"Doug Miller" wrote in message
m...
In article , "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
om...
In article , "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
y.com...
In article , "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

Great! Now we're getting somewhere. A few million investors, including
quite
a few pros (institutional investors) violated the rules of stock
evaluation,
thereby inflating the prices of many stocks. This eventually fell
apart,
as
it always does, and because investors are skittish, perfectly healthy
stocks
were dragged down along with the trash ones whose prices deserved to
plummet.

Agreed.

During this time, Clinton was president. He was connected with the bad
decisions made by private citizens.....exacty how? Did you expect him
to
give investment advice on television every so often?

I never said that he had any connection with it at all. My only
purpose
was
refuting the lie that the economy was just fine, with no problems,
under
Clinton.

Now you're being silly. You said "Agreed", which means you see how
erroneous
it is to combine the aforementioned ideas/factors in the same breath.
Then,
you do it again. Jeez..... :-)

No, it means I agree with your statement concering investor behavior.

Perhaps if you'd like to try reading my comments again, and read *only*
what I
actually wrote and no more - instead of insisting on reading things that
I
did
not write - you'll understand a little better.

I did not in any fashion connect Clinton to the stock market crash,
other
than
to note that he was President when it occurred. My only purpose in
making
that
observation was to refute the claim that the economy "did just
wonderfully"
while he was President. That statement is a lie.

Yes,

I'm glad you finally managed to read what I wrote, and not read things
which I
did not write.

but by stating it so simply, you perpetuate a theory which simpletons
cling to and turn into a mantra.

What? All I did was point out that the claim that the economy "did
wonderfully" under Clinton is a falsehood. Then you jump off the deep end
again.

Very bad. Don't even say it. It makes them
comfortable, they go to sleep, and wake up only for an hour to vote every
4
years. Look at the results.

Yes, indeed - the results were that a lying, pot-smoking, womanizing draft
dodger got elected in 1992, and reelected in 1996.

As opposed to the cocaine head, drunk, lying AWOL we have in office now?


--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.