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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: David C. Burns who wrote (419)	8/22/1998 9:53:00 AM
From: HighTech	Respond to of 67261

Those articles focus on nonissues. Ken Star is doing what he was charged to do. Janet Reno looked at the evidence he had awhile back and approved an expanded investigation. Star is a hero, not a goat. Also, what the public thinks about whether slickster should be impeached does not matter one iota. This is not an election, this is about lying under oath and coverup, both of which are impeachable offenses. Don't believe me, ask tricky Dick, who only KNEW of the burgarly, he did not commit it himself. He tried to cover it up. If you want to argue that he only tried to cover up a sex act, which is not that serious, I say that burglary is also a misdemeanor and when you are just trying to get information on your political enemies, so what? No big deal The difference between Nixon and Clinton is that Nixon at least had the morals to turn over the tapes and face up to his responsibility. Clinton would have burned those tapes and pleaded stupidity as to there whereabouts. Just like the phantom files that dropped from heaven into the White House a few months ago. Golly, I don't know how those files got here. The gullible bought that crap then as they are buying his crap now. HiTech HiTech

To: David C. Burns who wrote (419)	8/22/1998 10:44:00 AM
From: LesX	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Interesting reading. I haven't read Salon before nor explored its leanings. How would you classify it? Thanks, LesX

To: David C. Burns who wrote (419)	8/22/1998 2:10:00 PM
From: wallacestevens	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 67261

Thanks. I have a fundamentalist Christian friend. After the President's apology, I called her up to get her reaction. She was already mouthing the right-wing response: she was "insulted" by the speech. She was practically repeating the words of Orin Hatch's reaction televised right after Clinton's address. We then spent an hour yelling at each other over the phone about the comparative qualities of Clinton and the Starr Troupers. What is scary about the religious fundamentalists is their absolute certainty that they know what is true and good coupled with their insistence that anything or anybody unlike them is evil. They are dangerous. I highly recommend reading Margaret Atwood's "The Handmaid's Tale" for some insight into what the country will be like when they take over completely. For those members of the right who don't seem to be able to read, they can rent the movie.