, that would amount to a $10 billion increase in the foreign aid budget over three years. But Mr. Bush, sounding a similar but more diplomatic call than his treasury secretary, said that trade and foreign investment were far more important to the economic health of a poor nation than any level of foreign aid.
"All of us here must focus on real benefits to the poor, instead of debating arbitrary levels of inputs from the rich," Mr. Bush said in his speech at the Monterrey International Business Center. He added that "to be serious about fighting poverty, we must be serious about expanding trade."
Mr. Bush, as he has before, linked development aid to the fight against terrorism and also cast it in terms of religious and moral obligations.
"We fight against poverty because hope is an answer to terror," Mr. Bush said. "We fight against poverty because opportunity is a fundamental right to human dignity. We fight against poverty because faith requires it and conscience demands it."