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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (167909)	8/6/2001 1:47:16 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Clinton is no longer President. True. Neither is Nixon, but his name got dragged in. And I did not inject Slick's name. He was already in play when I came onto the field. First of all, which history? Let's take Monica. It is well established and well documented what happened there. But surely you would not deny that his history is much longer than that? You keep expecting me to be outraged by this, but I'm not. I must lack the Republican puritanical streak. I'm not expecting you to be outraged; I'm expecting you not to be hypocritical. (The "you" here includes NOW and the women's movement in general.) Packwood was driven from office for exactly the sort of thing Clinton did. Thomas was viciously attacked for less. And in Thomas' case, the charges were never proven. What's the difference- -EXCEPT the party label? I think Clinton contained himself as President until he fell off the wagon with Monica, which he knew was suicidal even as he did it. Surely that's not being proffered as a justification for his actions? turn Clinton's sex life into bribery & high treason You left something out- -the rest of the sentence - "and other high crimes and misdemeanors". Surely perjury counts. set a perjury trap ?????????? We forced him to lie? Dang, we're good! Clinton is brilliant and charming and could talk his way out of a wolf trap, and he took advantage of his assets. And his "brilliant ands charming" assets included perjury. After all, outrage against womanizing has hardly been a Republican platform plank up until now. And that's hardly an acceptable excuse. Murder started (according to one version of histpory) with Cain and Abel. Does 6000+ years make it acceptable now? And getting back to the issue: Unless you can show me that he's harassing subordinates or going after teenage girls I don't regard the women as victims. Message 16167486 Remember that? Monica was a subordinate. What Slick did was sexual harassment. Now just where WAS the outrage the women's movement proclaimed in the cases of Packwood and Thomas?