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: Dwight E. Karlsen who wrote (5623)	9/27/1998 6:55:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

Dwight, it sure sounds like somebody has a really bad case of the old black pot and kettle disease. Clinton and his supporters have taught Republicans a valuable lesson: Never* forget about politics. Push every political advantage to paint the opposition with the smear brush. . .* Much blah blah blah deleted Welcome to the new world. It's gonna be brutal. Your hero Clinton created it. . . That's one way of looking at things. I'd say Newt beat Clinton to the punch by a few years. Not to mention Richard Nixon, though he was in ill repute for a while. The "brutal new world" looks like old hat to me, on one side of the aisle anyway. Jim Wright, some puny $60k book deal- he's outta here. Newt, $6million or so from Rupert Murdoch, who just happened to have a few issues before Congress- What's the problem? And we have the delicious irony of Ken Starr, who everybody without strict partisan blinders on is beginning to see as the consummate partisan smear artist, being called the victim of a partisan smear campaign. Or to you find the voluminous lurid detail of the Starr report to be "just the facts", as you'd like them to be presented? Not to mention the roots of the whole thing in the "Arkansas Project" dirt digging expedition, a pet project of Starr's before he became the non-partisan, "just the facts" Special Prosecutor. And I suppose you found the Bush campaigns the epitome of squeaky clean, issues based politics too. Willy Horton, there was no distortion or smear tactics there, and that was 4 years before Clinton's first campaign. George Bush never tried to get personal against Clinton, either. Do you want to point out some equivalent of Willy Horton in either of Clinton's two campaigns? Lee Atwater, at least, was sort of apologetic about Willy Horton in the end. Maybe we'll see something about that from George when he faces his maker? I'm not holding my breath, personally. Brave new world indeed. We've been there a while. To repeat a line, the main parallel I see between Watergate and the current mess is the Republican dirty tricks at the core. Funny thing is, I've seen this "smear tactic" whine before, used as a defense of smear tactics, there used to be a Senator from my home state who bizarrely won two terms with it. It finally caught up to him the third time around. Smear tactics have a long history here, though, this being the home state of Joe McCarthy. He was a Republican too, as was the unnamed Senator. Oops, this is probably a little long for you Dwight, so I'll repeat one question. What Clinton campaign smear can you point to, in either '92 or '96, that was at all comparable to Bush's "Willy Horton" campaign, smear-wise? Or is this one of the usual objectivity and bias things, people you agree with are objectively presenting facts, and people you disagree with are biased smear artists? Cheers, Dan.

To: Dwight E. Karlsen who wrote (5623)	9/27/1998 11:37:00 AM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

And how about you, Michelle? Is your "Registered Democrat" card wearing a little thin these days? Eventually you may even have to swallow hard and admit that perhaps ethics in government would be a worthy thing for citizens to care about. But I'm not holding my breath. Wearing a little thin? No I dont think so. Ha Ha Ha the tapes this last week really turned the tide around here. Now the Dem candidate for governor is way ahead. You RR people really have no ability to judge public sentiment, do you? You and your sanctimonious prosecutor and the constant harping by the republicans on what a bad man our president is. Well there was an audience for it, but no more. Republicans will lose over this scandal now. And Clinton wont go down.... (sure he wont be effective in the next year but so what). Gore will win in the next election, and the Clintons will reap far more on the lecture/book circuit because of this than they would have otherwise. Bill Clinton will get divorced from Hillary too - yippee! Your hero Clinton created it, No he didnt create it, Starr created it. Which is somewhat unfortunate for the republicans because Starr more than anybody turned what could have been a political gift from above into a lesson about walking on eggshells.... wait a minute.... maybe this was a Dem coup all along. Janet Reno knew Starr was an idiot and appointed him to trash Clinton, KNOWING that Clinton was flawed but tremendously popular. Her real attempt was to expose the hypocritical RR for what they really are - a bunch of meddling busybodies with nothing more to do than dig up dirt on peoples private lives.... think she succeeded there? I do.

To: Dwight E. Karlsen who wrote (5623)	9/27/1998 11:38:00 AM
From: Zeuspaul	Respond to of 67261

>>Clinton and his supporters have taught Republicans a valuable lesson:<< It is not only Republicans who have learned a great deal from this scandal. I am sure there are many Democrats as well as Republicans who will "not remember" in court. Naive Americans are a little better informed than they were before the scandal. It's about time the little guy got a break. The guys with big bucks and fancy lawyers apparently have been using this tactic all along..we have made a giant step in the interest of fairness and justice for all. Zeuspaul