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: greenspirit who wrote (16419)	12/1/1998 9:56:00 AM
From: Bill	Respond to of 67261

Exellent post, Mike. Unfortunately, your phases will likely be parsed back to you in partisan, ad hominem, out-of-context, non-sensical and boring attacks for at least the next three months. Get ready.

To: greenspirit who wrote (16419)	12/1/1998 10:05:00 AM
From: DMaA	Respond to of 67261

So the willing liberals are on a campaign to save our children from the evils of cigarettes. Doesn't matter that it won't make a hill of beans to teenagers. It makes for good press and liberals need an enemy. That enemy is now big tobacco. Wesley Pruden Editorial: This week the president hired a new spinner, a "crisis management expert" who has helped Big Tobacco and the beer brewers overcome bad publicity. Only a man with no shame could denounce cigarettes by day and collude with Joe Camel's mouthpiece by night. Aren't we supposed to despise Ken Starr because his law firm represented the tobacco companies? Guy Lincoln Smith IV -- you might think the Smith family would have long ago retired a name as unimaginative as "Guy Smith" -- earned his credentials as a big-time flack fighting the airlines that wanted to ban smoking on their flights. If he can make smoking acceptable, he should be able to make Bill and Hillary look good. But he'll have to get some cooperation from the president, and the prez thinks he's home free now. washtimes.com

To: greenspirit who wrote (16419)	12/1/1998 10:53:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

Oh, I'm sorry Michael, your post wasn't the usual attack on Clinton as the root of all evil, it was on "liberals" as the root of all evil. I get confused, since the two get smeared together so often here. I raised a few points in response to the usual shotgun attack on everything that doesn't agree with the right wing agenda of the day. I happen to have some personal experience on phonics versus whole language, and on Catholic schools too. You don't know what you're talking about. My daughter in second grade, who's learned to read with a modern, eclectic approach, does very well at reading. I don't know if it's better than I could do at that age, with the old Catholic school Dick-and-Jane reader, but I know she reads a lot more interesting stuff than I did in school, and I imagine she'd be bored to death if she had to plow through Dick and Jane and endless phonics drills. She learned some phonics, but mostly she learned to read by reading a lot, and by being read to, like we all learn to talk. Then, I took on your defense of cigarettes, because I think it's ridiculous. No, cigarettes don't kill kids, but that's when a lot of people who die later get hooked on a lifelong habit. And cigarettes, by all indications, are as addictive as anything. The social opprobrium that's supposed to be the cure for all that was wrong with the '60's doesn't seem to have done much to cure that national addiction. So, do you claim your 5 point jeremiad on inner city violence was "casual conversation"? It looked pretty regurgitational to me. All that's wrong in the world is due to liberals, or Clinton, or the hedonistic '60s, or something that only a moral reformation coupled with conservative political domination can cure. But you really want to understand, right? Substantive debate as usual. K would be proud. Then, you get to throw in the ever popular mental health thing. Since I don't find all the smears and attacks on the "wrong" politics funny, despite your smileys, I'm hostile and unbalanced. Given your concurrence with Mr. Pilch on what's wrong with our society, I find that, at least, somewhat amusing. Cheers, Dan.