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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (131002)	3/27/2001 5:39:11 PM
From: Scumbria	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Ten, Clinton took some very, very unpopular stances. He passed a large tax hike in 1993 to restore sanity to the fiscal process. He pushed an extremely unpopular policy in Haiti. His very first act as President was to try to push for gays in the military. There was huge resistance to his actions in Bosnia. He vetoed the huge Republican tax cut of 1996. Was this for reasons of popularity? Your impressions of him make no sense whatsoever. Scumbria

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (131002)	3/27/2001 6:10:29 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Ten, re: John, why does it have to be a question of either-or? Without morals, how can we trust that Clinton's actions come out of a genuine concern for the environment? For all we know, he's just posing as an environmentalist just to get more votes, and then when that act fails to win any more votes, he'll dump it like he did Monica. The politicians, especially on the Presidential level, will say anything to get elected. "Genuine concern?" These guys only have a genuine concern for what will get them votes before they get elected, and for selling legislation that will keep their financial backers happy after they get elected. For most of my life the Democrats wanted to raise taxes, increase spending and run a deficit, now the Republicans want to do the same, and the Democrats are fiscally conservative. It's a marketing game that has nothing to do with morality. Note the Bush's reversals, Sr. on "No new taxes"; Jr. on the environment. I could find the same reversals for Democrats with little effort. These guys have hordes of marketing people to decide what the most people want to hear, and then to write the speech for them. They spend more than P&G does to introduce a new product. Moral politics is an oxymoron, get over it. 99.9% of the decisions these guys make will be based on expediency, not on moral conviction. John