I conducted a poll of my co workers and it came up 25-1 in favor of impeachment.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), December 12, 1998

Answers

You work in a smart office.

Personally, I agree. They should impeach him. Now.

-- Leo (leo_champion@hotmail.com), December 12, 1998.

Aw, come on guys. He's just a JFK who got caught.

-- Han (priv@anon.solo), December 12, 1998.

Well I would give him the benefit of the doubt if it was just a matter of having a quick bj while keeping a head of state waiting in the next room:) However there is also Whitewater, Loral (selling of missile and satellite technology to the Chinese), drug running through Mena, several setttlements in sexual predator cases, lying under oath to the people and Congress, etc. etc.

A whole host of people close to Clinton have also died in very suspicious circumstances over the years.

Check out

http://www.sightings.com/political/clintonbodycount.htm

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), December 12, 1998.

Everyone I have talked to says impeach. Honesty and integrity must be restored to the office of the presidency, therefore, the impeachment process must happen. If you were to take a poll and ask people "Do you think Clinton is a role model for your children?" I think the majority would say no. He's not a very smart man either because he got caught with his pants down.

-- Y2KBabe (Y2KBabe@xxx.com), December 12, 1998.

Does anyone really believe there is more than one lurker posting here?

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@yahoo.com), December 12, 1998.

I don't need Clinton as a role model for my children; we, their parents, are their role models. Clinton acted like a fool, but it's hardly as serious as Iran Contra. I don't want him impeached. I want him to get to work on y2k. Congress needs to get over it, and get on with developing plans for the big blackout.

-- gilda jessie morgan (jess@listbot.com), December 12, 1998.

The news media put him in the white house so their polls are trying to keep him in there. Who and where do they take their polls? Not around here. The people I know are disgusted with him. Look at his actions and what is there to be admired? Again the news media covered up his past and trying to cover his recent immoral acts. OUT with the rogue.

-- George (newsrc@txcyber.com), December 12, 1998.

POLLS????? Does anyone REALLY believe there are any polls being taken?? They simply announce a percentage number ...... who can prove where or how they got it??

Methinks we are being "misled" again.

-- Sheila (sross@bconnex.net), December 12, 1998.

Meknows we are being misled on this one. Do a websearch on "petition for impeachment". You will be surprised at what shows up. Bobbi http://www.buzzbyte.com/ Got beans? Got water?

-- Bobbi (volfnat@northweb.com), December 12, 1998.

Where I work, it's only those of a certain known conservative religious group that seriously wish for impeachment. It's smoke and mirrors, bread and circuses; Starr himself couldn't find anything re: Whitewater that was a crime on Clinton's part. It takes up space and time in print and electronic news, obscuring the fact that laws are being passed behind our backs by the people we elected without our input. Can you say....NAFTA? Can you say....GATT? Can you say....let's think about MAI?

-- Tookie Anderson (tookie@flynn.com), December 12, 1998.

I feel the "Clinton Problem" is just a symptom of a bigger issue.

The country is torn between leaders advancing a "Socialist" agenda (wealth re-distribution, egalitarianism, global government) and a "Capitalist" agenda (get the HELL outta my way (you damn American workers) - I'm a business man!).

Until I looked deeper than "The Washington Post", I would not have believed it. But 60 members of Capitol Hill are members of the Social Democrats (http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html), including that "Man's Man", Barney Frank. If you go there you can find 1) the list of Capitol Hill Socialists and 2) their "charter" which calls for world govenment and re-distribution of wealth.

Personally, I think it would be nice to have separate nations for the "Socialist" and "Capitalist" types (ignoring the potential of war...), but since the Socialists want world-government, they would never go along with further de-centalized government.

If TSHTF due to Y2K, I might prefer a middle-of-the-road scum-bad (Clinton) to Algore (whose family has historical ties to socialist/communist causes). But it makes me mad that the media doesn't report what really is happening. "It is all about sex?!?".

Those who get their information exclusively from the "Mass Media", couldn't possibly believe me. Been there... No I don't watch for "Black Helicopters". Hope never to see an "Alien".

I don't believe anything that suggests "conspiracy" until I see it confirmed (directly, or indirectly). I am mad, though, when I think of how "unbiased" I used to think the Washington Post was, when in fact they are pushing a "Progressive" agenda (according to their own union). "Progressive" is the same name used in place of communism not long ago (since people did not trust communism).

Yes, I realize this is a Y2K forum, aimed at clarifying and reducing the risk. IMHO, though, governments are the "wild-card". Understanding the underlying (lie ... hmmm) issues makes it easier to predict future government action.

-- Anonymous (Anonymous@Anonymous.com), December 12, 1998.

Nikoli,

Your posting is off-topic for this Y2K forum. Please post topics like this to The Government of The United States forum or similar forum, instead of this one.

-- No Spam Please (anon@ymous.com), December 12, 1998.

Technically of course the post is off-topic for a y2k forum - however, the point on which we all must surely agree, is that Clinton and Gore should be focusing the full might of the government machine on both fighting the problem more effectively (granted, I can't see how that can be done with the current shortage of programmers) and being more open with the population regarding preparedness/information issues. The fact that they are not doing this at this point in time (for example as in England's Tony Blair) makes one wonder what else is at stake here.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), December 12, 1998.

Not off-topic at all. The impeachment process is diverting attention from the Y2K issue. He's a scum bag, but I don't want him impeached. I want this to be over with ASAP so the media makes space for Y2K. One scum bag or another as president won't make much difference at this point. Al Gore is a scum of a different flavor.

-- Lurker # 1001 (noway@impeach.poll), December 12, 1998.

Lurker # 1001,

>The impeachment process is diverting attention from the Y2K issue.

Yes. IOW, a posting about "Does anyone believe these media impeachment polls?" is off-topic in a Y2K forum.

-- No Spam Please (anon@ymous.com), December 12, 1998.

I don't know anyone with an opinion who is in favor of impeachment. Most people I know are just sick of the matter and want it to go away.IMHO lying about sex in court or in the kitchen is on the same level with letting your answering machine answer the phone when you're home. (I didn't say running around, I said lying about it) The majority party is just being mean and trying to overthrow a man duly elected by the people. Having Sonny Bono's wife sit in judgemant of the POTUS makes my skin crawl. I Bill and his administration would focus like a "laser beam" on Y2K. "It's the double zero stupid!

-- Jimmy Bagga Doughnuts (jim1bets@worldnet.att.net), December 12, 1998.

This entire impeachment proceeding is a coup d4e4tat financed in part by the religous right. You want evidence of a conspiracy read it. Henry Hyde-chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, ordered from President Clinton "complete and specific" answers to 81 questions in reference to the Lewinsky affair. A man of principle according to the mainstream press, a dedicated leader. Hyde argues, "no man is above the law. But Hyde narrowly escaped legal responsibility as a former director of the failed Clyde Federal Savings and Loan, largely because of his political connections, according to investigators of the S&L case. What follows are passages provided by the Albion Monitor in the report: "New Details of Henry Hyde Role in Failed S&L.

"Most of the {Clyde} directors were fairly cooperative in that situation,"stated former Resolution Trust Corp. investigator Fred Cedarholm. "But Hyde never provided a thing. His attitude was basically 'I am a U.S. congressman.' I've done nothing wrong. End of discussion.

"If his name was John Q. Public, It's obvious he would never escape." said Walker Todd, former assistant general counsel and research officer for the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland. "If you were ranking the {Clyde} directors by guilt or responsibility or negligence, Hyde might have made the top four or five. If you were one of the {11} directors in that chain, you'd wonder why you're paying and he's not."

"Despite the seeming hypocrisy, Hyde remains one of Washington's most esteemed figures. With few exceptions, the national press corps has hailed Hyde as a judicious statesman, an 'unimpeachable' character in the words of one Washington Post headline." {WP, May12, 1998

My opinion is the mainstream press is the backbone of lies and deceptions, perpetuating corruption and secrecy. The mainstream press drives the consumer, corporate dominated, status quo society. The silence of Y2k, anti-environmentalism, UFO Debunking, and Henry Hyde. Read the article by the Albion Monitor at

http://www.monitor.net/monitor/9812a/default.html

Peace

-MC

-- M.C. Davey (UFOskyBlue@aol.com), December 12, 1998.

I suggest that cognitive dissonance is the mechanism that enables overzealous partisan politicians and the Republican right to trample citizens' rights to privacy while half the population cries "off with his head". I know of his heinous "crimes", but the fact is Clinton has been harassed, entrapped, investigated and persecuted unlike any president in history. Put this in perspective by looking at the founders of this country and the framers of your beloved Constitution: Jefferson had sex with his slaves (as you are aware, they didn't refer to them as interns back then), Franklin was the proud owner of the largest collection of pornography in the New World (I think they called it erotica) and Washington presided over a booming pot farm (then called hemp, mainly good for rope and not nearly as much fun as the moonshine of the day).

How many of the gentlemen back then visited houses of ill repute? 10%? 40%? How many do now? More? Less? What about the cocaine in soda? *Exactly* where and when did this country go wrong?

I'm not arguing that we are not a nation of sinners and I know that the last drops of morality are being drained from society as we speak, but do you really think the answer is Newt's 'piss tests for all' and an army of Ken Starrs manning the banks' "Know your Customer" booths?

Are you saying is that man is a nothing more than a beast in the jungle, and he must be restrained with powerful laws like eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, burn all witches and amputate the peckers of fornicators?

-- a (a@a.a), December 13, 1998.

"When men are pure, laws are useless; when men are corrupt, laws are broken."

--Benjamin Disraeli

-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), December 13, 1998.

Clinton is the result of 8 years of media and Democratic propaganda - more ably done than even that by Nazi Germany. The propaganda continues even here as shown the lies echoed above by otherwise sensible individuals. These lies are heated even worse by the blatant hatred of the media, democratic party, and others towards Christians. So much so, that even here the hatred bleeds through, and obscures reason.

The Democratic hypocrisy and one-sided reporting continues - and so is reflected in the polls. For example, I don't _want_ him impeached either, but it _needs_ to be done to protect the laws and future government of this country. To protect the integrity of this office, across Y2K troubles, isn't it fundemental that we be able to believe the White House?

Even my answer above would "push" these polls to the left, which is what our biased news media so desperately wants. But the polls are not the way our country is founded. This is a representative democracy. They (the Congress) have been chosen to to fulfill this duty, not to respond to polls conducted by liars in the service of liars.

No Democrat, for example, in any interview, has given any indication that the basic evidence is wrong.

The hundreds of crimes committed by this White House have been "whitewashed" by the national press interested in spoon-feeding a gullible public the Democrats lies, lines, and propaganda. Are these immoral liars and criminals the people you want controlling your rights, your freedoms, your money, your national police, your civil liberties through the Y2K crisis?

-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), December 13, 1998.

"The hundreds of crimes committed by this White House have been "whitewashed" by the national press interested in spoon-feeding a gullible public the Democrats lies, lines, and propaganda."

The only difference between this White House and the past two is this one got caught.

Anyone remember a little thing called "Iran-Contra"? What the hell was Granada? Bush, a former head of the CIA...oh yeah..lets trust him!

-- Political Hater (ihate@polls.com), December 13, 1998.

Robert,

Brilliant post as always. Speak the Truth no matter what.

MC and BaggaDonuts: You're idiots. Perpetrators of this so-called 'Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy" - B.S.!!!! If you had your way Christians would wear armbands and live in "secure" camps right? Your attitude is why we as one nation are over. America as we knew it, - whether Y2K or not - is forever gone. Americans have become fat, lazy and quarrelsome, while the world has become so dangerous, it surpasses the global powderkegs of both World Wars combined. You Unaware Socialists have succeeded in dividing this nation between race, class, gender and lifestyle - by pointing out the differences and demanding "rights" for each group, meanwhile the world has gone to the dogs while we quibble amongst ourselves.

Whatever event causes all the divisions between us as a nation to break wide open into uncrossable chasms, we will fall like a hundred million tons of bricks.

As Christ himself once said, "Weep not for me, but for yourselves and your children. For if they do this to me when the tree is green, what will they do to you when the leaf is dry?"

To paraphrase; if we will destroy one another politically, socially and verbally while things are now plentiful and prosperous, what is going to happen when these times have ended?

I can tell you: blame - hatred - fighting - war. From neighbors against neighbors right on up to nations against nations. If you refuse to believe that, I envy your ignorance. Mankind has not changed in almost 7,000 years of recorded history. We are no different that the people of Tyre, Rome, Egypt, or any other empire that has graced history's stage. Only our technology makes it all the more lethal and complete.

This is why many are preparing the way they are.

To them, The handwriting is on the wall.

Clinton, Clintonites, the Media, Liberal Democrats, Apathetics, DGI's, DWGI's, and a nation willfully asleep make the fall that's coming more painful and final with each day that passes. You may choose to believe otherwise, dreamers have always been the ones to build civilizations from the ruins of others - good or evil, but our society has already been transformed into a morass that cannot be salvaged.

I expect to hear that "The Religious Right" is responsible for the Y2K panic, and that it is all a front to cause a takeover of our society".

Expect it soon if it hasn't already started in earnest.

Just another chasm opening at the behest of those that truly do hate, but hide behind the mantra's of "tolerance", "Compassion", "Equality" and "Fairness". If you don't fall into their definitions of the above, look for ostracization, labelling, and eventual persecution.

It's the way it's been for almost 7,000 years.

We're no different.

INVAR, who is hoping for the best, preparing for the worst.

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), December 13, 1998.

Personally I think this whole thing could have been solved if Slick and Monica had made videos. Then we'd know for sure what went on and if he lied. He could have then sold the videos to pay for the Starr (another peeping Tom) investigation.

-- Poo Poo Hindo (gompo@tinko.com), December 13, 1998.

Nixon lied about campaign fraud

Regan lied about thwarting National Security measures.

Bush lied about taxes.

Clinton lied about his tallywacker.

I think you guys must be brainwashed if you can't see the difference.

-- a (a@a.a), December 13, 1998.

A little litmus test I use on the people who want to remove Clinton from office. Just ask - "Did you support the removal of Newt Gingrich as Speaker of the House when he lied under oath regarding his book deals?". Funny thing - I have been yelled at, cursed a couple of times, and even told it doesn't matter since Newt resigned a couple of years later (hasn't left yet though). But I haven't found a single person yet who supported the removal of Newt for lying under oath and supports the removal of Bill Clinton. Guess there are just different standards for the Speaker (third in line for the throne - if Air Force One went down with BC and Al Gore on board Newt would be prez.) than for the president in these peoples minds. Or maybe the whole thing is just partisan as all hell and they just don't want to say it.

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@yahoo.com), December 13, 1998.

Paul: thank-you.

Robert: I assume you are insinuating that my post contains lies. What's wrong - nobody ever told you there used to be cocaine in Coca-Cola?

-- a (a@a.a), December 13, 1998.

a., I think some people are blinded by self-righteousness. The difference is clear.

Robert, "To protect the integrity of this office, across Y2K troubles, isn't it fundemental that we be able to believe the White House? "

Yes, it is fundamental. And I agree that Democrats AND Republicans alike are a bunch of liars. What I think is important here, in my so very humble opinion, is to decide what is a dangerous lie and what is not. I personally think that -one- perticular lie, i.e., lying about an affair, is not cause for impeachment under the Constitution. And I also believe that any man or woman in the same situation would have lied. But prove to me that he lied about anything related to his duty as president, then under the Constitution and the law he should be tried. So far for me, Starr has not come up with impeachable proofs in his whole investigation. The question would then be "is blameless moral character required to be a president?". Well, if that was required, I can't think of any (political) man in this country fitting the bill.

I'm trying to bring a non-partisan view to this debate, since I'm not affiliated with either parties.

-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), December 13, 1998.

chris: yeah. I think the term is "sanctimonious".

-- a (a@a.a), December 13, 1998.

To the Holy Roller who called me an idiot about 5 inches earlier. I Resent That. Being from New Jersey the term is asshole. There's a comet comming by soon. BE ON IT!

Starr was the kid in High School who got the crap kicked out of him everyday after gym class in the locker room. Clinton was the popular kid who could have stopped it with a word but chose not to for self serving reasons. The revenge of the nerd. To all the high school bullies of the world: I HOPE YOU'RE HAPPY!

-- Jimmy Bagga Doughnuts (jim1bets@worldnet.att.net), December 14, 1998.

INVAR I appreciate your anger. I believe we're all on edge, and feeling distrust over our elected leaders. However in the future try attacking the message. If you see holes in the message, feel free to contact the Albion Monitor and review sources. I agree we all need to work together, and communicate our thoughts so that humanity can make it through Y2k hopefully in a utopion environment. INVAR, I bleed red like you, and would just as soon work with you rather then against you, but please organize your thoughts, your assault based on anger, does little to further your cause.

"M.C. and BaggaDonuts: You're idiots. Perpetrators of this so-called 'Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy-B.S.!!!"

"To paraphrase; If we destroy one another politically, socially, and VERBALLY (emphasis mine) while things are now prosperous and plentiful, what is going to happen when these times have ended."

"If you had your way Christians would wear armbands and live in "Secure" camps-Right?"

Wrong INVAR- YOU said it not me.

Albion Monitor: http://www.monitor.net/monitor/9812a/default.html

Peace be with you INVAR

-MC

Wrong, you said it, not me.

-- M.C. Davey (Apus1Son@aol.com), December 14, 1998.

INVAR I appreciate your anger. I believe we're all on edge, and feeling distrust over our elected leaders. However in the future try attacking the message. If you see holes in the message, feel free to contact the Albion Monitor and review sources. I agree we all need to work together, and communicate our thoughts so that humanity can make it through Y2k hopefully in a utopion environment. INVAR, I bleed red like you, and would just as soon work with you rather then against you, but please organize your thoughts, your assault based on anger, does little to further your cause.

"M.C. and BaggaDonuts: You're idiots. Perpetrators of this so-called 'Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy-B.S.!!!"

"To paraphrase; If we destroy one another politically, socially, and VERBALLY (emphasis mine) while things are now prosperous and plentiful, what is going to happen when these times have ended."

"If you had your way Christians would wear armbands and live in "Secure" camps-Right?"

Wrong INVAR- YOU said it not me.

Albion Monitor- http://www.monitor.net/monitor/9812a/default.html

Peace be with you INVAR

-MC

Wrong, you said it, not me.

-- M.C. Davey (Apus1Son@aol.com), December 14, 1998.

INVAR I appreciate your anger. I believe we're all on edge, and feeling distrust over our elected leaders. However in the future try attacking the message. If you see holes in the message, feel free to contact the Albion Monitor and review sources. I agree we all need to work together, and communicate our thoughts so that humanity can make it through Y2k hopefully in a utopion environment. INVAR, I bleed red like you, and would just as soon work with you rather then against you, but please organize your thoughts, your assault based on anger, does little to further your cause.

"M.C. and BaggaDonuts: You're idiots. Perpetrators of this so-called 'Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy-B.S.!!!"

"To paraphrase; If we destroy one another politically, socially, and VERBALLY (emphasis mine) while things are now prosperous and plentiful, what is going to happen when these times have ended."

"If you had your way Christians would wear armbands and live in "Secure" camps-Right?"

Wrong INVAR- YOU said it not me.

Albion Monitor- http://www.monitor.net/monitor/9812a/default.html

Peace

-MC

Wrong, you said it, not me.

-- M.C. Davey (Apus1Son@aol.com), December 14, 1998.

INVAR I appreciate your anger. I believe we're all on edge, and feeling distrust over our elected leaders. However in the future try attacking the message. If you see holes in the message, feel free to contact the Albion Monitor and review sources. I agree we all need to work together, and communicate our thoughts so that humanity can make it through Y2k hopefully in a utopion environment. INVAR, I bleed red like you, and would just as soon work with you rather then against you, but please organize your thoughts, your assault based on anger, does little to further your cause.

"M.C. and BaggaDonuts: You're idiots. Perpetrators of this so-called 'Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy-B.S.!!!"

"To paraphrase; If we destroy one another politically, socially, and VERBALLY (Emphasis mine) while things are now prosperous and plentiful, what is going to happen when these times have ended."

"If you had your way Christians would wear armbands and live in "Secure" camps-Right?"

Wrong INVAR- YOU said it not me.

Albion Monitor- http://www.monitor.net/monitor/9812a/default.html

Peace

-MC

-- MC Davey (Apus1Son@aol.com), December 14, 1998.

Maybe he'll have to stand trial for atrocities;

http://www.januarymagazine.com/sullivan.html

Personally, I think that if y'all wanted a Democrat for pres, you'd have done much better with Dukakis. But then I'm just a silly Canuck.

-- Tricia the Canuck (jayles@telusplanet.net), December 14, 1998.

Bagga Doughnuts -

An example of intelligence and wit unsurpassed in your post. You speak well for most of the liberal establishment. They makes the same amount of sense. After all you're from Jersey, it makes sense to me now. Congratulations on your unabashed idiocy.

MC -

Your entire premise of which I vehemently took issue is wrong. It's a matter of law, and our fundamental foundation that is at stake here. Who cares whence it is funded or investigated? Did Clinton break the trust of the People and the Law or didn't he?

If you want to split hairs with the law, you diminish it. If you want to excuse the breaches of trust and law he almost admits to, then you do so to assuage your own ideology which then is morally bankrupt.

It's pearls before swine I know to try and make logical sense with apathetic folks anymore, but I will attempt to describe WHY us Christian whackos are so pursuant of this issue. I suspect the "Religious Right" as you label us is simply sick and tired of watching this president and Liberal Socialists get away with breaking and circumventing the law, which when applied to the rest of us is unmovable and final in it's application - as it should be. Are we to have one standard for the elites in power and another for the rest of us? If you excuse this President simply because you say the investigators are of a moral ideology hostile to his character, then you condone tyranny. Which is just about where we are at. Which then gets to my original post.

My exclamation that folks of your ideology would have conservative christians in detention camps is not mine. It came from several sources. One is from James Carville on a cable talkshow, One was from a verbal exchange I had with a Democratic committeeman, the other was printed on this forum a while back.

Each exclamation of "Right-wing extremist", makes the label that the person who is referred is invalid and dangerous. As that mantra roots itself as truth to the American populace, it will make it easier for a tyrant do exactly what some have subtely suggested, imprisonment or annihilation. Which is why I mentioned it. I've heard it before.

BTW, Hitler did the same thing.

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), December 14, 1998.

Anyone notice that my answer from that moron was fun and M.C.'s answer was BOOOOORING?

Anyone notice this thread was started by a dead guy?

Anyone notice that this board is populated by fruitcakes?

Anyone offended by the way the Diane person is patronized?

Do you really want to survive with the people most likely to survive?

-- Jimmy Bagga Doughnuts (jim1bets@worldnet.att.net), December 14, 1998.

Bagga Doughnuts -

You just made my point perfectly clear. Thank You.

- When fools speak.....

-- INVAR (gundark@aol.com), December 14, 1998.

To Everyone:

Sorry about the triple post, a waste of space. "Mail failed" I unkowingly re-posted and you see the result.

-MC

-- MC Davey (Apus1son@aol.com), December 14, 1998.

Hey Vlad the Impaler! Thanks for screwing up a good thread with your uninteligible drivel. We'll meet again.

BTW armbands on Christians is an idea worth exploring.

-- Jimmy Bagga Doughnuts (jim1bets@worldnet.att.net), December 15, 1998.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nixon lied about campaign fraud Regan lied about thwarting National Security measures.

Bush lied about taxes.

Clinton lied about his tallywacker.

I think you guys must be brainwashed if you can't see the difference.

Looks like Nixon came off best! So what he broke into the Watergate building. Leaks happen all the time, usually you don't have to physically break in.

-- Richard Dale (rdale@figroup.co.uk), December 15, 1998.

Anyone notice it took an Englishman to point this out?

Yes Ricard, we really are that brainwashed for the most part. Some of us, me included, look at the President as "Okey, it's been another 4 years, what mask will he put on now?". I really have no use for the office of President anymore and I find almost all of them to be despicable. The only one even close I think to being honest was Jimmy Carter. Whatever you think of how he ran his Presidency, I really do think he MAY have been (notice I did not say for sure) the only one really trying to do everything above board.

Rick

-- Rick Tansun (ricktansun@hotmail.com), December 15, 1998.