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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (521758)	1/9/2004 4:25:48 PM
From: PROLIFE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Friday, Jan. 9, 2003 3:19 p.m. EST Sharpton: Clinton 'Killed the Democratic Party' The Democratic Party is dead, presidential candidate Rev. Al Sharpton said Thursday. And it's Bill Clinton's fault. Launching into a tirade against Democratic centrists during an interview on Washington, D.C., TV station WJLA, Sharpton complained that it's been all downhill for Democrats since Clinton took over 10 years ago. "Bill Clinton won, the party didn't," railed the radical reverend. "And Bill Clinton [might] not have won if it had not been for Perot." "That is my point - centrism killed this party," he insisted. "We didn't regain the Congress in 1998. ... In 2000 we lost it all. In 2002 we were demolished, we were demolished. We lost everything as a party." Sharpton said Democrats certainly couldn't do any worse if they nominated him for president, since the party seems to be flat-lining already. "People are saying, 'Will Sharpton, the Progressive, kill the party?' The party's dead. I've come to help start the resurrection," he announced. Though Sharpton's comments are among the most politically explosive uttered during the presidential campaign so far, with the exception of radio host Rush Limbaugh, who played the Sharpton audio during his Friday broadcast, the reverend's outburst has gone unreported.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (521758)	1/9/2004 4:48:28 PM
From: Ish	Respond to of 769670

<<We are having modest economic growth with weak jobs growth.>> I think you have posted that enough times over the last few months that it's not news to anyone.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (521758)	1/9/2004 4:48:51 PM
From: Ish	Respond to of 769670

<<We are having modest economic growth with weak jobs growth.>> I think you have posted that enough times over the last few months that it's not news to anyone.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (521758)	1/9/2004 4:49:17 PM
From: Ish	Respond to of 769670

<<We are having modest economic growth with weak jobs growth.>> I think you have posted that enough times over the last few months that it's not news to anyone.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (521758)	1/9/2004 4:49:37 PM
From: Ish	Respond to of 769670

<<We are having modest economic growth with weak jobs growth.>> I think you have posted that enough times over the last few months that it's not news to anyone.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (521758)	1/9/2004 4:49:53 PM
From: Ish	Respond to of 769670

<<We are having modest economic growth with weak jobs growth.>> I think you have posted that enough times over the last few months that it's not news to anyone.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (521758)	1/9/2004 4:50:10 PM
From: Ish	Respond to of 769670

<<We are having modest economic growth with weak jobs growth.>> I think you have posted that enough times over the last few months that it's not news to anyone.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (521758)	1/9/2004 4:50:31 PM
From: Ish	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

<<We are having modest economic growth with weak jobs growth.>> I think you have posted that enough times over the last few months that it's not news to anyone.