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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: American Spirit who wrote (245568)	4/4/2002 10:40:41 PM
From: American Spirit	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

PS on conservatism - the ultimate conservatives in the world now are the Islamic extremists. Think about it. They are terrified of womens rights, liberalism, rock music, sex, the fall of the male-dominated ruling class. Sometimes being progressive and secular is a lot better than hanging onto old ideas, even if your religion tries to dictate them.

To: American Spirit who wrote (245568)	4/4/2002 10:52:09 PM
From: rich4eagle	Respond to of 769670

Great post American Spirit, we need more posts like that one

To: American Spirit who wrote (245568)	4/4/2002 10:58:25 PM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769670

Interesting examples of corruption. You list the Clinton Lincoln bedroom sleepover for Ken Lay as an example of conservative corruption. Wow, I thought Clinton was a liberal. You must be brighter than myself. Enron was an excellent example of political corruption. Clinton's fund raiser called Enron for a DNC donation hours after Pakistan (?) approved the Enron power plant deal. When Enron asked GW bush for favors, he sent them packing. Corruption, yes Clinton was very guilty. The energy debacle is the best example of DEMOCRAT corruption you mentioned. Grey Davis appointed his cronies to the regulatory body. The DEMOCRAT politicians in California indebted the entire state by billions of dollars to make the whole energy crisis worse. They agreed to high priced long term contracts because they only deregulated purchase prices, not the costs to consumers. This proved that the market works. Demand increased because of artificially low prices. The increase in demand increased the cost of energy. Democrats took millions of dollars from liberal groups who wanted to ban any energy production in their state. Then when the problem caused by the liberals came home to roost, they mucked it up worse, and demogouged the energy companies for responding to market forces. No educated person can argue that supply and demand don't set prices. Thanks for the opportunity to correct mis-understanding.

To: American Spirit who wrote (245568)	4/4/2002 11:14:14 PM
From: bonnuss_in_austin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Check this out -- LOL -- courtesy of Solon... ...on another SI thread dominated by RWE founders, etc who are riotously challenged at every turn by others who are permitted to post I suppose as long as they don't piss off in 'spirit' or some such horsesht the RW 'tone'... Hi Solon! LOL!! So WHO 'authored' this bullsht? 'Neocon?' Or is it plagiarized cut/paste? It's more than priggishly enough to pass for Neocon's 'original literature' <snicker> ... Message 17288727 --snip-- WHAT LIBERALISM MEANS TO ME The frame of reference for the true liberal is Western Civilization. It is something that commands allegiance because of its inherent goodness and beauty, but also because it is the basis for the modern world and its achievements. Without Western Civilization, it is almost impossible to imagine the development of democracy, rational jurisprudence, laboratory science, advanced technology, or the hope of bringing the mass of humankind out of the bondage of ignorance, disease, and endless toil. The liberal looks with alarm at attacks on the fundamental values and practices of Western Civilization, and seeks to defend it, not only for its sake, but for the sake of the world, which must progress or die. Many things may change without harm; many things may even be an improvement; but no one should treat lightly the fundamental ideas, precepts, customs, attitudes, and institutions that have developed over millennia in the West, and which incorporate within them mechanisms for criticism and improvement that should be respected. The liberal understands that one cannot put everything up for grabs without losing one's bearings, and therefore that hallowed ideas and institutions should be treated carefully, and much should be considered as settled at any given time. He understands that society has to work through its problems, and that no governmental solution exists for many of them. He understands that an attack on a person's cherished beliefs and customs is an attack on that person, and that we should be very careful about stirring up anger and division in society by clumsy attempts to interfere with community norms and private traditions. He is leery of an activist government, and sets a high bar before supporting anything resembling social engineering. In other ways, he considers the onus on those who want to use governmental power to accomplish their ends. He is leery of taking economic power out of the private sector, and of federalizing issues that could be dealt with by the states, for example. He is inclined to view favorably and encourage "mediating institutions", public but non- governmental corporations, like churches and charitable foundations and civic groups, from the Boy Scouts to the Kiwanis. The liberal wants to see certain values honored: merit, honesty, trustworthiness, devotion to duty, among them. He would like to see a world where all take seriously their responsibilities, and can be counted on. Human beings may falter, but it is better to do one's best than to cynically turn one's back on standards of character and decorum. I have tried to give an idea of what I think liberalism is. I am curious to see what comments are elicited....... >> Too funny. bia

To: American Spirit who wrote (245568)	4/5/2002 9:42:14 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

I have a full inbox, and want to give your post considered treatment, so I will come back to it in a little while.

To: American Spirit who wrote (245568)	4/5/2002 9:44:45 AM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 769670

The most glaring examples were the S+L debacle, Enron and the recent energy crisis gougings. A crock of your usual baloney. Conservatism is no more to blame for these matters than liberalism.

To: American Spirit who wrote (245568)	4/5/2002 12:13:20 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

I do not believe at all that most executives are criminal, nor do I believe that the criminality of a few is more important than the benefits of getting rid of cumbersome regulation. Imagine, if you will, having to check in weekly with a parole officer and document what you have done during the week, even though you have committed no crime. Is the likelihood of a decrease in crime worth it? The question is balancing interests. At this point, the environmental groups have a knee jerk reaction, and don't care about costs, either to the tax payer, or through unfunded mandates. Additionally, they want to lock up so much land that is ripe for mineral exploration, or is used for grazing, that they have a quite adverse impact on the local economies. (Much of the West is tied up in federal land). Ultimately, it is an example of environmental elitism, since few people can afford or are interested in the sort of wilderness activities that they pursue, or care so much about aesthetic considerations over jobs. The next platform for military activity is space. We are in advance of any other country on that, but we must proceed to keep that edge. We will start with modest goals, but who knows where we will end up? The rich pay most of the taxes, regardless of a tax break. The bigger question is whether individuals making decentralized decisions are preferable to the legislature in allocating most resources. In respect of complexity, and the value of an array of voices, I agree with you.......