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 : Compaq -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jerome who wrote (95114)	2/5/2002 11:22:47 PM
From: Captain Jack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 97611

Jerome-- Hollingworth has made so many stupid comments the past few weeks he has become a Dem liability. Instead of going into hiding until he is forgotten he adds to his list of rediculous comments. Hell, even the media is getting a laugh out of him and spokespersons are used to refute his drivel as no one feels he warrants a personal response.

To: Jerome who wrote (95114)	2/6/2002 8:27:50 AM
From: MeDroogies	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 97611

I'd say it's a biased opinion, since the bias was apparent alot in earlier posts. Personally, where Cheney is hanging out is immaterial. He was missing in action before ENE. So that is not really a "smoking gun". Nor are the appointments. These men were vetted by impartial sources. To say that the appointments strain perception is to look around and nobody should ever hire people they are comfortable and familiar with. Nobody denies that ENE was cozy with Bush (or all politicians...as they were). But to take circumstantial points and expand them into a "smoking gun" is the height of hyperbole. If you want smoking guns...you need to go to Whitewater and Lewinsky. I don't bring them up to divert the argument, but to make a point. In both cases, Clinton was SO CLEARLY implicated, but used nefarious legal maneuvers (probably due to his cozy relations with the trial lawyers) to avoid prosecution. In this case, DESPITE multiple partisan investigations, HEAVY (double Whitewater) media coverage....Bush is still looking clean. Every time the media finds something, it doesn't show any indication of impropriety. What's truly fascinating is that EVEN AS the media continues to find nuggets of irrelevant information, they refuse to admit they have found nothing. Because they are searching so hard (as is their right). Comparatively speaking, they found considerably more to implicate Clinton in BOTH his cases, and simply excused his behavior. So, considering the leeway Clinton got, that Bush ISN'T getting...you have to be fairly impressed that there is little or nothing there. Occam's Razor, my friend. By the way, if you review the politicians who say they only took individual contributions, you'll not really find as clean a slate as they claim. PAC money doesn't have to be reported below particular levels. Also, let's consider the politicians who ran "on their own money". Aside from my Senator (who is the biggest slimeball on earth) from NJ, there's the Real Media chick in Seattle. Funny thing about her, though, is that the media has overlooked the fact she is teetering on bankruptcy. She had taken out loans on her Real Media options to fund her campaign. When that went south, she called in "Saint Hillary" to save her. She is now beholden to some of the scummiest PACs on earth. So much for the concept of any kind of bilateral agreement on campaign reform. It won't happen. In all reality, as much as I think we need some kind of reform, I don't think any of the current plans make any sense whatsoever.