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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (435348)	11/17/2008 6:21:12 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1586920

>> Fascism is only slightly right of you Fascism is fundamentally leftist. We've been over this one......fascism is conservatism run amok. It invokes strong nationalism, reactionary thought, racism and encourages the union of gov't and corporations. All of that was present in Nazi Germany.

To: i-node who wrote (435348)	11/17/2008 6:31:03 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1586920

Even democratic conservatism can't tolerate any kind of dissent or disagreement among its ranks. Do you see how easily you all could fall into fascism? *Remember fascism will come to this country wrapped in the American flag and carrying a bible!* NATIONAL REVIEW'S SHAKE-UPS CONTINUE.... Christopher Buckley was pushed out for praising Barack Obama; Kathleen Parker is persona non grata for failing to praise Sarah Palin, and the shake-ups at the National Review continue with David Frum's resignation. ...David Frum, a prominent conservative writer who enmeshed himself in a minor dustup during the campaign by turning negative on Governor Palin, is leaving, too. In an interview, he said he planned to leave the magazine, where he writes a popular blog, to strike out on his own on the Web. [...] Mr. Frum said deciding to leave was amicable, but distancing himself from the magazine founded by his idol, Mr. Buckley, was not a hard decision. He said the controversy over Governor Palin's nomination for vice president was "symbolic of a lot of differences" between his views and those of National Review's. "I am really and truly frightened by the collapse of support for the Republican Party by the young and the educated," he said. I can't honestly say I've found Frum's perspective compelling, but I can acknowledge that he's been one of the magazine's better writers, and has been willing to at least question the party line from time to time. Noting the recent departures, Andrew Sullivan added: "[W]e are left with adolescent bilge from Kathryn-Jean Lopez and spittle-flecked postings from Mark Levin and Andy McCarthy and Mark Krikorian and Mark Steyn, it may indeed be time to call the era of National Review as a repository for intellectual debate over." This has almost certainly been the case for quite a while, but if one were inclined to note the day and time the notion of intellectual debate at the National Review ended, I'd say it was around noon on Oct. 3, when Rich Lowry, an NR editor, explained that he sat "a little straighter" when Sarah Palin winked at the camera during a nationally televised debate, because it was "so sparkling it was almost mesmerizing." Lowry concluded, "It sent little starbursts through the screen and ricocheting around the living rooms of America." I'd stopped taking the magazine seriously long before then, but this was the proverbial nail in the coffin. The New York Times noted the magazine "may" have lost its "reputation as the cradle for conservative intellectuals." You don't say. —