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: Scumbria who wrote (130768)	1/25/2001 3:09:22 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1580594

Scumbria, the "Clinton was involved in a plot to kill Foster" story got about as much mainstream press attention as the "Bush was a drug dealer" story. In both cases the mainstream press was not actively pushing the story for the most part, and with good reason (both ideas have little in the way of evidence that suggests that they might be true). As far as the drunk driving that got lots of attention at the worst possible time (although that probably has more to do with the timing of the leak from the Gore campaign rather then a deliberate press plot to hurt Bush). Insider trading and shady business deals are something the Clintons were quite familiar with. As for "the terrible job he did on key issues in Texas", that's a matter of opinion (both what the key issues are and how well Bush did on them). Gore's attacks on Bush's performance did get press attention. Also your post was talking about the kid gloves the GOP has supposedly gotten for the past 20 years, not for the past year or two of Bush's campaign. If a GOP president had been involved in all the scandal that Clinton was involved in and congress was controlled by Democrats then he probably would not have finished his term. If a GOP senator had been involved in something like Chappaquiddick his career would have been over. I think the press is more biased against conservative ideas then it is against individual Republican politicians. The press tends to be more favorable to pro-choice groups then pro-life groups. It almost never focuses on news that is favorable to the position of the NRA usually it considers gun control organizations to be solid sources of fact while the NRA is portrayed as a negative force hurting America. When a criminal uses a gun to kill people its on the news but when someone defends himself or others with a gun it usually doesn't get mentioned. Similarly I rarely see praise in the paper or on the evening news for any politician who holds back government spending, while those who spend more are "supporting their district" or "fighting for the poor" (or the elderly or minorities or whatever). Proposed environmental laws or regulations are usually looked at positively and the cost rarely gets any focus. Tim