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 : I Will Continue to Continue, to Pretend.... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: abstract who wrote (14663)	10/1/2005 6:22:37 PM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35834

...."Nevertheless Bennett was stupid to make a remark knowing full well that he would be PERCEIVED as racist. He should have apologized for being stupid.".... So you opine & simultaneously malign sans any substantiation*. Although a large number of libs jumped on his remarks purely to score political points, there were a number of libs who defended Bennett's comments. And no one who has maliciously assailed Bennet, including you, has made a single legitimate connection between their vicious rhetoric & Bennet's remarks taken in proper context. If we were to take your misguided, unsubstantiated opinion to its logical conclusion, no conservative would ever utter a word in public on any major issue we face today because undoubtedly some lib will hysterically (mis) "PERCEIVE" it as racist, sexist, homophobic, fascist, eeeeevil, malevolently theocratic, ruthlessly imperialistic, etc., ad nauseam. Since that would automatically make them "stupid", any further discourse would be unnecessarily. So much for open, honest debate. So much for diversity of thought, tolerance & inclusiveness. Yup, just bring on the PC Police & the grievance-mongers to shout down any opposing POV with baseless mean-spirited rhetoric. Ya! That's the ticket! *****Since you have posted here many times in the past & repeatedly, even willfully violated thread standards, I will remind you only once to read the thread header & comply.

To: abstract who wrote (14663)	10/1/2005 6:55:13 PM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 35834

No philosophical deed goes unpunished, Part Two Power Line Maybe I should spend more time reading lefty blogs because they can be quite amusing. Yesterday, I noted that two members of the reality-based community, Yglesias and De Long, had been honest enough to note that there was nothing improper in William Bennett's allegedly racist reductio ad aburdum argument against defending abortions based on utilitarian goals such as reducing crime. Now Garance Franke-Ruta (great name, not-so-great journalist) is taking co-blogger Yglesias and De Long to task for being intellectually honest enough to commit a philosophical deed when they could have ignored the merits and simply engaged in helpful Republican-bashing. She writes: One of the reasons the left has such a difficult time moving public opinion is that, all too often, it reacts with cleverness to situations where outrage would be a more appropriate response. Bill Bennett yesterday offered left bloggers a golden opportunity to make political hay, and what do we have? The spectacle of them explaining his remarks away in order to prove ... what exactly? That they, too, studied Latin and philosophy? So that's the left's problem -- too much intellectual sophistication, not enough venom. Ultimately, of course, Franke-Ruta wants to show that she too is familiar with reasoned argument. If anything, though, she demonstrates the contrary: Implicit in Bennett's statement is the assumption that African Americans contribute only criminality to America, and that if he could he wave his magic wand and bring African Americans' tenure in this nation to an end, that is all that would disappear. That's what's offensive about his statement. But Bennett made no factual assumption that African Americans contribute only criminality to America. Instead, he implicitly assumed that even if that were all they contributed, it would still be reprehensible to argue in favor of aborting black babies. The moral bankruptcy of arguing for abortions on that basis made it unnecessary to resort to a utiltarian argument based on all the positive things African-Americans contribute to America. Bennett's whole point is that these sorts instrumental considerations have no place in a discussion about the right to life. Maybe Franke-Ruta disagrees. UPDATE: Jonah Goldberg has a similar, though perhaps less amused, reaction to Franke-Ruta's effort to enforce the mindless orthodoxy of Republican bashing. It certainly reads to me like she's upset that liberal bloggers are being too intellectually honest. The upshot of Franke-Ruta's position seems to be that deliberately distorting Bill Bennett's intent and meaning is a small price to pay to villify him unfairly and for the added bonus of angering-up southern blacks in order to get limousine liberals like John Edwards elected. And if Matt Yglesias or Brad DeLong see it differently, they should just be quiet -- for the sake of the movement. I find this very illuminating. We get a lot of grief around here from time to time for supporting conservative politicians or figures -- including Bennett -- when liberals insist the only intellectually honest position is opposition and outrage. Therefore we must be operating in bad faith. And here we have someone at The American Prospect all but declaring that intellectual honesty is corrupting liberalism and its nakedly partisan ambition to attain political power. Nice movement she's working on. corner.nationalreview.com powerlineblog.com powerlineblog.com prospect.org powerlineblog.com powerlineblog.com