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: Bearcatbob who wrote (118938)	8/20/2009 8:51:44 AM
From: Dale Baker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542059

I admonished Vinter to cut out the bashing or move on. It would be nice if we could all move on and get back to interesting substance. If you two want to have it out via PM, be my guest. Thanks.

To: Bearcatbob who wrote (118938)	8/20/2009 10:51:49 AM
From: Bread Upon The Water	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542059

I'm not sure what I can say here anymore without getting my knuckles rapped. The gist of it appears to be that we are not free to characterize other poster's argumentative style(s). Let me try this--with all due respect to all parties concerned. I don't think you have attempted to make any coherent substantive rational arguments when challenged by other posters here to flesh out your comments. As an arguentative approach, it appears to me, that you are effectively substituting style for substance---and to me this is analogous to what the Republican Party is doing on the national level. As a gamesmanship tactic there's something to be said for it. I, philosophically, am opposed to using an approach like this. I think it's intellectually dishonest and lends itself to susbstituting emotion and rhetoric for rationality. (I understand politicians don't always proceed in this manner, but that doesn't mean we have to follow their lead.) You are free, apparently, to proceed in this manner, and I guess all I can say about it is that I disagree with this approach as adding to the debate here. As I said, there are plenty or rational or philosphical grounds one can advance for opposing government's involvement in our health care system to the extent that is being proposed by the Democrats. In my opinion, the better way to proceed in the debate is to see if one can make the better argument.