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: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (2866)	9/15/1998 4:54:00 PM
From: jim kelley	Read Replies (6) \| Respond to of 67261

Michelle, I think that the people who are calling for Clinton's resignation or impeachment should be prepared to tell the rest of us why they are better than he is morally. If we find them morally impure then they should have to publicly confess their sins and quit their jobs. Otherwise, they are hypocrites! The notion that the law itself is the high arbiter of morality is a cynical joke. It seems that the highest moral authority for some of these folks is the federal law. Of course, this law is made by congress which as we have seen of late is morally lax itself. One only has to tune in on the morning talk shows to know that Clinton's behavior is more the rule than the exception in this society. The morality of the news media itself is smeared by their own conduct in this matter. I was talking with one woman who claims that Starr has the same swarmy smirk as the pedophiles that she has encountered in her job. He looks like the scout master who likes little boys too much. Despite Starr's rationalizations to the contrary, he knew that the report that he delivered to congress would be made public and that it contained pornographic information designed to inflame public sentiment against Clinton. The fact that the republicans refused to allow Clinton the same privilege that they accord members of congress bespeaks to the partisan nature of Starr's enquiry. Now Starr would like to trickle out the remaining reports on his investigations so that he can screw over Clinton, the congress and the American people with its onesided innuendo. It is also interesting how political figures are asking Clinton to drop his legal defenses. This is not going to happen. They would murder him in cold blood if he complied with that demand.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (2866)	9/15/1998 11:50:00 PM
From: Dwight E. Karlsen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Uh oh. Fact error here. Orrin Hatch is after Microsoft! And hes NOT a liberal. In fact, Clinton doesnt like him. No fact errors. Orin Hatch is a politician representing Utah, home of Word Perfect Corp. (I know, WP is owned by Corel, but the operations of WP are still in Utah, though that is ending). Robert Bork is a lawyer for NSCP. Well you know lawyers, they don't care what side they're on as long as they're getting paid. But it is the Clinton administration's Justice Dept anti-trust division which is going after MSFT and INTC. Hey look, seriously I don't hold that against Clinton. He obviously isn't controlling the Justice Dept (though I bet he wishes he could). INTC and MSFT are extremely powerful companies, and small companies find it difficult to compete against them without feeling strong-armed (or actually getting strong-armed). I just think that Joel Kline's view on what the solution should be is way too extreme.