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: Neeka who wrote (148993)	11/27/2005 8:11:32 PM
From: SirWalterRalegh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793677

Mac I've given up trying to talk to the "other side". They need to declare bankruptacy and start over again. They are corrupt and they lie. An answer from Ms Holt will not advance yours or my understanding of why the democrats will not unite in the fight against Islamofascism. Their heads are buried in the sand awaiting their ascent to power. The "boy president" has shown us already how they will act in the face of terror e.g., the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. As I've said they are bereft of ideas and spine.

To: Neeka who wrote (148993)	11/27/2005 8:53:48 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793677

I am asking for absolute proof that the president intentionally misled, misinformed, or deliberately distorted information that led up to the war. Can you please oblige? I can respond but I doubt you will find it obliging. Or that you will accept anything I say because you are so distrustful. But here goes... First of all, I can't prove that ANY MORE THAN YOU CAN DISPROVE IT. We have no way to know. We can only look at the evidence, put it in context, and make our best guesses. Second, I don't personally believe that the President deliberately did that. If I don't believe it, how in the world am I going to come up with a rationale that would persuade you, someone who would resist any persuasion, that he did? I recognize that what you...are saying about the President and his administration is for political advantage leading up to the 2006 election You're kidding, right? How long have you "known" me? Why in the world would I make any effort on behalf of the Democrats in the 2006 election? What have I ever said that makes you think I have any partisan interest in those elections? I'll answer my own question. Nothing. I'm sure of that because I know for a fact that I have no horse in that race. (I'm quite sure that I haven't posted about them once. I think I have vaguely referenced the 2008 election--I've stated a preference for Guliani--but I'm quite sure I haven't mentioned the 2006 elections because I have next to no interest in them.) You are making a preposterous assertion about me (with no offer of "proof" I might add <g>). I believe your tactics are particularly disingenuous and dishonest. I have never been anything but straight-forward with you. I don't know any other way to be. What may have misled you (my definition of mislead), although I try to be clear about it, is the tack that I typically take on this thread which is to try to insert into this echo chamber some alternatives for your consideration. I do that because I don't think it's healthy either for the participants in this thread or for the country to be so polarized, so partisan, so angry. With such a homogenous group, people reinforce each other and that pushes the group spiraling towards the extreme. I assert that there are other POVs that, while you or I might not agree with them, are reasonable positions worthy of at least a modicum of respect. I offer them in the hope that they will help you to back off on the polarization and hostility a notch or two. That is my "cause." I am not trying to persuade you of any of those positions, only to recognize that some position other than your own might just possibly be reasonable. I offer them not because I necessarily prefer them but to trigger some reflection and hopefully mitigate the extremism. Because I think such black and white thinking is scary. (I also offer them for the mental exercise--a good debater can understand and debate either side. Staving off senility is a priority for me.) I am all ears. I don't think so. I see no indication that you are prepared to listen to me at all. I looks to me like what you do is react against anyone who is not a full-fledged, dues-paying member of the Club as the enemy and all enemies look alike. If you can't tell the difference between me and Howard Dean or Ted Kennedy, you have no "ears" at all.