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.

Biotech / Medical : Ligand (LGND) Breakout! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Machaon who wrote (13699)	1/24/1998 2:38:00 PM
From: CYBERKEN	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 32384

<<The Supreme Court has really done our country some damage, this time. By opening up the President's office to civil lawsuits, they have set the stage for a 100 years of litigation. It's too easy to file a civil lawsuit. I think that it will spread. It is going to be used as a new weapon, that will be used by both political parties. The only thing that might slow down these civil lawsuits, in the future, would be the fear of having the finger pointed back towards themselves. Too many politicians have too much too hide.>> Obligatory silver lining search:::: The spread of tort lawsuits and reluctance of courts to toss them out definitely threatens our economy and way of life. Even highly successful companies-as we believe Ligand will become-may eventually gain nothing for their success except a constant barrage of lawsuits from those literally trying to steal that success. Perhaps, then, if those who make and approve the laws start to feel significantly threatened, the possibility of true reform could emerge. A heavy-handed but simple legal solution is to prevent attorneys from working for a percentage of the loot. (I believe there is such a law in the UK). There are, of course, other possibilities. All of this is a matter of the interaction of very long term, slow-moving trends. An accelleration of reform could have a very positive impact on the economy and markets, just for starters.

To: Machaon who wrote (13699)	1/24/1998 3:28:00 PM
From: Andrew H	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 32384

>>If these new charges prove to be unsubstantiated, I think it will hurt the Republican party. << Yeah, but I think the chances of that are looking slimmer and slimmer. I say this as a supporter of Clinton. It looks to me that at the very least there were probably sexual (oral) relations between Monica and the Prez. As for the charges of perjury and obstruction of justice, they may not be possible to prove against the President. However, the whole affair will most likely damage an administration that has had more than its share of questionable behavior. >>Personally, I think that ALL of our elected officials should be under constant scrutiny. It might cut down on some of the graft and corruption.<< Its a difficult question. Personally I feel even public figures have a right to a private life. However, they should be held to a higher moral standard. >>The Supreme Court has really done our country some damage, this time. By opening up the President's office to civil lawsuits, they have set the stage for a 100 years of litigation. It's too easy to file a civil lawsuit. I think that it will spread. It is going to be used as a new weapon, that will be used by both political parties.<< I agree with you on this. Civil lawsuits should wait until after the term of office has ended.