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 (11756)	10/11/2003 6:19:31 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793903

Speaking of "hot stove time", I have been researching the influence of Christian reconstructionism, aka domininism on Republican politics, and I am not at all happy about it. religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu It's kind of a stealth movement, but for example the Chalecedon Foundation, which was supporting McClintock in California, also supported Roy Moore's Ten Commandments furore. And by "support" I mean bought and paid for. chalcedon.edu As a Catholic, I'd pretty much rather claw my brain out than read more than a little bit of the writings of the movement, but at any rate, these birds are the reason I quit being active in the party in Virginia, a while back. And I think it's time to take back the party.

To: LindyBill who wrote (11756)	10/11/2003 11:50:57 AM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 793903

By ADAM NAGOURNEY I've never been particularly impressed with his work. I simply didn't carry the weight that previous Times folk who wrote on national politics did. This one shows again why. Rather than make his own points and use quotes to illlustrate them; he gets close to simply stringing quotes together. So one knows how Christie Whitman feels but not what Nagourney's analysis is, at least in any serious sense. I saw him the other night on the Lehrer Hour and he was much better than I expected. So I'm reading him a bit more carefully these days. And, to criticize my own sentences above, there is a bit more of his analysis, downplayed, than I had seen before. But . . . Johnny Apple, he's not.