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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (2886)	6/30/2003 2:08:35 AM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 793817

Fund-Raising Puts Dean in Top Tier of Contenders By ADAM NAGOURNEY - NEW YORK TIMES This is surprising. But the far left and right are over represented on the Internet, as SI shows. The Net is the new Gorilla in fundraising. Howard Dean announced yesterday that he had raised close to $9 million this year, establishing himself as a top-tier candidate in the Democratic presidential field. The figure stunned his rivals and transformed Dr. Dean from a maverick into a more traditional contender. Much of the money was collected over the Internet, his aides said, leaving little doubt there are now ways to solicit contributions other than the telephone calls and elaborate fund-raisers that are the stock and trade for most mainstream candidates. Dr. Dean's aides said he would report raising at least $6.2 million in the three-month period that ends at midnight, on top of $2.6 million he raised over the first three months of the year. Dr. Dean announced the figure 36 hours before the filing period ends, timing the release for a slow-news Sunday afternoon. "We are thrilled," Dr. Dean's campaign manager, Joe Trippi, said. "Right now our new goal is $6.5 million by midnight tomorrow." The other campaigns said yesterday that they would wait until the fund-raising period was over before releasing their results. "He'll beat everybody," Steve Elmendorf, a senior adviser to Representative Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri, said of Dr. Dean. Dr. Dean's strong showing seems certain to cause a problem for some congressmen who are running for president ? in particular, Mr. Gephardt and Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, who had weak financial showings in the first quarter. Mr. Gephardt and Mr. Lieberman were looking to strong showings in the next report to erase any concerns among Democrats about their viability. Several Democrats said that Dr. Dean's success posed a particular problem to Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, since the men have been competing for many of the same voters and since it could undercut Mr. Kerry's effort to present himself as the front-runner. Mr. Kerry's campaign manager, Jim Jordan, disputed that analysis. "If their fund-raising projections are accurate, then perhaps it makes it a two-candidate race," Mr. Jordan said. "If so, it makes it clarifying and helpful to us." Dr. Dean's advisers said that as of a week ago, he had raised just $3.2 million. They said contributions had increased sharply over the last week because of his announcement speech on Monday and the online vote by the organization Moveon.org, which served to enlisted a lot of new supporters, many of whom made contributions. Mr. Trippi also said that Dr. Dean had been helped by his appearance on the NBC interview program "Meet the Press" on June 22. Dr. Dean's appearance on that show, in which he was unable to answer some questions and appeared to change his position on some issues, drew widespread criticism among Democrats. But his aides suggested that as far as Dr. Dean's supporters were concerned, it might have proved an old show business nostrum: There is no such thing as bad publicity. "My own theory of it is when Howard Dean says things like, `I don't know the answer to that,' the echo chamber in Washington says: `Oh my God; he doesn't know the answer!' " Mr. Trippi said. "But the guy at home says, `Hey, someone who admits he doesn't know the answer. We haven't seen that before!' " nytimes.com

To: LindyBill who wrote (2886)	6/30/2003 3:36:04 AM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793817

Stanley Fish is always interesting to read. Thanks for posting it. I'm typing away in the middle of the night because the cat decided to prowl the house and woke us up. Since he usually doesn't do that, we were unprepared to hear noises. Now the adrenaline flow won't slow down. Fish does a much better job, apparently, of rendering Thomas' argument than Thomas does. The only thing I would add to the last portion of Fish's argument, most of which I agree with, is that, generally but not always, one finds a particular specific wandering behind the timeless generalities argument. My guess is that Thomas, to make that point clearer, favors timeless generalities when they produce outcomes he likes; but does not favor them, or selects different ones when the outcomes don't look so good. I need only invoke the Gore vs. Bush case to make my point.

To: LindyBill who wrote (2886)	7/2/2003 12:56:02 AM
From: D. Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793817

This is clear and unequivocal and places Justice Thomas squarely in a philosophical tradition that begins with Kant's insistence that questions of justice turn only on abstract considerations of what is right rather than on the calculation of (someone's) preferred outcomes. THAT nails what is so unnerving about the Michigan case and Lawrence v. Texas. It is deciding from desired outcomes, instead of established principles of law. Legislating OUGHT from the bench instead of deciding IS from the bench. The job of the judiciary is to rule based upon what is law, not what it believes law should be. The latter is the role of the legislature. Some don't get the distinction, apparently. :/ Derek