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 : About that Cuban boy, Elian -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greenspirit who wrote (7994)	7/2/2000 11:37:34 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9127

Will you at least acknowledge the "possibility" that the actions were taken for political reasons? Sure. I'll acknowledge it. None of us was there. We don't know what happened. It could have happened the way you said. Or a hundred other ways. It also could have happened the way I suggested. Will you acknowledge that? Karen, you don't really believe it happened that way do you? I don't believe anything. Neither of us has enough information to hold any belief about the change of direction. I think my explanation is plausible because I've been watching this phenomenon repeated in every administration since Johnson and this situation fits the pattern so well that it seems obvious to me. You see a pattern as well. You, along with the rest of us, saw Clinton stretch "plausible deniability" about embarrassing personal activities past the point of crudulity. You extrapolate from this that he's never uttered an honest word on any subject during his whole administration. I think his definition of "is" is enough to make a reasonable person suspicious, but way short of the heft needed for plausibility. As for political motivations, I would think that the safer political position to take would have been the same one Gore and Dubya took. If Clinton did it for political reasons, why take the unpopular route? Yeah, the public ended up on the Administration's side, but that was at best a huge gamble--more likely dumb luck. I'm not trying to convince you or anyone else of my theory. I'm only trying to get you to grudgingly consider the potential of explanations other than the generic SOB explanation, that's all. Karen P.S. Perhaps it was just convenient happenstance that the path chosen turned out to be the one that best fit law, regulation, procedure, etc. Or maybe they planned it that way. What a concept!