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: combjelly who wrote (133008)	2/17/2001 10:46:24 AM
From: hmaly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570498

Combjelly RE.......Ok. Maybe it was a more common occurance that I imagine and he just sort of got used to it. <<<<<<<<< It could have been, or it could have been that most people don't think of driving tickets as an arrest. I have gotten tickets in the past. Yet I have to put down on any form that I was arrested. I remember when I was young, I was training to sell books. I had answered a add. Anyway we were arrested the 2nd night out for selling without a license. I had no idea we even needed a license much less didn't have one. While I was in jail for 3 hrs, and my boss paid the fine, I have never considered that as an arrest. And if a reporter asked me if I had ever been arrested I almost certainly would have said no. When they ask the question "have you ever been arrested, they are asking, have you ever committed a felony. And most people don't consider a driving ticket a felony. <<<<So? And this means he did it under the direction of the Gore campaign? Sorry, it's a stretch.<< Here is your original statement <<<<<Besides the party affliliation of the guy that dug up the info, did they find any connection with the Gore campaign? I didn't think so. <<<<< Note that your original question states "find any connection"; not find a direct connection<. Being a active member of the democratic party is a connection, as the DNC is actively connected to Al's campaign. I find it odd that you refuse to believe GW forgot about an incident 24 yrs ago, and yet here you can't even remember a question you posed only 2 hrs ago. Because then he could decline by making it look like he was way behind and needed every advantage he could get? <<<<<<< True, but it was Al who publicized it and used it in his campaign. AL claimed he offered to eliminate soft money but GW turned him down because GW said Al was outraising him 2-1. AFAIK The original 2-1 statement wasn't part of GW's campaign. Al made it part of his and chose to exploit it. Nobody in the public would have known about the reason, if Al hadn't chose to disclose it. GW wasn't trying to mislead the public with that statement, Al was. the contention was that Al was raising soft money 2-1" Well I guess the phrase "he is out-spending me 2 to 1" can be construed as that...<<<<<<<<<< Whoa, not so fast here, yea who speaks with forked tongue. Raising money in no way is the same as spending money. In fact, they are direct opposites. You have yet to prove Al wasn't indeed outraising Gw 2-1. before you can make that claim. You will note that even Al doesn't dispute that part. What Al is saying by bringing it up is that GW isn't willing to limit soft money (i.e. corruption) until GW himself has pocketed enough soft money.(i. e. corruption) <<<<I guess those strategy sessions for fund raising and all are spent talking about sports, then? And if he didn't have a clue, which you are certain of, why did he state it so forcefully? <<<<<<< Once again you are mixing campaign contributions up with soft money. I doubt if either GW's campaign or Al's campaign knew how much soft money was spent was spent on their behalf by either the parties, or by independent special interests. For instance, the Sierra Club doesn't report direcly to either campaign. The NRA doesn't; so how would either AL or GW know? GW was making an educated guess. Haven't you ever done that. <<<<<< You can spin and apologize all you want, but this is an obvious and glaring flaw in his character. <<<<<<<< And calling raising money the same as spending money isn't a spin? To claim being an active member of the democratic party isn't in anyway connected to aL's campaign isn't a spin? What are they; outright lies? By claiming that raising is the same as spending, you are claiming that GW is lying. Wrong. By claiming that spending is the same as raising, isn't it you who is lying? By claiming that anyone should remember back 24 yrs, when you yourself can't remember back 2 hrs, isn't that at least hyprocrisy if not lying? You have not proved that GW was indeed lying with those statements, but you have solace in the fact that you seem to have proven yourself a liar and hypocrite.