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: TimF who wrote (187071)	4/27/2004 1:34:35 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1586628

If I am, its because I see him as a serious threat to our democracy. That motivates me in a way that nothing else can. If you think that then its a good reason to be against Bush but it isn't a good reason to not consider other ideas. It is possible to both oppose Bush and keep an open mind at the same time. What makes you think that I don't have an open mind? Disliking Bush is hardly an enterprise unique to me.....hating Bush is becoming legion. "The fact that I might be wrong goes without saying. Its a given, but you don't seem to recognize that given for yourself. People who disagree aren't just mistaken they are "blind", or "extreme partisans". " That isn't true.......during the war right after shock and awe when Iraq seemed to collapse with ease, I started to admit I might have been wrong in my view of what would happen. Frankly, I was stunned and I said so on SI. I was embarrassed that I had so misread the situation. Events since then, of course, have confirmed my original expectations. You do reconsider your ideas in the light of new evidence, and to be fair I must give you credit for that; but both before the invasion, and esp. after some of the more recent problems have started you have put down almost anyone who disagrees as "blind", or as an "extreme partisan". In between you where uncertain about your position, so you where not attacking others or being totally dismissive of their ideas, but before and after your uncertainty you did act in the way I described. If the evidence in available to you at any given moment, strongly supports (in your opinion) the idea that you are right, then you don't even seem to consider the possibility that you are wrong. Listen........we may have different thresholds for 'pain'. It seems to me that the 'pain meter' when it comes to Iraq in terms of lives and $$$ has hit a hi level. Therefore, I am surprised that there are people whose pain meter is set so low. Hence, I attribute it to partisanship. Adding to my concern and frustration is that I don't believe the people in charge know what they are doing. You might be surprised but I think this is to an extent true. I believe the people in charge are reasonably competent but they don't know exactly what to do or how to do it. War is muddled that way and so is politics (both in the US and within Iraq). Competent people are more likely to make the correct guess but dealing with situations like those in Iraq is going to involve guesses and muddling through. The current administration does not have some precise plan for success in Iraq. The difference between us seems to be that I would not expect them to have one. I do think in hindsight they could have handled some things better but judging them in the recognition that they don't have the benefit of hindsight I would not say they have done an awful job even if they definitely have not done a perfect one. Frankly, I think its bad politics to lead a democracy into war and not have it well thought out. Tim, I would love to think you are this incredibly fair and objective person, but again, when DR and Stevo Harris were calling me and other liberals on this thread every name in the book, I didn't hear you jump up and accuse them of being belittling or mean spirited. Your lips were tightly sealed. That's an exaggeration. I did respond in one or two more extreme cases. Others I probably never saw because I don't always read every message on this thread. I don't think it is unreasonable or should be unexpected that I will react stronger to insults, put downs, or inaccurate statements to or about me then I would react to such statements made about third parties. If I was going to try to jump on every such statement made on this thread, people would probably put me on ignore rather then have to read an unending series of "net nanny" posts. If that's the way you feel, then don't jump on me. We have few friends in the world.........do you think that's because Bush is so nice but people are generally mean........or that every envy's us? No.....he is hated because he acted like a butthole with hubris and mendacity. Just as he is hated so are many on SI. I don't think Bush is "so nice and reasonable", or "mendacity and hubris". Bush has different ideas an opinions then for example Chirac or most of the middle east. Both sides feel strongly both about the correctness of their opinions and the importance of them. Therefore you get conflict. But lets imagine for the sake of argument that Bush really is an inflexible, spiteful SOB. That doesn't mean that everyone who agrees with him about Iraq or some other issue is an inflexible, spiteful SOB or should be treat as if they where one. I see your point.......however, I am not sure that I agree with it. ted