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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: hmaly who wrote (133991)	3/3/2001 2:17:06 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1594133

Harry, I agree that Bill on the legislative side was a good president. Amazing stands is stretching it, but he was a good president legislatively. But why the disconnect. Doesn't it stand to reason that a person known for his intellect in one area would also apply that intellect to another area. Why wouldn't you assume that if Bill is extremely intelligent and innovative in one area, that he wouldn't be in another area; collecting campaign contributions for instance. To me, it seems obvious, that a brilliant statesman could have been a brilliant CEO or a brilliant general or a brilliant con artist. A con artist is usually a con artist throughout his professional life.......insuring that he/she benefits at all times.......except for maybe Robin Hood. Unless Clinton is schizoid, its unlikely he would use his intellect to do good in one area of his professional life and then rip people off in another area. The problem isn't that Bill is corrupt by nature, but politics itself is corrupt. That's a very popular premise but I don't believe that. And just as Bill was on the leading edge as far as his policies and innovative ideas go, he also was on the leading edge with the corrupt side of politics. You are stretching...you have no evidence, just hearsay and your own supposition. Beyond that, he gave most of his life to public service when he didn't have to and when every damn fool knows you can't make squat working for gov't. <<<<<<< What kind of justification is that? If he is as clever and as duplicitous as you claim, why would he stay in public service under the glare of public scrutiny. He would have to be asking for trouble. You now have a psychological profile of a man who does some good, is duplicitous, periodically dishonest, a socio-path, and a sado masochist......besides a fetish freak. You are turning Clinton into one of the most complex and exciting persons of the new millenia. No wonder I am so freaked out with having Bush as president. <g> <<<<<<His greatest offense was that he fooled with Lewinsky who btw is not a minor.....and for that he should have our sympathy, not our mockery.<<<<<<< Sympathy????? Why??? Was Bill asleep in his office, fooling around with his boner when Monica snuck up on him and devoured it when he wasn't looking? That is a senseless statement. Maybe you can say, Bill got punished far more than he deserved, but to try to imply he was duped and a hapless victom is nuts. He is a victim but not in the way that he may have tried to convey. I have learned from human psychology that things are not always what they appear to be. I understand what is the popular view of what Clinton was up to; however, I see it differently. Sorry. The man did his best in servitude for his country....I can't say the same for the people attacking him. <<<<<<< Is taking donations from the chinese doing the best he can for our country? Is taking money from drug dealers and gun runners doing the best he can. Do you have factual evidence to support your claims? Is doing an end run around the justice dept for the pardons doing the best he can do for the country. Is having numerous affairs the best he can do for his country? Once again there is little if any discussion on this thread and for the most part in the press, regarding these pardons. Do you know the particulars of the two most controversial ones? Whether Dubya is half the man or not isn't the point. The point is, if Dubya is half the politician ; is he then, by reasoning half the crook? Unfortunately, we already know he is a crook. I find insider trading to be a far more serious crime than playing with a cigar. ted

To: hmaly who wrote (133991)	3/3/2001 6:34:06 PM
From: Scumbria	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1594133

Harry, Republicans get money from the gun lobby, oil companies, and other big business in return for promises to "look out after their interests". This is an incredibly slimy business. In order to get elected President, you need to raise a lot of money. Clinton did what it took. He was competing against institutionalized corruption on the other side of the aisle, an I am damn proud of the fact that he had the balls to do what it takes to get elected twice. Poor blacks and disenfranchised senior citizens can't finance a campaign against the gun lobby and oil companies. Scumbria