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.

Technology Stocks : CYRIX / NSM -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Scumbria who wrote (29587)	9/21/1998 7:11:00 PM
From: StockMan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 33344

Dudes, Waasup, Cyrix/NSM up a whopping 7/16 of a point. Looks like you dudes are into BIG money today.

To: Scumbria who wrote (29587)	9/21/1998 7:54:00 PM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 33344

Scumbria, If you were asked every detail of your sexual life under oath, in front of your family, how would you do? We are starting to go in circles. I agreed that the law should probably not require you to answer those type of questions. But I recommended you to take it up with the bigwigs in your party (Democratic) which blessed us with the sexual harassment laws requiring you to answer under oath questions about your sex life. Or is your argument that the sexual harassment laws should apply only to Republicans? I don't hear you saying that the laws should be changed. You just keep saying over and over that Clinton should not be asked these questions. Anyway, it would be interesting if the Democrats started to argue that the sexual harassment laws should be changed (now that their guy was caught up in them). The Democratic talking heads already argue that the Special Counsel law and the campaign finance laws should be changed. The bottom line is that you are upset that your guy was caught, and proven to be a liar cheat and a low life that many people suspected he was. He let you down. You are trying to blame everyone else, except the the person who is responsible. I know how you feel. I was upset during the Iran-Contra affair. But in the retrospect, I realize that there was no need to cut corners in compliance with laws. And if you don't like the law, work through the system on changing it, rather than violating it first and asking questions later. If you were asked every detail of your sexual life under oath, in front of your family, how would you do? I have not been accused of sexual harassment, and in general, I don't go around grabbing strangers' breasts, or asking people I am supervising to kiss my penis. But if I was wrongly accused of sexual discrimination, I would have to answer all questions, because that's the law. But unlike the president, I could just tell the truth. Because for me to tell the truth would not require a redefinition of the words "sex", "is", "was", "alone" etc. I would not have to convince people that my mind works in a different universe, where sum of multiple lies is the truth. This is what the president is asking as to do. In universe where we live in, he committed multiple perjuries. He argues he didn't, because every lie had a grain of truth, and if you take all the grains of truth from all the false statements, you will get the truth, or at least not a lie. And some people are yet again are ready to agree with him. They getting ready to swallow another lie. They are being seduced one more time. I America is collectively getting ready to perform another blow job on the president. Joe PS: Prepare to swallow.