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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: carranza2 who wrote (12388)	2/17/2006 7:21:59 AM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 541403

Why do you assume without a smidgen of evidence that Toensign is not credible as a source? I've seen Toensing on TV a lot. She's sharp and I like her. She's another one of those "colorful" regular guests on TV, a role that detracts from the quality of anyone's opinion so I can't automatically accept her unsupported opinion regardless of her experience. I wouldn't write it off either. Which is exactly my attitude about the resignation of a judge. Both give us some information but not enough to form any kind of a conclusion. I don't see how you can take her opinion as probative. is not a reason to brand her a liar. I didn't brand her a liar. Not even close. Please read more carefully. I can drive a truck through the holes in your logic Please do. I mean that seriously. I am always excited by the prospect. It's a wonderful learning experience. In the interest of brevity, though, do aim your truck at my logic rather than at some strawman of yours. EDIT: Just saw your later post. Edit window closing. Apology accepted.

To: carranza2 who wrote (12388)	2/17/2006 11:38:49 AM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 541403

The fact that she has an opinion and that she has experience beyond that of 99.99% of the populace, is not a reason to brand her a liar. This mode of thinking suggests that everyone with relevant experience and a viewpoint is a liar; I did not argue that. I simply said I would need other sources to verify her arguments because she had stretched arguments in other public appearances. My assertion of that fact is not something you need agree to; nor was it meant to persuade you. Just a statement of my own views of some of the pundits. As for the last sentence, that's not even close to an implication of my argument. Show me the lie, then and only then call her a liar. Only then will your arguments and John's have some merit. Ditto above. You simply misunderstand the character of this conversation.