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: thames_sider who wrote (12561)	2/17/2006 7:21:20 PM
From: Dale Baker	Respond to of 541371

The intolerant mash-the-flip-floppers is used so much because it works - Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Gore and Kerry all fell before that attack. Only Clinton was resilient enough not to get pidgeonholed and chopped off at the knees. Since we can't (and shouldn't) legislate civility and tolerance in our political campaigns, the underhanded crap that works is used over and over. It will go on working until the voters turn up their noses and demand something better.

To: thames_sider who wrote (12561)	2/17/2006 7:26:57 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541371

I'm not sure that's true about liberals. I've met some incredibly dogmatic liberals out there on SI- the kind who are just amazingly brutal in their name calling (WRT republican figures), and on top of being brutal, are just off the mark, and unrepentant when called on it by even another liberal (such as my gentle self :-) I think there are absolutists on both sides of the aisle, and the dogmatic liberals are every bit as closeminded as the dogmatic conservatives. The fascinating thing I observe, is that the dogmatic angry liberals have much more in common with their angry conservative counterparts, than they do with me. It's the same odd affinity that I see between hard atheists and true believers- both sides are so convinced of the absolute correctness of their positions that they are almost identical, and they have nothing in common with a wishy washy agnostic (albeit a partisan one) like me. The real divide is between relativists and non-relativists- or if you prefer, between absolutists and non-absolutists. IMO, of course.

To: thames_sider who wrote (12561)	2/17/2006 8:36:38 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 541371

I'm not sure why you would want to use a slur as your definition for liberal. I don't see how it leads to constructive conversation. If you were not actually defining liberal that way but just bashing conservatives because some conservatives have bashed liberals I also don't see how that leads to productive conversation. Even using your definition I don't think liberals are more likely than conservatives to be willing to understand or accept thinking that is hostile to their preconceptions. Most of those characterised/denigrated as "liberals" on SI seem far more ready to attempt to understand their opponents and their arguments than the reverse. OK, your talking about people in SI. That narrows it down a bit. I still don't agree. SI has plenty of close minded liberals as well as close minded conservatives. Tim