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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Grainne who wrote (24926)	9/15/1998 2:49:00 AM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Christine, I wouldn't be a great deal more comfortable with Kerry or Lieberman than I would be with Gingrich or Thurmond. The issue (to me) is less ideology than the inherent weakness of a potential President who has never prevailed in any national election, and has no national mandate. The line that jumped out at me from the article you cited was about "rising disgust". Is there any? The impression I get is that most Americans are more disgusted at the reaction than the action. OK, he concealed an affair. Like many, many, Presidents before him. The main difference is that previous opposition parties have hesitated to make much of dirty linen because they knew they were every bit as vulnerable, and that exposing this sort of thing does more damage to the edifice overall than it does to either party. Nor do I think he used her. I think she enjoyed every second of it, and had the ego ride of her life. They used each other, and each of them got what they wanted. The same thing, in fact: cheap thrills and self-gratification. What else is new? I find the report to be a ridiculous anticlimax, and talk of impeachment pretty close to absurd. Reagan and LBJ did their damndest to start wars, and lied through their teeth about it; everyone looked politely in the other direction. Now we take a relatively successful President with huge worldwide prestige (before this started) and throw him out of office, leaving a leadership vacuum that threatens the entire world, because he had 10 blow jobs and said he didn't? OK, he lied. If you lined up the House and the Senate and asked each one if they'd ever had sex outside marriage, bent the campaign rules, lied to the people, etc., how many of them would swear they hadn't? How many of them would be telling the truth? Probably not enough to get a quorum for the gang of four. THEY ALL DO IT!!! They always have. And we've always followed the rule that they can get away with it as long as they keep the ship in order. Now we've changed the rule, and I'd guess opened a terrific can of worms in the process. Next time around we get a Republican, and the Democrats will dig until they've found something to hound him out of office with. And pretty soon the parties will start selecting candidates not for their ability to do things right, but for histories of doing nothing wrong. And the only way to find someone who's never done anything wrong is to find someone who's never done anything. Then we get somebody like the Peter Sellers character in "Being There". Which will, I assume, make everyone happy. For a very little while. I get the feeling that I'm repeating myself... Steve