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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Krowbar who wrote (32697)	8/28/2000 6:52:44 AM
From: Tom Clarke	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Bush Ahead Again In Popular Vote. Bush 44.3, Gore 40.4, Nader 2.7, Browne .8, Buchanan .8, Phillips .3. Of course, Bush has always been far ahead in the Electoral College polls. portraitofamerica.com

To: Krowbar who wrote (32697)	8/28/2000 8:41:57 AM
From: PROLIFE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

that's weak Delbert. You know the media is as slanted as a playground slide. You have the right to keep bringing up any issue you wish. But why not find some proof on it? It is easy to keep saying he used cocaine, sort of like yelling fire in a crowd, but I doubt you really care as you sure don't seem to care that gore and clinton both have used drugs. Where is your outrage there? Selected outrage? dan

To: Krowbar who wrote (32697)	8/28/2000 8:48:11 AM
From: Bill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

If Bush was accused of doing coke, I would agree that an explanation would be due. If there was evidence of coke use, an explanation would be due. If there was a hint of a credible allegation, perhaps an explanation would be due. But alas, none of the above apply. Clinton was asked about pot, and created his own controversy with his idiotic answer, "I never inhaled...(twice)".

To: Krowbar who wrote (32697)	8/28/2000 9:45:10 AM
From: kvkkc1	Respond to of 769667

You are too messed up to understand that it has been delved into. Nobody has any proof. When you publish things with no proof you are libelous. You can be sued for libel. Therefore, the Dems and libs have learned to keep it quiet unless they have proof.knc

To: Krowbar who wrote (32697)	8/28/2000 9:55:31 AM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Then the issue of Bush's cocaine use comes up, and he simply says that he won't discuss it, and that it was improper to ask him about it, and guess what? All done. No more questions about his drug use. That's it. Case closed. What country were you in? The media drumbeat lasted for months. They finally had to give it up because they couldn't pin anything on Bush. No credible witnesses ever came forward, unlike many of the allegations about Bubba and Gore. JLA