SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Janice Shell who wrote (13063)4/7/1998 8:18:00 PM
From: Catfish  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 20981
 
Janice,
I think that Stalin, Lenin, Clinton or any other socialist might be acceptable to you as long as their political viewpoint matches yours. Obviously, you do not care about leadership character or moral standards just as long as they are socialist. That is very, very sad.

Darrell



To: Janice Shell who wrote (13063)4/8/1998 4:58:00 AM
From: Catfish  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 20981
 
Abuse of Power -- Clinton Gun Diktat Usurps Congress' Authority

The Manchester Union Leader
April 8, 1998 Richard Lessner

It is not going too far to say that Bill Clinton increasingly behaves like a dictator. He clearly prefers to govern by executive order, of which he has issued more than any previous President.

The latest Clinton diktat usurps the authority of Congress to make laws. By executive order, Mr. Clinton has banned the import of 59 firearms. That the President has no such constitutional or statutory authority has become an irrelevancy. Unless such an arbitrary exercise of executive power is resisted, it becomes established by custom and usage.

If Congress does not rescind Mr. Clinton's dictatorial action, then perhaps the federal courts, by means of a lawsuit, will act to restrain this runaway President. Several groups are contemplating such a lawsuit.

In a constitutional Republic, the ends do not justify the means. However noble or desirable the end of Mr. Clinton's unilateral action against so-called "assault weapons" -- and we do not for a moment agree with his misguided notions -- a well-meaning objective cannot trump the Constitution. We are a nation of laws, not men.

Moreover, Mr. Clinton's decree is the worst kind of political pandering. Any weapon used to assault someone becomes an "assault weapon," whether it is a military-style firearm, an expensive hunting rifle or a cheap "Saturday night special." Neither does the Second Amendment make any reference to hunting or sport shooting, as Mr. Clinton imagines.

The right to bear arms, in fact, has nothing to do with sports and everything to do with the people's right to defend themselves -- even against a tyrannical government. If the gun control advocates desire to find hunting and sport shooting in the Constitution, then let them put such in the Constitution by the process of amending it, not by dishonestly pretending to find things in the document that plainly are not there.

The anti-gun hysteria notwithstanding, relatively few crimes are committed with so-called "assault weapons." Excluding murders that are the byproducts of another crime, such as armed robbery, the U.S. averages just 21 multiple-victim public shootings a year. Of the 19,600 people murdered since 1996, fewer than 0.02 percent of the victims died in multiple public shootings of the kind in which assault weapons allegedly would be the firearms of choice.

One of the best kept secrets is that an armed citizenry is the best deterrent to crime. In states with permissive concealed carry laws, multiple shootings have declined by 84 percent and deaths by 90 percent. According to Prof. John Lott of the University of Chicago Law School, armed citizens use guns 2.5 million times a year to defend themselves or to stop crimes before they occur. Despite the fevers of the gun control mob, an armed citizenry produces less crime and greater public safety.

The Union Leader

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



To: Janice Shell who wrote (13063)4/8/1998 1:05:00 PM
From: MulhollandDrive  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 20981
 
Yes, of course you have a problem with it, anytime you are confronted with a fact that cuts your bent logic off at the knees you respond by attacking the "source". I heard the interview, I know what she said, I'm sure her statement about the Lewinsky and Tripp relationship is verifiable. But obviously nothing will satisfy your willful blindness. I'm sure if you are confronted with the WH records showing their concurrent time there, you'd just come up with some asinine statement like, "well, taht doesn't really prove they talked to each other. Woman, you wear me out.



To: Janice Shell who wrote (13063)4/8/1998 11:00:00 PM
From: Catfish  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 20981
 
Focus On The Cross, Not The X-Rated Bunny

Exegesis
April 8, 1998 Steve Myers

It's Holy Week, time to focus on what is really important. First we must try to clear our minds.
It's said that ten percent of America is outraged by Judge Susan Webber Wright's dismissal of the Paula Jones lawsuit. It was too much to hope that Mrs. Jones could have had her day in court. Her case may have been flimsy, but that was the job of the jury to decide after the evidence had been presented, rather than for the judge to preempt. In Arkansas, it isn't apparently outrageous for the Governor to put his hand up the dress of an employee, unzip his pants, request oral sex and threaten her if she tells anyone. Are we to infer from the ruling that this kind of thing happens all the time?

Nobody, including the judge, denies that the President is a sexual predator. By dismissing the case, she accepts that the incident took place. "Boorish and offensive" though it may be, she deems it not serious enough to deserve a court hearing, let alone an apology or compensation for the victim. Mrs. Wright, a centrist Republican, is a former student of Bill Clinton who ought to have recused herself from this case. She failed to consider that Mr. Clinton is no ordinary man, "no Joe Six-Pack" as he readily admits. He was the Governor of the State. And that is why Alan Keyes, speaking in Washington last Friday, was right to call her decision "biased, incompetent and depraved". For the Paula Jones case is not about sex; it is about the abuse of power. Mr. Clinton says in this week's Time, "Having the case dismissed and putting this behind us is plainly in the best interests of the country." Plainly, it is not. What message is he sending to the women of this country?

A further ten percent of America is rejoicing that Mr. Clinton seems to be getting away with yet another outrage. Rejoicing? Yes, there are still people out there, both the sick and the deluded, who are easily captivated by the plastic smile of the crocodile. They are in for a profound shock. And the other 80%? Apparently, they don't care that the nation's leader has been exposed as a serial rapist, predator and adulterer as well as a bank robber, fraudster and much more. As one Chicago college student wrote to us this week: "Mr. Clinton can have sex with sheep for all I care, as long as he does his job properly." Such a compartmentalized, distorted and depraved view of the presidency is Mr. Clinton's unsavory legacy to his country. And that, beloved readers, is the current state of America. So now what do we do?

One benefit of recent events is that we have an accurate reading of how profoundly sick this great nation has become: it is wracked by hypocrisy, duplicity and fear; its legal system is corrupt and complex, and its Head of State is the most corrupt, dangerous man ever to rule a Western nation in modern times. Of course, most Americans are still largely in the dark about Mr. Clinton. He is popular, portrayed by his Stalinist media as a lovable rogue. He certainly isn't popular for his policies or achievements; he has precious few of either. But Mr. Clinton's popularity is simply an extension of the man himself: both are a superficial irrelevance. He is indeed dangerous - after all, over a hundred witnesses who could testify against him are dead - but the popular predator is, above all else, frivolous and peripheral.

Bill Clinton is as relevant to solving America's real problems as the Easter Bunny is to the Crucifixion and Resurrection of our Lord, which we observe this week. Actually, Mr. Clinton resembles the Easter Bunny with a machine-gun, a paradox which belongs in a black comedy or a book of horror tales. Unlike another famous bunny, it is unlikely that this one will keep going and going. This presidency has been shallow and irrelevant from the outset. If Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr succeeds in shaming him into resignation or proving that he lied under oath, we all may yet learn a lesson from this chaotic character.

So what's next? Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr is preparing what the London Sunday Telegraph called "the legal equivalent of a nuclear strike at the presidency": charging Monica Lewinsky with perjury and naming Bill Clinton as an unindicted co-conspirator. That term has been rarely heard since President Nixon was named as one during the Watergate affair. It means that the person was involved in the crime, but has not been charged. If Miss Lewinsky were found guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice, it would mean that Mr. Clinton were guilty too. His fate is absolutely linked to hers, even if he is not indicted. As the London Sunday Times commented: "In that case, Clinton will not have to wait much longer before knowing how history will receive him - as the guardian of economic prosperity or a sex-crazed, X-rated stain on the dignity of the office." For now, though, let us try to put these matters to one side. For an event much more important is about to be commemorated.

It was to a nation burdened with a corrupt, top-heavy bureaucracy that Jesus came as the Messiah of the Jewish people and of the world. He devoted His ministry to illustrating that miracles could triumph over evil if faith in God were present. And into Jerusalem He rode on a donkey, on the day we know as Palm Sunday. As He did, exuberant crowds in the Mount of Olives villages waved palm branches and cried "Hosanna - Save us!" and "Baruch Haba B'Shem Adonai - Blessed is He who comes in the Name of the Lord." Yet Jesus knew what lay ahead. And just as we weep over the state of America, He walked a few yards down the slope of the Mount of Olives, taking in the stunning view of the Temple, and wept over the City of Jerusalem. "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing. Look, your house is left to you desolate." (Matthew 23: 37-38)

We now sense a similar desolation. The America in which we believe, which we love and which we long for once again, has been systematically raped of its values, morals and ethics over the past few years, most thoroughly by the present Rapist-in-Chief himself. And for what purpose? What good has it done? Is it not time for America to admit it is on the wrong road and to make a cultural, political and spiritual u-turn?

The politically-correct view is that all religions are equal. The events of the days prior to the Crucifixion clearly show otherwise. Jesus strode into the Temple Courts, angrily denouncing the corrupt religious leaders, calling them hypocrites, blind guides, blind fools full of hypocrisy and wickedness (Matthew 23). Were it Washington instead of Jerusalem, one can imagine Him sweeping across The Mall, similarly denouncing the ruling authorities in a way the media and Christian folk ought to have done long ago, proclaiming: "They tie up heavy loads and put them on men's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them." (Matthew 23:4) That sounds remarkably like the government to me.

In reality, the only way we shall restore the America we love is to begin the process by changing ourselves: that process of change begins with accepting who we are, miserable sinners, forgiven only by the single greatest Event of History, the one that took place that Friday. And after the betrayal, there it was, a simple piece of wood nailed to an Olive Tree, two robbers either side of Him, as Jesus made the sacrifice that would end all sacrifices and bring the Jewish religion to its logical completion. Was that the end of the story? As Tony Campolo says: "It's Friday, but Sunday's coming."

Exegesis

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------