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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Edwarda who wrote (51349)	8/15/1999 7:43:00 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

I am, however, a bit puzzled by your stating But your argument causes a rush to the bottom. If your argument is that what was fair to ask Clinton is fair to ask Bush, then every time a sleazy publication opens up an area of questions for one "side", the argument is that that becomes fair game for the other "side" to ask about. Thus, it is okay to ask Bush if he is briefs or boxers, and expect him to answer. The sleaziest area of inquiry automatically becomes accepted, because the other "side" is now ducking fair questions if they say they aren't going to talk about that. This is what I mean by a rush to the bottom--a rush to the lowest level of standards any single journalist can stoop to.