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: SecularBull who wrote (348920)	1/28/2003 1:33:41 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Respond to of 769670

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH is such a master, lol, the hissyfits rants of the dems are hilarious.

To: SecularBull who wrote (348920)	1/28/2003 1:38:58 PM
From: steve dietrich	Respond to of 769670

He's a regular "Columbo", although he seems more like "inspector cousteau".

To: SecularBull who wrote (348920)	1/28/2003 1:45:03 PM
From: Neeka	Respond to of 769670

Worth a re-post. M 3bruces.com SHEEP AMIDST WOLVES : On The Fine Art of Being Stupid There are two ways of approaching a great thinker. If you are reading Plato and you chance across a remark that strikes you as foolish, you may either conclude that Plato is being stupid or that you are. And if you decide that you are-which is always a safe bet-then you will dig deeper, reflect harder, and try to penetrate to the wisdom carefully hidden beneath the apparent folly. On the other hand, when dealing with people we already regard as fools we feel absolved from the duty of digging much deeper. Our hermeneutical principles do not require us to offer a rigorous analysis of their inanities, and we sensibly conclude that it would be pointless to pursue a deeper examination of their motives. This is because stupid people's motives are normally quite self-evident, and we tend not to suspect them of cunning or duplicity in their designs. Usually we are more than justified in this approach. But it is by no means obvious why this should be so. After all, why couldn't a brilliantly Machiavellian mind adopt stupidity as a strategic device to lessen the chance of having his subtle designs being detected by those upon whom he was working these very designs? At the level of abstract theory this does in fact seem perfectly plausible. Yet the world does not offer many cases of such a device being adopted by the cunning. And there is a reason for it. It is the tendency of those with intelligence to be afflicted with that disease of the ego, amour propre-that boundless, almost hormonal narcissistic lust to outshine all rivals and to outrank all peers--although, in this case, what at the individual level may be a curse at the collective level proves a boon; and thus another instance of Mandeville's maxim, Private Vices, Public Virtues. For the vanity of the brilliant neatly prevents them from simulating stupidity, and thus protect us from the staggering power for mischief this masquerade would potentially put into their hands. If a man has a brilliant enough mind to conceive of subtle designs, he will almost certainly have the psychological drive to demonstrate the brilliance of his mind by revealing-or indeed trumpeting-the very subtlety of those designs that he would be far better off concealing. For what brilliant man will consent to being considered stupid? Even stupid people find this a trial. And this is my way of warning the reader that what he is being invited to ponder is something little short of a violation of the natural order. But, so advised, let us proceed. <snip>