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: brian1501 who wrote (177653)	11/6/2003 4:06:36 PM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574251

What they were trying to do would be similar to having Bill Clinton say "Let those black folks starve. They are just a bunch of Africans." when referring to Rawanda. Would that be fair? Would you have an issue with that? They have said some pretty flattering things about him and while he was in office no less. A few samples... Congressman Dan Burton called him a scumbag George Will called him a rapist The Wall Street Journal, the Washington times and the American Spectator said that Hillary was a lesbian, that she was having an affair with Vince Foster, and that he was murdered to cover up the affair, that Ron Brown's accidental death was really a murder implicating the Clintons, and that Clinton smuggled cocaine into Arkansas in concert with the CIA as payoff for smuggling arms to Contras in central america. Al

To: brian1501 who wrote (177653)	11/6/2003 5:17:26 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1574251

To be frank..........I am disgusted. Reagan was not the saint conservatives make him out to be.........he wasn't a monster but he was human like the rest of us. I'm just catching up with the thread, but I had to comment. I can't claim this analogy as my own, but it points out the issue well: What they were trying to do would be similar to having Bill Clinton say "Let those black folks starve. They are just a bunch of Africans." when referring to Rawanda. Your analogy might be apt if in fact, the alleged statement is a lie. However, I suspect it is not a lie........an exaggeration possibly, but not an out and out lie. Would that be fair? Would you have an issue with that? Again, it would be fair if the statement were not true. There is a big difference between having dramatic license, and taking advantage of the situation to alter people's perceptions. In this day of non stop litigation, do you honestly think that the writers, producers, CBS et al would put something on that could be the subject of a lawsuit without checking things out first? After all, LA is the litigation capital of the country.........they would be the first to clean everything up. Again, I suspect the statement is true but severe pressure was brought down on CBS to cancel the show. Frankly, its another step towards a loss of freedoms and an increase in censorship. I don't know what's happening to this country but its worrisome. ted