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: ILCUL8R who wrote (7643)	10/2/1998 1:05:00 PM
From: Les H	Respond to of 13994

He is the first Democrat to get into the White House since the Moral Majority/Religious Right emerged in 1980. As a corrupt governor of a small Southern state, he also has a lot of skeletons in his closet ( realchange.org ) that make him a target for the opposition. You can also get background at pbs.org and select "Once Upon a Time in Arkansas".

To: ILCUL8R who wrote (7643)	10/2/1998 1:35:00 PM
From: Rick Slemmer	Respond to of 13994

Richard: For an outsider's view of the Clinton legacy, try some of the articles written by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard. He was the Washington correspondent for the (London) Telegraph, and he's been digging into Clintondirt for years. His past articles can be found at telegraph.co.uk RS

To: ILCUL8R who wrote (7643)	10/2/1998 2:19:00 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 13994

Hi Richard Westenskow; About why Clinton raises the right-wing's hackles... It's not that his policies are that left-wing. In fact, Gore is far to the left of Clinton, and much more difficult to manipulate. Clinton has allowed the cutting of old growth timber out here in Washington State, and really hasn't done much with the EPA. But you don't see the right wing carrying on much about Al Gore. Gore's got a couple of skeletons hanging around, but they are skeletons of the size and number of Newt Gingrich's. That is, they are pretty minor stuff. Sure, he tried to take medicine public, but any Democrat, just about, would have tried the same thing. And anyway, he failed. Clinton's policies are not that disimilar to Carter's in terms of where they are in the political spectrum. They were both southern governors. But Carter was treated pretty kindly. So why is the right wing all hot to pot Clinton? The first reason is that Clinton is such an easy target. While the other politicians have done suggestions of book deals or minor fund raising violations, the rumors around Clinton are far, far more numerous, and go so far as murder and drug dealing. There really isn't any comparison. Clinton has had most of his buddies convicted of crime and put in jail. In addition, the other leading Democrats have some sort of redeeming service to their country. Carter served in the Navy. Gore in Vietnam (for the army, unlike Hanoi Jane, who served, well, the Vietnamese.) As compared to Clinton, who apparently did nothing but protest his country (keeping plausible deniablity, as usual) and work for the government. (And briefly taught law. Hahahahahaha.) Clinton is a lot better for the Republican party as an incumbent. He keeps the party from doing anything really stupid, and he raises money for them like no party member has ever done. In addition, he has drained the Democratic coffers. In 1996, he did the same thing that Nixon did: He used up party funds ensuring his own election at the expense of the local races. In addition, since the '94 debacle, his policies have not been much averse to the Republicans. Gore would be much worse for the Republicans. Of course the Democrats would have to suffer the shame of a President having to resign, but that would be a lot better than having to admit that he is their leader. My guess is that you will see the Democrats trying to convince Clinton to resign, while the Republicans leave him twisting in front of the Senate. The Republicans have all the time in the world to convict him, and a nearly infinite number of charges to explore. They could easily delay an impeachment vote (in the senate) until close enough to the '00 elections to leave the stench still in the air. Sure the Democrats are talking about "backlash". This is merely whistling past the graveyard. Their own leaders have asked the President to quit trying to deny his lies. They know that if he admits to perjury he has to leave. They want to see him go. The White House spin on all this is different. They have completely ignored the calls from Democratic leaders asking for Clinton to give up the legal defenses. Instead, like the Clinton supporters on this thread, they are claiming no criminal violations, and therefore, no impeachment. -- Carl