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: robert scheb who wrote (30632)	12/11/1998 9:56:00 PM
From: Scumbria	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 33344

Scheb, Partisan politics This whole thing is absurd. The Republican party's only hope to survive this, is to vote it down on the house floor. If they vote to impeach they can expect serious retribution from the American people whom they are supposed to be representing. I just don't understand what they are thinking of. Scumbria

To: robert scheb who wrote (30632)	12/12/1998 1:32:00 AM
From: Joe NYC	Respond to of 33344

Scheb, It's the witch hunt that I object to. Clinton thought he could lie about an extra-marital affair and get away with it like he always has. In this case the difference was that he was not lying to his wife or to the electorate (they are used to it). He lied in court, under oath. There is some difference, in my opinion between the two. He as a lawyer should have been aware of it. He knowingly took a great risk, placed himself in danger and it didn't work out. He in fact lied to his own lawyer (Bennet), because Bennet was the one who really nailed him in his the deposition Having sex with an intern is not a crime. And that's not what he is accused of. But just for the sake of argument, you try it, and to test your theory, publicize it. See how long it is before you are fired. which hunt If there was no perjury, obstruction of justice etc, you would be right. But there is some substance. Is it an impeacheble offense? If he was a Republican, by now he would have been impeached, lynched, arrested, castrated and probably deported. Any other Democrat, assuming he was an honest guy, he would come clean very quickly, and in a month the matter would be over and forgotten. With Clinton, you have a dilema. He still hasn't admitted what he did, he waited until the semen test came in to admit he did something "improper". If Monica Lewinsky didn't have the semen sample, he would have destryed her by now and he would have gotten away with it as he did with all the others who spoke out. So what do you do? Nothing? That is an option. Censure? You know the guy has no conscience. He would probably have a party in the White House that evening. Partisan politics. Right. 35% of the Republicans voted to impeach Nixon. Undoubtably the committee was very partisan. But whose falt was it? What was the percentage of Democrats who voted for impeachment? I don't know, but I guess it was 100%. I don't know if you ever venture to C-SPAN. Whenever there was any congressional inquiry, the none of the Democrats ever want to find out anything. They use all of the time allocated to them to attack the probe and republicans and whine about "partisanship" instead of questioning witnesses and seeking the truth. I am sure Nixon had his die hard defenders. But a good percentage of the Republicans were willing to set aside their partisanship and seek the truth. Even by your account, 35% of Republicans voted to impeach Nixon, and there must have been another 10 to 20% (my guess) who seriously considered it. But in the Democrat side, there are just too few people who are willing to be objective. Going way OT: what's really disappointing is that the within the Democratic Party, the people who I consider to be reasonable are getting to be such a small minority. A lot of the good ones are either retiring or they were from districts that have gone Republicans since 1994. Joe