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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Marty Rubin who wrote (27185)	12/20/1998 6:20:00 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

Yes, I still like TOY-but I have a 1 year time horizon on it. Even then it might not perform if we have a bear market- which I think is still a possibility. As for Clinton, I think perjury is an impeachable offense, especially in light of the sexual harassment backdrop. Would Thomas have been confirmed to the Supreme Court on this kind of record? Would Packwood have been impeached? I think we all know the answer. I do understand that the bar for impeachment should not be set too low, but neither should it be set so high that we are left with a President who commands no respect from any but the most partisan supporters. The American people, as yet, still do not want him impeached but he has no respect. What crimes will we allow require impeachment? What if Clinton had not lied and obstructed justice in the Jones' case? It is possible the case might not have been dismissed- we'll never know because of Clinton. If the case had been decided for Ms. Jones would we want to have a sexual harasser as the President- Could we countenance the hypocrisy of Mr Clinton in office, when men in lesser positions have lost their jobs and reputations over much less serious allegations?

To: Marty Rubin who wrote (27185)	12/20/1998 11:55:00 PM
From: JF Quinnelly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

what if he sells missiles to iraq and lies about it, should we cut his head off? An interesting formulation, as it seems to parallel recent history. Reagan, of course, sold Hawk missile parts to Iran, who then shot them at Iraqi tanks during their long border war. While this ran counter to stated U.S. policy, there was nothing at all illegal about it. It was the channelling of Iranian funds to the Nicaraguan Contras that violated the Boland amendment, an amendment which oddly carried no penalty of either fine or imprisonment. To the great dismay of many the prosecution couldn't trace violations of the Boland amendment to anyone other than North and Poindexter. And at the end of his seven year investigation Iran-Contra special prosecutor Lawrence Walsh certified in writing that Ronald Reagan had not perjured himself. Reagan haters aren't convinced in the slightest, arguing that Reagan lied about his inability to remember. Much of his testimony was given after he had left office, when he was already showing signs of the Alzheimer's that has erased his memory.