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: Who, me? who wrote (7100)	10/4/1998 2:12:00 PM
From: dougjn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

I love the way the right wing repeat again and again that the issue is not the sex, and then fulminate with things such as: <<Again, it was Bill Clinton that got the BJ >> <<obstructed justice, tampered with witnesses and abused his power!!!>> Poppycock. Not remotely demonstrated or proven. Didn't happen. He could easily have told Bettie Curry to do many things to cover it all up, which he didn't do. When the story first broke on Drudge, Clinton talked to her to find out what she did, and didn't know. To see what he could and couldn't deny, to the press. How much would leak out. Big deal. It's an enormous gasbag moralist to do, about very, very little. The size of the media story makes it seem vastly bigger than it is. (In this country. For everybody else the only big story is that we're making such a big thing about so very little.) Doug

To: Who, me? who wrote (7100)	10/4/1998 2:21:00 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 67261

Hi Who, me?; Don't worry too much about this scandal. It plays into the hands of the Republicans no matter which way things go. By the way, did you see the latest accusations from Ross Perot? Drug use in the White House! Oh my! Now that the dam has burst, more rats are going to drop a dime on Clinton. These guys are probably telling stories to Starr even as we speak. People are not as scared of his operatives as they used to be. Fame and book deals are calling. The end will arrive sometime in '99, I expect. In any case, what will the history books say about Clinton? He hasn't got diddly worth of legislation passed. The Republican congress hasn't helped, but he wasn't able to get stuff through the Democratic congress that he had when he was elected, either. About all he has done is administer over the dismantling of the Democratic party all over this nation. Anytime you start feeling like the republic is in danger of going under, just remember back to what things were like back in '92 when Clinton was first elected. (pre-Newt) Back then the Demos got most of the campaign contributions, now the Repubs do. Control of congress has switched. Governorships have switched. The Democratic party has been destroyed for the next 10 to 15 years, just like Nixon destroyed the Republican party for 10 or 15 years. (Reagan's election was an exception.) If the Democrats want to protect their boy based on legalisms, claims of "everybody does it," and minimizations, let them. If they want him as their leader, let them follow him. Gore would be no better politically for this country. And the people will not make the Clinton mistake again in a long, long time. -- Carl