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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Scumbria who wrote (144387)	5/10/2001 1:48:39 PM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Crock. If he hadn't done anything to lie about there'd have been no problem in the first place. But when caught, an honest and decent person admits his mistake, sincerely apologizes, takes the lumps and moves on. Bubba took something he would easily have been forgiven for and made it into a felony. That's plain stoooooopit!!! JLA

To: Scumbria who wrote (144387)	5/10/2001 5:55:18 PM
From: Peter O'Brien	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

The only problem with your reasoning is that Clinton and the Democrats were _themselves_ the "inquisition"! In the wake of the Thomas/Hill controversy, the "Violence Against Women Act" was passed by the Democratic congress and signed into law by Clinton himself in 1994 (before the Republican wins in November of that year). It is this law that was used against Clinton, just as it was used against all those evil male business executives in the private sector. Specifically, the law allows the accuser in a sexual harassment lawsuit to question the accused under oath about their sexual history with others in the workplace (even if it is consensual) while shielding the accuser from such questions. It is supposedly to allow a "pattern of behavior" of the accused to be established. From 1994-1997 (before Clinton got entangled in his own law), it was routinely used as a weapon against male executives in the private sector to extract out-of-court settlements. The reason is that that the executives would often prefer to settle rather than being forced to testify about other potentially embarrassing workplace relationships (even if they were entirely consensual and had absolutely no bearing on the charge of sexual harassment). So, Starr was not the inquisition. Clinton and the Democrats were. Starr's tactics were no different than those used by Clinton's trial lawyer friends against executives in the private sector. The only difference is that, unlike the private sector executives, Clinton was too stupid to settle out-of-court when he had the chance, and he perjured himself instead. But, when you elect a sorry piece of trash like Clinton, that's what you should expect..