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: jbe who wrote (6729)	9/22/1998 6:57:00 PM
From: Rick Slemmer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13994

Ah, the Grammar Lab! That's where we've met before. Rick, if you will look at my message again, you will see that I was not throwing stones at anyone. I was only summarizing the position that most "Clinton supporters" seem to be taking. True. However, the supporters are too often blinded into thinking that the president's private life is the core issue, not the basis for establishing a pattern of sexual misconduct central to the Jones lawsuit. To characterize the first Starr Report as nothing more than a narrative of Clinton's tawdry adventures is to miss the point entirely. It now appears that Clinton lied under oath in the Jones deposition, and that's how the Tripp/Lewinsky/Willey phase was opened. As for the zealots on both sides, take a look at the Yahoo page on impeachment. Every last one of the sites listed there is rabidly anti-Clinton. I think it is fair to say that the anti-Clinton forces are better organized (and better funded) than the pro-Clinton forces. That tends to be true of the right wing generally. Yes. As a bonus, many of us "zealots," (see how I put the comma inside the quotes?) feel we have justice on our side. This raises an interesting question: If the websites listed on Yahoo! are universally anti-Clinton, where are the representatives of the 66% we hear support the President? RS