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.

Pastimes : The Boxing Ring Revived -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (2541)	2/19/2002 5:37:43 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7720

did not bring up anything with a purely personal cost. I think you can see how I might have thought otherwise. These key points speak to the expenditure of personal time and energy, which is why I thought you were speaking to both. <<Since no serious person has so much time on his hands that he could not conceive of something better to do with it than harass socialites, I have come to the conclusion that my hypothetical anti- fur fanatic does not have a life, nor much of a desire to get one.Even ordinary recreational activities make more sense, since everyone needs some opportunities for refreshment and conviviality, and most of them are pretty harmless. Better my fanatic should hang- out with a few friends and engage in tomfoolery.>> <<The ACLU attorneys who chose to pursue this matter probably have lives, and are almost certainly better balanced individuals than the anti- fur fanatic>> Liberals initiate "Heather", knowing that there will be a negative reaction. And conservatives who propose creating a mechanism to provide pre-natal care by covering the fetus under SCHIP rather than just continuing to cover the pregnant woman under Medicare did so for no other apparent reason than to jar the status quo. This is a chicken and egg thing. Just like the Middle East. The other guy always is the one who started it. Which side is the status quo? Right now we have abortion-rights, no prayer in schools, and established affirmative action practices. Which side is the paint thrower in those cases? Which side is doing the moral grandstanding by protesting the status quo? I'll bet that the first librarian who put "Heather" on the shelf along with a bunch of other new books didn't think a thing about it. I don't think we can dump the cost of making an federal case out of it solely on the liberals. If no one had made a stink, it would have been no harm, no foul and no one would have even heard of it. Maybe the liberal side gets a tad more than half the "blame" for the cost of that controversy, but it takes two to tango. I don't think you can legitimately put it all on the liberals. I glower at women in fur coats. I don't make a special trip to Bergdorf's to do it and I certainly wouldn't carry a can of paint, but I don't hide my displeasure when I encounter fur at the Kennedy Center. Do I need to get a life? Is my interest in the welfare of little furry creatures trivial? How much does a glower cost when you're shuffling your way past the ticket taker? Nothing. And it makes me feel better. I read your essay. I don't think you were convincing to anyone but a true believer. I offered suggestions on how to reframe the argument to make it more valid in the minds of potential readers who don't have a knee-jerk reaction to the word, liberal. No, my suggestions weren't just tweaks. They would require a rewrite. But they were supportive of the point you were trying to make, or what I thought was your point. Karen