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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Joe NYC who wrote (175623)	9/30/2003 12:28:36 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570744

Joe, wonderful article. I never noticed this trend until now. Tenchusatsu

To: Joe NYC who wrote (175623)	9/30/2003 12:43:16 PM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1570744

The fundamental argument in the presidency wars is not that the president is wrong, or is driven by a misguided ideology. That's so 1980's. The fundamental argument now is that he is illegitimate. He is so ruthless, dishonest and corrupt, he undermines the very rules of civilized society. Could he be any more wrong, unlikely...the issue IS ideology. Pre-emptive wars, unilateralism, destruction of decades of order, UN, allies, environmental order, faith as a base rather than a distinct and separate freedom, social unity, fiscal responsibility....these are real issues, not irrational hatred as this writer conveniently would like us to buy into. Al

To: Joe NYC who wrote (175623)	9/30/2003 5:21:03 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1570744

The quintessential new warrior scans the Web for confirmation of the president's villainy. He avoids facts that might complicate his hatred. He doesn't weigh the sins of his friends against the sins of his enemies. But about the president he will believe anything. He believes Ted Kennedy when he says the Iraq war was a fraud cooked up in Texas to benefit the Republicans politically. It feels so delicious to believe it, and even if somewhere in his mind he knows it doesn't quite square with the evidence, it's important to believe it because the other side is vicious, so he must be too. I am unclear why Ted Kennedy is any less believable than Bush and his WMD. Already, the author shows his partisanship by stating that the war can not be a fraud and was not cooked up in TX even though we have proof that the former may well be true and we don't have proof that the latter ISN'T true. However, because he is partisan, he believes both are false because he believes his conservative president. I am not sure what comes first......the chicken or the egg: were we heading for years towards extreme partisanship and that partisanship finally coalesced under Bush, or did Bush by his very nature force this partisanship to the surface. I don't know which is true, if either, but I do know that this country is the most partisan I've ever seen it since becoming an adult. ted