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: Daniel Schuh who wrote (31500)	2/1/1999 5:05:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

LOL - that post was a new high for you Dan. PS you forgot to mention Hydes defense of that congressman that had an affair with a 17-yr old page in the 70s.

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (31500)	2/1/1999 5:07:00 PM
From: sea_biscuit	Respond to of 67261

But on the "third hand", people will punish their Democratic senators for voting "not guilty"! It is beside the point that 31 of the 45 Dem senators will not face the electorate for another 4 years or more, and of the 14 that will go for re-election, only a couple of them might find it a struggle to win back their seats. Contrast this with the other side -- 19 Republicans, 13 of which are from states that went to Clinton in 1996. And 8 of the 13 are "freshmen" Senators that got elected in the 1994 pro-GOP wave. There is a good chance that the Democrats will make a clean sweep of it in the Year 2000. We only have to hope that the GOP will keep this circus going for a few more months at least.

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (31500)	2/1/1999 5:13:00 PM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 67261

Whistling past the graveyard. JLA

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (31500)	2/1/1999 8:04:00 PM
From: JBL	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Dan, You 've said the Ed page of the WSJ is totally biased. I don't agree with you, but I'll take your point. Do you really believe however, that the New York Times, to which you keep refering, is a model of Journalistic integrity ? (I have become so thoroughly disgusted by their coverage, and their constant misrepresentation of facts, that I canceled my subscription to the International Herald Tribune, which often carries their articles.) They have become a mouthpiece for the White house, which is now lying day after day. By the way, have you read the Salon Magazine (Feb 1st) article about the "Constitutional Experts" continually refered to by the White House and the New York Times ? This article exposes the fact that most of these "experts" who signed the document have in fact no experience at all in Constitutional Law. Talk about a bold face lie. I will take the intellectual honesty of the WSJ anytime and anyday other that of the NYT. What about the Washington Post of today (in their article about the witnesses) refusing to tell their readers the very critical fact that Jordan is swearing he never had breakfast at the Hyatt with Lewinsky in December when billing records of his Amex card match with what Lewinsky said they had for breakfast ? The bias and complicity of the liberal media on this matter is evident and frightening. There is a fine line between journalism and propaganda, and it is becoming more blurred day after day. And yes, there are the Matt Drudges of this world that you can point to for the same distortions, but nobody pretends that these guys have the same integrity or reputation as that of the NYT or WP. I compare this situation in the media today to that of analyst firms' complicity in the Internet stocks valuation heresy. Firms such as Goldman, Robertson, Morgan Stanley etc... have shown to be the true putz that they are, by maintaining ratings on these stocks after valuation began to defy all logic. They have done so because of obscene profits on the underwriting and market making activities. Day traders have not been long to spot this complicity and corruption, and there we are today in the situation that we all know, where millions believe they are market gurus who can do no wrong. Yet, most of those who have been in the market for over 30 years no exactly how this will end up.