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 : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (37127)	7/23/2004 7:55:44 AM
From: Richnorth	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 81568

Rightly or wrongly, my take on Clinton was that he was much too engrossed with trying to achieve a peace accord between Barak and Arafat. Clinton apparently felt he had to be "nice" to Moslems in general in order to get the peace process going. Recall how angry and frustrated he was when Arafat flip-flopped and finally refused to sign. However, reality forced him to lob a few cruise missiles and smart bombs, here and there and now and then, in order to placate wrathful forces at home and to help his personal ratings. Now this may sound a bit far-fetched: I suspect Clinton also wanted to be nice to the Moslems to help in getting his wife elected into the Senate. Recall that Hillary visited Palestine and got a sizeable donation for her election war chest. (The donation was returned due to unfavourable public opinion.) So, overall, Prez Clinton was generally seen to be rather nice and soft on Moslems abroad and at home. It is not surprising that lots of folks lay the blame for 9/11 on his doorsteps.

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (37127)	7/23/2004 9:28:28 AM
From: Wayners	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

How in the hell does impeaching the President soak up the FBI's and CIA's time and prevent them from coordinating? How in the hell was Richard Clark's time stolen to help defend the President from impeachment?

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (37127)	7/23/2004 9:30:39 AM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

The Clinton scandals were a distraction, I'm sure. For that reason, at the time I opposed allowing the Paula Jones case to proceed while Clinton was in office (let her case wait) and I opposed the impeachment. However, I don't know if this had a big impact on Clinton's foreign and defense policies. If it did, then peraps Clinton should have stepped down for the good of the nation and handed the reins to Gore. If Gore had run as a sitting President in 2000, he likely would have won. Gore's massive shift to the left (as I see it) since the 2000 election makes me think we would have been worse off with him as President.