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: Lazarus_Long who wrote (578296)	5/25/2004 5:19:02 PM
From: E	Respond to of 769670

I didn't go back and read, but it's my impression that you're mixing apples and oranges. I'd bet that there was no argument adduced by Poet or anyone else that Moore was not fat. Post a link if you find one. Poet said that the word 'ugly' as applied to mph was, she thought, in reference to the nature of mph's posts, or some message in them, not a disparagement of mph's physical appearance. If it was the latter, it was wrong and stupid, imho. So... it may be fine, or may not be, to disparage physical appearance as part of a political argument, but that's a separate issue. Personally, I think it's benighted, but hey, maybe that's just me. "Moore is a liar" is a different kind of statement than "Moore is fat." They may both be true, but the kind of person who uses the latter as an insult in argument is different than the kind of person who uses the former as one, imo. This is not to say that I don't understand the difference between a public and private figure. Private figures, for example, have a right not to have personal information about them revealed pubicly, and anyone who would do that would be, obviously, a disgusting person, whereas if a figure is public, personal information may be considered 'news,' or the figure may simply be 'fair game.'