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: Lane3 who wrote (39363)	4/14/2004 10:59:26 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793856

I take umbrage at the suggestion that being partisan means I, or any other partisan member of the thread, have lost brain cells or curiosity. I don't disagree with the suggestion that I fail at collegiality. Personally, I don't think veiling one's personal digs in collegiality is all that civilized. Passive aggressive is what I call it. Anyway, I vote we try, just for one day, focussing on the content of the messages instead of each other's foibles. Edit: actually I should be working instead of goofing around anyway. Later.

To: Lane3 who wrote (39363)	4/14/2004 11:16:09 AM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793856

From the little I've read of you, I get the impression that you do associate with a party, but that doing so hasn't destroyed your curiosity, your collegiality, nor your brain cells. Which would make you neither partisan nor non-partisan, according to Webster's, a very odd kind of verbal limbo. <g> Thanks for the compliments. I think. Yes, I'm a Democrat. I still have hope it will return to its roots as the party of the little folk. Bill Greider's book, Who Will Tell the People?, best expresses that hope. Here's the Amazon url for that book. amazon.com I don't share all of Greider's politics, so I don't mean to offer that as a way of reading my politics. I do, however, offer it as the kind of hope, however dimly, that the Dem party will return to its roots. But, my serious guess is, that's about as likely to happen as Bill's wish that the libertarian's gain control of either party. But, having said that, there is more than enough to criticize about Bill Clinton's policy stuff during his period as president (and not the small stuff of his personal life). As for your remark about my verbal limbo position as neither partisan or non-partisan, that's clever. At this level of conversation, I'm much less concerned about labels than about their content. Incidentally, I was struck during Bush's press conference last night, just how deeply post-modernist this presidency is. In the midst of all this talk they put forth about universal values and their intimate acquaintance with them, they have this pomo conviction that language will alter reality. The constant use of, for instance, the term "terrorist" to describe actors of very different stripes is an obvious attempt to pull all opponents, rhetorically, under the Al Q umbrella. The point is a political one but it's also an attempt to create a reality. And, has the obvious ugly consequence of confusing all sorts of activities. And damaging policy badly.