George Soros Speaks Politics

horos2c writes "Hey all, the philanthropic billionaire George Soros has tossed his two cents worth in about the election and about Bush's policies overall. Even from an apolitical point of view its an interesting read, that's for sure. He both speaks clearly and has a hell of a lot to say."

Comments

Re:All liberal, All the time

[Unordained]

"Either way", "pro-kerry", "pro-bush" ...

Presenting two differing points of view does not make something unbiased; even a billion points of view cannot provide objective reporting. Some of us don't favor "either of the candidates", some of us don't think this is a simple "liberal vs. conservative" spectrum of opinion. It won't matter if they throw in some "conservative"-related stuff, it's still biased editing -- assuming, that is, that their input pool isn't just as biased as their output pool seems to be. (You could correct that by submitting your own, non-lefty, stories.)

But more importantly, some of us realize that the benefit of slashdot isn't that the editors are unbiased, it's that the comments are only moderated, not censored. (And I just finished using up my mod points.) You and I are free to speak, to present alternate points of view ... we can fight back, right here. And considering how few people "read the fucking article", it's possible your comments matter more than the story itself.

But do you really want the editors to throw you a bone by sending your way something you already agree with? Will it make your day better? Do you feel so oppressed and alone that the sympathy of slashdot editors would be sufficient to bring an end to your gloomy mood? You're not even in the minority, according to current presidential polls! ("Lefties" of course are welcome to be offended that slashdot editors would feel they need the extra boost of having mostly/nothing-but stories "in their favor".)

Don't Like It? Refute it!

[lexDysic]

OK, so I know this is /. and I shouldn't expect anyone to RTFA, but so far the majority of comments from the Bush++ crowd are complaining "I call BS! Soros is a liberal!" Although Soros is definitely anti-Bush (calling him a liberal may not be exactly accurate) the point is it doesn't matter. If you don't like what he has to say, refute it! What substantive statements of his thesis do you disagree with? <Irony> After all, this is slashdot where reasoned discussions and calm minds always prevail. </Irony>

Think! It ain't illegal yet.
--George Clinton

Soros is not good for 2nd Ammendment Rights

[Clanner]

While I may or may not disagree with some of Soros' views regarding Bush (who I am not a big fan of, by the way), one major issue I have with Soros is his support and funding for the various anti-2nd Ammendment groups out there. Groups such as the Million Mom March (more like the 1000 Mom March, but whatever), the Brady Center (formerly Handgun Control Inc.), etc. Soros is also a big supporter of a proposed UN Treaty that would outlaw private ownership of firearms.

I simply cannot support anyone who is so vehemently opposed to my Rights as a US citizen.

I noticed though that his thoughts on anything other than Bush or Iraq aren't posted on his website. I wonder if he's trying to hide his other political views because they aren't as popular as his anti-Bush stance...