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: Peter Dierks who wrote (212805)	12/7/2004 10:22:41 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574854

Packwood was a Republican Senator from Oregon. He behaved as Clinton did. He also happened to be Anti-Life. While the Democrats needed him, the press called him a "maverick", in "independent minded". After the new groper arrived on Pennsylvania Avenue, there was no longer a need for Packwood's vote to block abortion legislation. Overnight the maverick became a pervert. Huh? The Senate Ethics Committee began their investigation of Packwood in 1992 BEFORE Clinton president. And Packwood was not an adulterer, he was a sexual harrasser...........big difference. Here is some information about the biased coverage by Dan Rather from a watchdog. It's very easy to pull material on a singular basis and post it without doing a thorough review. I don't have time to check and see what Rather said about every sexual matter that occurs among Congresspeople. However, I doubt that he singled out Packwood because he was Republican. From what I've read, Packwood was a long time perv. Is that okay with you? Do you think he should have been treated with kid gloves? In any case, it was my experience that the major media outlets' stories placed more emphasis on Clinton and Condit than on Packwood. In fact, I barely remember hearing about Packwood. That was not the case with Clinton and Condit.....and frankly, I do not remember any of the mainstream media treating them nicely during those periods when they were under scrutiny. With Condit, I can understand.......a woman was murdered. With Clinton, it was a BJ. Hardly the same thing.