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 : Did Slick Boink Monica? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lady Lurksalot who wrote (15545)	6/2/1998 2:14:00 PM
From: DMaA	Respond to of 20981

Re: why "they" forced Nixon out of office. "They" did it because of a visceral, deep and abiding hatred of the man. As soon as he screwed up "They" pounced. What they achieved was the complete and utter humiliation of the object of their hatred ( though interestingly, they didn't destroy him ). Is history repeating itself? I hope so. Interesting quote from Drudge at the Press Club this noon ( where he received about 3 claps from about 10 pairs of hands at the end of his speech ). He was asked how many corroborating sources he needs before he publishes something. He said usually the same number as Woodward and Bernstein used in their Deep Throat stories.

To: Lady Lurksalot who wrote (15545)	6/2/1998 2:31:00 PM
From: DScottD	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20981

Holly-- To answer your last question, I think history is repeating itself. The President is accused of perjury and suborning perjury in the context of a legal proceeding. Nixon's happened to be in the context of a criminal investigation; Clinton's present troubles arose in the context of a civil lawsuit. Nonetheless, the alleged Presidential misdeeds in both instances are criminal in nature. The parallels are significant. In both cases, the President's party was/is the minority in both houses of Congress. The legal and political heat on both men was really turned up in the midst of "off year" Congressional elections in the President's second term of office. Both Presidents' surnames end in "on". Etc. Etc. It will be interesting to see what happens this summer. My guess is that Starr's report will be inconclusive as far as whether the President should be impeached, but will taint the President enough to make him a nonentity politically should he continue to serve. Seeing the writing on the wall, the Democratic leaders in Congress, fearing the worst in November and a total meltdown in 2000, will pressure Clinton to resign, much like Senator Goldwater did with Nixon in 1974. Clinton will initially resist the pressure but will eventually give in when it becomes apparent that no Democrat wants his support and no Democrats are willing to stand behind him. Algore then becomes President, putting him in the driver's seat for the Democratic nomination in 2000. The Republicans make modest gains in the 1998 election, but nothing like when they took control of both chambers in 1994. We can only speculate beyond that. DScottD

To: Lady Lurksalot who wrote (15545)	6/2/1998 2:40:00 PM
From: Jack Clarke	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20981

Holly, Is history repeating itself? I hope so. But it probably won't. The population is not in the mood for anything which would rock the boat and lower the unrealized paper profits they think they have in their mutual funds. (Hey, Joe, you gotta sell 'em before you can spend it!) I am no Nixon fan, less so now then I was then, as his character and misdeeds come out. But the man was poorly handled by the press. He suffered from the lack of a pretty face, which protects our current smiling lip-biter from being thought of as inherently evil. Nixon, with his perennial five-o'clock shadow, just looked "mean" to boobus americanus. There was one political ad which showed a scowling Nixon's photo with the caption: "Would you buy a used car from this man?" Life ain't fair, is it? So much of political reality and history is accidental, being in the right place at the right time and with the right face. It would take some economic catastrophe, not a failure of moral leadership, to turn our happy populace into a snarling mob ready to depose our leader. The Barron's interview with Albert Edwards was very interesting. Seems Greenspan and everybody else is scared spitless at the prospect of angering the retail investor, described by Edwards as "the biggest potential lynch mob in history." I am hopeful but doubtful that Starr's efforts will succeed, other than some perfunctory censure, as our legislators did in condemning his sellout to China. I'm sure those Chinese and Mr. Clinton cried all night. Jack

To: Lady Lurksalot who wrote (15545)	6/2/1998 2:47:00 PM
From: George Coyne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20981

<< Food for thought and lively discussion: President Nixon's resignation, what led up to it, what followed it and why. What did we expect to achieve by forcing President Nixon out of office and what did we achieve? Is history repeating itself? >> Hi, Holly. Some interesting questions. At the risk of seeming too elemental, I think the first question is "who is "we""? Those who actively went after Nixon could have felt (charitably) that they were removing a "blot" from the presidency. That achievement was probably an end in itself for them. In the same manner, I believe many feel the same way about the current resident of the WH. Do "we" do the presidency more harm by removing blots, or leaving them in? Obviously there is disagreement on this question. Personally, I agree with David. G. W.

To: Lady Lurksalot who wrote (15545)	6/2/1998 3:25:00 PM
From: MulhollandDrive	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20981

>>What did we expect to achieve by forcing President Nixon out of office and what did we achieve?<< Hopefully what we achieved was to demonstrate that we are a nation of laws, and that no one, not even the president is above the law. Clinton, with his myriad assertions of "privilege" appears to be testing that foundation to the core. He's not going to be forthcoming with the facts as they relate his possible illegalities (not in his interest), so he seems to be content to travel down this road and will probably continue until he's managed to bring the country to the point of a Constitutional crises. bp