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 : How high will Microsoft fly? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (10894)	9/22/1998 3:09:00 AM
From: ed	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

Republican just either did not get the message from the people or they just ignore it. People are more realistic now, judging the president by his achievement. Carter is a good man and probably a good husband and father, unfortunately, being a good man, good father or good husband did not help him being a good president. Under this good man, we had a inflation over 10%, interest over 15%, high unemployment rate and high budget deficit. So, do you want a good man or a good president ? Carter lost his reelection because of his poor performance in his first term. Regan had done a good job as a president, so he got reelected. Bush got elected because of Regan's performance, but lost the reelection because of his own poor performance, even though he kept emphasizing the CHARACTER issue during the reelection campaign, however it just did not work at all, because people judged him by his performance as a president, not by his characters. Clinton got elected because of Bush's poor performance. Clinton got reelected because of his good performance as a president in his first term. Now, Al Goar will be elected in 2000 because of Clinton's performance as a president . If Al can do a good job as a president in his first term , he will be reelected in 2004. So, there is a pattern there. If Republican continue to ignore the voice of people, it will lose big time in the presidential election of year 2000. My bet is Republican will try hard to mess up the economy in the next two years.

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (10894)	9/22/1998 5:49:00 PM
From: Gerald Walls	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74651

Do you think in the future every president should have a standing Special Prosecution of Starr's high, non-partisan integrity watching their every move? I think that when there is credible evidence that any public official may have violated the law they should be investigated. I don't care what party they belong to. The whole reason we have corrupt officials like Clinton is because they believe they are kings and can get away with anything. If they violate the public trust then they should be brought down hard and broken. If credible evidence of a crime was given to a law enforcement agency about you or me we would be investigated. What makes Clinton so special in your eyes that he should be immune? Promoting and aiding private lawsuits against the sitting President at the same times? Nothing less would be fair, don't you think? Equal "justice" and all that. Fair? Do you think it was fair to the Whitehouse Travel Office staff to be branded criminals by the President? That the President had the FBI and the IRS investigate those poor people? That he calls every women that said he approached them liars, until they come up with physical evidence, like Lewinsky and Flowers, and then he half-way admits it? Clinton's current problem comes down to two points, both of which are his own damn fault: 1) he dropped his pants, and 2) he lied about it under oath. He has no one to blame but himself.