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: DMaA who wrote (120551)	6/17/2005 8:56:09 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793896

You jumped to a conclusion about what the generalization is. I don't think so. It is absolutely fair to generalize and say Democrats don't criticize democrats, regardless of the sin. Republicans do - see Trent Lott. Perhaps that's a fair generalization, but how did you get to the conclusion that that particular generalization is the topic generalization of the article if not by "jumping"? The headline said "You've (Durbin) Told Us Who Democrats Really Are." Ergo it must have been something Durbin said or did that told us something about Democrats. What Durbin said or did was make that statement about gulags as described in the article. Durbin's statement tells us nothing about either Democrats or men. It only tells us something about Durbin. Your generalization could not have been the topic the headline. If your generalization were the topic, then it would have had to say "They (Kennedy, Reid, and the other Democrats who have not criticized him) Told Us Who Democrats Really Are."