At 01:54 PM 1/25/01 -0500, you wrote:
>I just see Milken as the typical "big fish" that prosecutors were able to
>get because of his arrogance and careless disregard for the law.
or maybe he's a scapegoat, like William Calley of My Lai infamy.
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.l
Nathan Newman wrote:
>But if Milken-hating is so good for upholding the legitimacy of the
>financial system, why is there such a strong conservative defense of Milken?
>You are acting like an apologia for Milken is some kind of transgressive
>left challenge to capitalism, yet the idea that Milken
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/25/01 02:08PM >>>
>
>How do you analyze these alignments (other than residual YAFism on your part
>and residual liberalism on mine)?
Like I said, Milken-hating implies that the rest of the financial
racket is legitimate and upstanding, so if the bad apples are
isolat
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Henwood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Why those are related is an interesting statement. Although it is true
that
>you line up with FORBES and NATIONAL REVIEW in vilifying Clinton to the
>extreme while defending Milken.
>
>How do you analyze these alignments (othe
Nathan Newman wrote:
> >It doesn't surprise me that cyberspace's best left defender of Bill
>>Clinton is also Mike Milken's biggest enemy.
>
>Why those are related is an interesting statement. Although it is true that
>you line up with FORBES and NATIONAL REVIEW in vilifying Clinton to the
>ext
