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 : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tsigprofit who wrote (1078)	5/9/2003 3:10:01 PM
From: rrufff	Respond to of 20773

Tsigprofit, with all due respect, read your post. Liberals and conservatives are two labels on the supposed opposite end of the spectrum. I actually hate these labels as it presumes that one has an opinion which toes the party line or the philosophy of someone else 100% of the time. You accuse Bald Eagle of doing what other posters you call "liberal" do on your thread all the time. The conspiracy theories, the Bush bashing, etc., certainly are not more "moderate" than his posts. As moderator you are free to do as you wish. As a moderate, you should act in moderation and fairness.

To: tsigprofit who wrote (1078)	5/9/2003 6:02:00 PM
From: sylvester80	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

And bald eagle is a liar to boot. I exposed him to his blatant lies many times before. He should be banned from posting anywhere. His posts have a 99.99% probability of being lies.

To: tsigprofit who wrote (1078)	5/9/2003 8:34:46 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

This forum is for moderates and liberals Quite a while ago I started a discussion with the moderator of another liberal thread on exactly what constitutes being a liberal. She wasn't interested in the discussion, because for her a liberal was a person who thought the way she did. Maybe you would be more interested in the issue? I raise it because I think there are two very divergent strands of liberalism which tend to get lumped under one term and shouldn't. Whjen I was in my political phase, the people one associated most with liberalism were Adlai Stevenson, Hubert Humphrey, I.F. Stone (unless you considered him an out-and-out communist), JFK (though not Bobby, at least not then -- people tend to forget that he was a quite active participant in the McCarthy commie-hunt until he fell out with Cohn). For me, one of the primary voices of liberalism was -- and is -- Nat Hentoff. Liberalism seems to have morphed quite a bit from those days, not, IMO, in ways that are always positive. For example, Hentoff made a strong liberal case for opposing abortion, and IMO his understanding and application of liberal principles is still compelling. But liberalism seems to have gotten to some extent hijacked to special interests (so, of course, has conservatism, only different special interests, though there are some dual special interests such as Enron), to the extent that the desires of the special interests overwhelm the concepts of principle and principled belief. Is this a discussion that interests people here?