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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zoltan! who wrote (2050)	9/9/1998 3:22:00 PM
From: Who, me?	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

NBC New Special report on now. There's a van at Starr's office loading up material to be delivered to Congress. Videotape of President's Grand Jury testimony, Tripp's tapes, Grand Jury transcripts. Sgt at Arms is waiting for these papers. Said documents are literally being dumped at the front door. Going to Ford Building where it will be sealed in a room that has new locks. Best estimation of time is for House to take some sort of action by Friday. Legal sources say that there will be big surprises in this report. Will include perjury, witness tampering, abuse of power, obstruction of justice. The White House officials acknowledge that they pretty much know what to expect but are very concerned of surprises Lisa Myers talked about. They're bracing themselves for a major counter-offensive. This is going to get hot real quick.

To: Zoltan! who wrote (2050)	9/9/1998 3:27:00 PM
From: j_b	Respond to of 67261

<<Actually it makes great sense to have a real right/left ideological divide. That gives the people an actual choice rather than just a choice of competing but virtually identical "brands". >> The only problem I had with your analysis was the part I quoted, above. The earlier discussions regarding abortion (or gun control or welfare or immigration, etc.) point out the danger in having people become too polarized. There ends up being a winner and a loser, with no room from compromise. I would much rather eliminate parties altogether and have people state their positions on individual issues. For example (as I put in a prior post), I'm pro-choice, anti gun-control, pro-environment (up to a point), etc. I don't fit either party, and the issues they differ on are equally important to me. I would like to be able to vote for people that represent me, not their political party. I don't mind the ideological divide - what bothers me is that is has been so simplified (only two choices)that somehow we are forced to make phyrric choices. There is more than one issue, so there are more than just the two opposing possible combinations of positions. Why would you want to be limited to only one or the other?