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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (224844)	3/21/2007 2:57:46 AM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

"The open condescension you display in assuming that people only disagree with you because they are too stupid to read long articles is very off-putting." Did I strike some kind of nerve? Of course the Lazerus longs, Bills and Jlallens are capable of reading long articles. But I've noticed that they enjoy their witty little one liners immensely and sometimes feel compelled to complain about "academia" and "long winded posts that no one reads." As to why the posters I was referring to disagree with me, that's an interesting question. I have a pretty good handle on why you disagree with me but I haven't given much thought to the annoying trio. It isn't because they're too stupid to read long articles, though. I think it's more likely that they have no interest in reading anything that doesn't make them feel good about "their team." I had to post several time to Lazerus before he could begin to realize see how nonsensical it was too brazenly assert that no American unit larger than a platoon had ever been "defeated in battle" in Vietnam. Now no one with a burning desire to know the truth could entertain such a silly, illogical premise but he had to read a well documented account of a battalion getting nearly wiped out before he'd change his tune. So I'd guess they could "read" long articles until the cows came home but the facts and good thinking in such articles wouldn't get through their nationalistic, patriotic, Republican loyalism that filters out all the "liberal, academic, defeatism" that has been proven correct in the real world over the last 5 years. So, Nadine, for future reference, stupidity can be a reason for not reading long articles, but so can laziness or the desire to avoid that unpleasant feeling that sometimes arises from reading a well reasoned opinion that runs counter to your core beliefs. Sometimes when that happens all that's left is a bitter attack on the motives or the character of the writer. You've surely seen that, haven't you? Ed