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 : Did Slick Boink Monica? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lady Lurksalot who wrote (9064)	3/1/1998 4:13:00 PM
From: Michael Sphar	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20981

NEWSFLASH!!! PREZ TAKES TO SNOWBOARDING FAD SWEEPING THE WINTER SPORTS WORLD, "NO POLING REQUIRED" CHIEF EXEC EXCLAIMS

To: Lady Lurksalot who wrote (9064)	3/1/1998 5:50:00 PM
From: Jack Clarke	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20981

Holly, I am no fan of unconstitutional behavior, even against repulsive criminal types. But I don't know that Starr has done anything unconstitutional in his investigation, although many feel that his subpoena of Mr. Blumenthal was stupid politically and showed the thinness of his skin. See this article: washtimes.com But we should all realize that our law allows people to be treated in a manner ranging from irritating to truly Kafkaesque. This is even more apparent in civil lawsuits, where you must pay for your own defense and get no recompense even when you win. At least people accused of crimes can get public defenders. I confess that I do experience a bit of schadenfreude at the discomfiture of the Clintons at the mercy of the legal system they have supported so much. If they had only been forced to send Chelsea to public school! Those trial lawyer and teachers union contributions would have more meaning for them. The health care mess is just that. It'll probably get worse until we are crying for a nationalized system, which is probably the less crummy of the two choices (HMO and Socialized). I'm still threatening to post a long overview on this subject, but the muse isn't there at the moment. Jack

To: Lady Lurksalot who wrote (9064)	3/1/1998 7:09:00 PM
From: Ish	Respond to of 20981

<<This is what troubles me and should trouble any citizen, that being that when all else fails resort to expediency, and the law of the land can take the back seat until "justice" prevails. >> It happens. John Gotti was denied his attorney who had gotten him off in the past at his last trial.

To: Lady Lurksalot who wrote (9064)	3/2/1998 9:07:00 AM
From: Zoltan!	Respond to of 20981

>>I am astonished at the paucity of righteous indignation at Starr's apparently being given carte blanc to ride roughshod over the letter and intent of the law. Since that has not happened, why should you be astonished? Starr has remained easily within the bounds of both. Those squeals you hear are the sound of Clintonistas as Starr gets nearer the truth. If you want real abuses see Walsh. He leaked all over the place and did so the weekend before the 1992 election when Bush was tied with Clinton. That particular leak cost Bush 7 points and the election. While there is plenty of feigned "righteous indignation" on the Left, we know better and see it as nothing less than the grand hypocrisy that it so clearly is.