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 : Clinton's Scandals: Is this corruption the worst ever? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Doughboy who wrote (3145)	8/25/1998 6:42:00 PM
From: RJC2006	Respond to of 13994

Well we've heard it all, a psychoanalysis from a psycho. Now we have the esteemed Doughhead labeling Mr. Netanyahu's brother as "mythical". A man who lost his life trying to rescue others during the raid on Entebbe. Don't you just love liberal pacifists? <<<Meshal was not a terrorist; instead he was a political operative/attache for Hamas in the same way a Sinn Fein spokesperson is not an IRA terrorist.>>>> Uh wrong again pony boy. That's the same as saying that because Jefferson Davis didn't wear a uniform or fire a gun he wasn't a Confederate. In the case of Hamas, you not only shoot the message but you shoot the messenger as well. Just when you thought you'd heard it all.... Jordan...friend of the Jews!

To: Doughboy who wrote (3145)	8/25/1998 7:59:00 PM
From: Catfish	Respond to of 13994

OPINION IN BRIEF MR. CLINTON'S REAL WAR In January, James Carville declared ''war'' when proclaiming his intentions to defend the president in the strongest possible manner. Seven months later, Mr. Carville's words seem somehow, prophetic. The bombing raids against Afghanistan and Sudan took place so suddenly, they seemed to startle even the most seasoned policy-makers and journalists. They certainly have captured the headlines, subordinating for the moment, revelations concerning Mr. Clinton's ethical and moral conduct. But, at what price? Secretary of State Madeleine Albright has spoken of a new war on terrorism. However, the launching of this offensive is fraught with risks and laden with uncertainty about whether the outcome can be successful. If this is indeed a new war, it is one that raises serious doubts in the minds of many as to the timing and motivation of the administration's actions. Now Americans face real perils at home and abroad. Severe retaliation is expected, and the impact has already been felt in all major cities, as security measures are heightened at government buildings, primary airports and even national monuments. Whenever conventional weapons are employed to fight terrorism, the proportionality and capability of their use against what are essentially nebulous targets create a host of problems. In the bombings last week, the United States spent $79 million for satellite-guided cruise missiles to destroy what turned out to be obstacle courses, field barracks and some tents, all worth somewhere in the tens of thousands of dollars. Neither of the principal targets, the training facility in Afghanistan or the factory in Sudan, appears to be of major significance to Osama bin Laden, the terrorist leader. The FBI never got to complete its investigation of the original bombings in Tanzania and Kenya that prompted this military response. Whatever happened to the consensus- building foreign policy of the Clinton administration? Rather than enlisting the support of our allies, Clinton ordered these strikes unilaterally. Our friends and foes alike found out about the raids from the press reports, at the same time as the rest of us did. This approach stands in marked contrast to the Clinton administration's reaction to other international crises. For example: -- When two diplomatic employees were gunned down in Pakistan in March of 1995, there was no military response. -- When a car bomb killed five innocent U.S. citizens in Saudi Arabia in November of 1995, there was no military response. -- When a truck bomb in Saudi Arabia killed nineteen members of the U.S. armed forces in June of 1996, there was no military response. -- When four U.S. citizens were gunned down in Pakistan in November of 1997, there was no military response. -- More recently, the Clinton administration ignored its promise to penalize Iraq for violating UN resolutions concerning weapons of mass destruction. There are other factors that distinguish this new armed initiative. Clinton couldn't wait to appear on the air and inform the American people of his decisive action. In fact, he did so twice -- once in the afternoon and again in the early evening. He even borrowed a phrase from Ronald Reagan, saying there will be ''no sanctuary for terrorists.'' But this was not deemed to be sufficient to thoroughly notify the public. It was essential that National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Henry Shelton, Secretary of Defense William Cohen and Secretary of State Madeleine Albright each hold press conferences. We were being asked by all of these officials to believe the administration's representation that this action was wholly justified and necessary at this time. Mr. Clinton's defenders did a terrific job doing what they do best -- diverting public attention. In recent years, they have gained a great deal of experience changing the subject. Bombs and baiting terrorists not withstanding, all America watched the last vestige of moral authority and marginal credibility the president once possessed slip away last Monday night. The commander-in-chief must be able to act decisively, with the support of the American people. This is not possible with a cloud of distrust and cynicism hanging over the Oval Office. Unfortunately, now substantial public doubt will surface with every decision this president makes. Visit THE FEDeralist at: thefed.com Date: 25 August 1998 Volume # 98-34.brf

To: Doughboy who wrote (3145)	8/25/1998 8:07:00 PM
From: Catfish	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

Doughboy, Perhaps you missed these: He really is a Bastard: Message 4748412 Clinton's Son: freerepublic.com Roger in handcuffs: hugin.imat.com

To: Doughboy who wrote (3145)	8/25/1998 8:19:00 PM
From: Catfish	Respond to of 13994

NEALZ NUZE The Neal Boortz Show -- News Talk 750 WSB -- Atlanta While I am on the air from 8:30 to Noon (EDT) you can send me e-mail at wsboortz@yahoo.com! Tuesday, August 25, 1998 SHRINK SAYS CLINTON IS A BIT OUT OF FOCUS Dr. Paul Fick, a clinical psychologist, wrote a book a few years back called "The Dysfunctional President." We talked about it on the air. Now Fick has surfaced again to go into his "I told you so act." He says that Clinton is mentally ill, and he will get worse before he gets better. He says that Clinton is a pathological liar and is addicted to sex. HILLARY PLANNING HER WAY OUT? The London Times is reporting that Hillary Clinton has used the good offices of Madeleine Albright to sound out U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan about a job when her White House residency is over. She is evidently interested in something relating to refugees or human rights. So ... just how long do you folks think that this marriage will last when Hillary no longer needs Bill for her access to power? WHAT HAS CLINTON SO UPSET - STARR'S "MOUNTAIN OF EVIDENCE" The Washington Times is reporting this morning that Ken Starr has a "mountain of evidence" that Bill Clinton lied under oath (that's a felony, folks) about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky and that he obstructed justice trying to cover it up. It's getting late, so Click Here to read this story yourself. STARR REPORT DUE SOON --- SO DEMOCRATS HAVE A NEW GAME PLAN The Clinton supporters (what a sad, pathetic lot) need a new game plan. They know that Kenneth Starr's report is going to contain a truck-load of evidence of wrongdoing on the part of their leader. So, a new game plan is needed. Look for this one. The first shots have already been fired. The Democrats are going to claim that the Starr Report is horribly flawed and biased and that the charges contained in that report have to be fully investigated. This is like a murderer claiming that the evidence against him at trial is bogus because nobody conducted an investigation of the investigation. What's next? An investigation of the investigation of the investigation? What a joke ... but it's going to work. I don't think the media is fed up with this man yet ... and they'll take this absurd "investigate the investigation" angle and run with it. CLINTONISTAS GET SLAPPED DOWN BY COURTS ... AGAIN. When the Democrats lost control of the Congress of the United States in 1993 it was a very traumatic event. They just couldn't believe it! Forty years of control, and it was gone in the span of one election. To make things worse ... Democratic office holders were bailing out right and left, and State Governorships and legislatures were abandoning the Democratic party in large numbers. Clearly, the Democrats needed to do something. Appealing to the voters wasn't going to work. The numbers of Republican voters was on the rise, Democrats on the decline. So -- a plan was hatched. If you can't elect a higher number of Democratic members of congress, fake it. Just increase the number artificially! How in the world do you do that? It's all very easy. You wait for the next census and you monkey around with the numbers of voters in the nation's inner cities. That's where the Democratic voters are. The lazy, the poor, the indolent. Here's how you do it. You inflate the numbers of residents in the traditional Democratic strongholds. To cover your artificial inflation, you use something called "statistical sampling." So, instead of actually counting the numbers of people who live in these areas, you make a guess. A guess that is subject to political manipulation. Then, lo and behold, the census shows a big increase in residents of Democratic strongholds. The State Legislatures then go into their redistricting mode and a number of new congressional districts show up in these areas where the count has been inflated through statistical sampling. The people who live in these areas then promptly elect Democrats to fill those new seats! Neat trick! But it didn't work. The Republican Party saw through this, and filed suit. Now a three judge Federal Panel has ruled that the plan is illegal. It violates the census act. Wonder what the Democrats will try next? boortz.com

To: Doughboy who wrote (3145)	8/25/1998 8:25:00 PM
From: Catfish	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

America on trial? August 24, 1998 / 2 Elul, 5758 Thomas Sowell IN A DEMOCRACY, we hate to think that the people themselves may be wrong or -- worse yet -- fatally flawed. Yet the polls of the past several months make it hard to be optimistic about the American public's understanding of the society in which they live or the dangers to that kind of society. Consider some polls. The public has a far more negative view of Monica Lewinsky than of Bill Clinton. Since it takes two to tango, why would you blame one more than the other -- and especially the one who is younger and who has no power and no responsibility to the nation at large? Kenneth Starr's approval ratings have barely made it out of single digits. He is far more disliked for bringing out the truth than Bill Clinton is for lying. Perhaps the most amazing thing of all is the sympathy poured out for Susan McDougal, a convicted criminal who was part of an Arkansas fraud that cost the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation tens of millions of dollars. She has also been indicted for embezzlement in California. Susan McDougal's stonewalling on Bill Clinton's part in the Arkansas fraud has been magically transformed into something noble by the media. More important, the public has bought it. Hey, obstruction of justice is not so bad if she's a spunky gal. None of these episodes and none of these individuals will matter in the long run. What will matter very much -- and perhaps tragically -- is if the public has degenerated to the point where they can only react emotionally to what is right under their noses, rather than understand how much this country's freedom and well-being depend on the rule of law. "A fool and his money are soon parted" is a saying that goes back to the 16th century. The tragic political history of the 20th century shows that fools and their freedom are also soon parted. Time and again, people's emotions have been manipulated to put power into the hands of despots, whether in Europe between the two world wars or in Africa and Asia afterwards. The adoration of Hitler in Germany, the cult of Stalin in Russia and Mao in China, the throngs cheering Juan Peron and Evita in Argentina are all part of the tragic montage of our century. The very techniques and images have been the same in country after country. Benign pictures of the Leader exchanging smiles with little children have been a staple in these image-building exercises, while expressions of his "concern" for "the people" have become part of the rhetoric by which the public has been induced to give him control over their lives. Yet here we are, at the end of this tragic century, admiring Hillary and Bill Clinton for playing these same political games that have been played with such disastrous results in countries around the world. Add to this the mindless psychobabble of our time that can only interpret support or opposition in terms of pop psychology and you end up with people who explain a prosecutor's carrying out his investigation as his being a man "obsessed" and think that a desire to have the laws apply to the president just shows that some people are "Clinton-haters." There is still a possibility that the public's reactions have been due to their not yet having heard the other side of the story, which can only happen when the special prosecutor files his report to Congress, laying out the evidence and connecting the dots to show the big picture. This would also be a good time for Kenneth Starr to finally break his silence -- imposed by the laws surrounding grand jury proceedings -- and explain at some length to the nation just what is and is not the purpose of his investigations. An ideal forum would be a televised, hour-long interview with an interviewer whose integrity is respected and whose style is to bring out what the guest has to say, rather than impose his own agenda on the discussion -- someone like Brian Lamb of C-SPAN or Charlie Rose of PBS, rather than the "60 Minutes" types. The public ought to be given ample opportunity to understand not only "the other side" but also the profound issues that are more important than either side or both sides. Only if the public still fails at that point do we need to give up hope. Bill Clinton may or may not go on trial, either in court or in Congress. But our generation is on trial -- and the best we can say right now is that the jury is still out. jewishworldreview.com

To: Doughboy who wrote (3145)	8/25/1998 8:30:00 PM
From: Catfish	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

Psychologist-author says Clinton mentally ill Says president needs help, cannot remain in office AUGUST 25, 1998 By David M. Bresnahan Copyright 1998, WorldNetDaily.com President Bill Clinton is mentally ill, and he will get worse before he gets better is the conclusion of a clinical psychologist who has studied him and written a book on the subject. Dr. Paul Fick, clinical psychologist and author of the book "The Dysfunctional President," is in an "I told you so" position now that Clinton has admitted his sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky. Previously criticized for his diagnosis of the president, Fick is now being deluged with calls from talk show hosts for interviews. Fick says Clinton is a pathological liar and addicted to sex. He lies about everything, not just sex, and he is so compulsive that he is always thinking about sex -- a distraction preventing Clinton from doing his job, says the author. "Whether it's drugs, alcohol, eating disorders, or sex they engage in the behavior compulsively and they think about it obsessively as a way to distract them from the emotional problems that they have. Dolly Kyle Browning (high school sweetheart) in 1988 said that Clinton told her he's a sex addict. Attorney Joseph Purvis (close personal friend of Clinton) said in 1994 that his problems are because he is the adult son of an alcoholic," said Fick. People display the symptoms from very mildly to very severely, and the president exhibits them on a very severe basis, according to Fick. There is treatment available, but the first step requires the same first step an alcoholic must take to recover -- full acceptance and admission of the problem. Once treatment begins recovery can be expected in 18 to 36 months. "There is no way he can remain in office and receive the treatment, and for that treatment to be effective," said Fick, who does not expect Clinton to admit his problem. His admission that he lied about Monica Lewinsky has brought all other allegations he has denied into question. It is expected that the more than 500-page report being prepared by Kenneth Starr will provide significant evidence to show a consistent pattern of untruthful behavior, according to a source in a position to know. The report will document a significant number of lies by Clinton, lies that involve the various women he has been accused of having sex with, and lies regarding the China connection, Vince Foster, John Huang, Whitewater and much more. The focus of the Starr report will be on Clinton's many lies, not his sexcapades, according to the source. Contrary to other reports, Monica Lewinsky does not appear in the Starr report until page 400. Some reports have claimed that the report will deal only with the Lewinsky affair, however it has been learned that the real focus of the report will be on the many instances in which Clinton has lied. Sen. Bob Kerry once said Bill Clinton is "an incredibly good liar." He is such a good liar that now many are asking, "When is he telling the truth?" "I always wanted to ask Sen. Kerry if he voted for Bob Dole or if he voted for an incredibly good liar," said Paul Fick. The lies began as a way of covering up the difficult situation in his home as a child, but they quickly became a way of life for young Bill Clinton, according to the author. He had to perfect his ability to live the lies he told to avoid being caught in the lie. Over the years, Clinton did become "an incredibly good liar" because he has been able to keep track of his lies and "remember who has been told what," according to Fick. Clinton is not living in a fantasy world, however. He is conscious of his lies, and is in fact very calculated. Fick predicted in 1994 that Clinton would have the problems he is now encountering regarding his sex life. A report over the weekend in the "Drudge Report" about the perversions engaged in by Clinton was no surprise to Fick who says he already knew about them -- and more. Rather than become addicted to alcohol like his stepfather, Clinton developed a compulsive addition to sex, according to Fick. "If he doesn't get intervention at this point in time, and say he's reinforced by the public to stay in office, I firmly believe he'll act out again before the end of his term. I wouldn't be surprised if during the course of the investigation he's already acted out," predicted Fick in a weekend interview. Steve Jones, husband of Paula Jones, claims there are at least 100 women who are prepared to testify under oath that they had sex with Clinton. Fick says that based on the interviews he has done for his analysis he is certain the list is at least that large. He said he knows of one woman who was an Arkansas state employee who regularly had sex with Clinton in the governor's office. Various polls continue to show that many Americans do not seem to think that the personal sex life of the president matters. Fick says they believe that because they do not know the actual facts regarding Clinton's condition and the effect it has on his ability to fulfill his duties. "We are not observing a man who had an affair and is remorseful for hurting his spouse. We are observing an individual who is consumed with thoughts and behavior related to sex in much the same way that a drug abuser is consumed with thoughts and behaviors about his compulsion. He seeks out fulfillment of his compulsion in much the same way the drug abuser engages in drug-seeking behavior. This is pathological behavior that requires effective treatment," said Fick in his book. The condition will get worse before it gets better, says Fick. It has a major impact on his ability to devote his time and attention to the presidency because he is either satisfying his compulsive urges or he is thinking about satisfying them. "Such urges serve to avert his attention from the underlying conflicts of the compulsion and distract him from functioning fully as president," Fick explained. "America's credibility in the foreign policy arena is eroding because of the president's credibility problems." David Bresnahan hosts "Talk USA Investigative Reports" (http://talkusa.com) and is the author of "Cover Up: The Art and Science of Political Deception." (David@talkusa.com) worldnetdaily.com

To: Doughboy who wrote (3145)	8/25/1998 11:45:00 PM
From: DMaA	Respond to of 13994

We were talking about odds-makers take on the Clinton resignation odds yesterday. Fount this. Not British, can vouch for it, but.. Miscellaneous odds: That the Republicans will lose control of the US House in 1998 to the Democrats: 3:2 AGAINST HAPPENING (40% chance of happening) That the Republicans will lose control of the US Senate in 1998 to the Democrats: 7:2E AGAINST HAPPENING (22% chance of happening) That the Republicans will lose control of both the US House and US Senate in 1998 to the Democrats: 8:1 AGAINST HAPPENING (11% chance of happening) That President Clinton will be forced to resign or impeached before the end of his term - 3:2 AGAINST HAPPENING (or, a 40% chance of happening) camelect.com