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: Bill who wrote (444569)	8/18/2003 12:44:07 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769670

You mentioned agendas in response to a post dominated with comments by the historians. In that context, of course I primarily took it as a reference to them. Sure, historians may have agendas, but the reputation of these particular historians is impeccable. They do not publish shoddy scholarship, and it has all been basically anti- Communist. David Horowitz is someone who, up until now, liked Coulter, and even published her. The Treason Symposium was on the Free Repblic site. Only Conason would have had a highly partisan animus against Coulter, and even that does not mean he is wrong in factual criticism. If you have not "discredited" anyone else, I am glad, but it does not explain the comment you made, which implied that I was only paying attention to persons with agendas that would inherently put them at odds with Coulter. I have seen her defend her book on tv, and I have read her as her columns have gone downhill. I am in a position to make generalizations about her and her book, what I am not in the position of doing is making detailed criticism. For that, I have relied on others, by posting various factual criticisms. That is common sense......