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: mrknowitall who wrote (10888)	10/23/1998 11:59:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Respond to of 67261

Woohoo!! Why is it you cannot defend the man from an intellectual or philosophic stance without resorting to the jejune, diversionary White House talking-points spin about past administrations? Your now ubiquitous snide finales are annoyingly trite. Your repetitious rhetorical retorts are rebarbative. So there. I don't care to defend the man, because I don't particularly care for him myself. Mostly, I think he's not a very good politician, and he demonstrated that early on. But remember, I did find my honest (presumed) Republican, no thanks to you guys. He chose, wisely, to remain anonymous, perhaps to escape the wrath of Newt. "I thought from day one, as I think today, that this was bad for the country," said one of Starr's defenders who now questions his tactics. "Sometimes you have to exercise prosecutorial discretion." Even though this defender of Starr said he believed the president was guilty of significant misconduct, he said, "the cost to the country far outweighs the value of proving it." (from nytimes.com; I agree with this unnamed Starr defender. Do you have a problem with that? Others disagree, as is their right. It's also their right to repeatedly dredge up (or Drudge up, as the case may be) every rumor and accusation that's ever been made against Clinton, regardless of how "jejune" they might be. Starr interviewed 37 Secret Service agents on Clinton's personal life, and all he got was rumors. But Starr was incompetent, and the Clinton haters here know better. Hyde's investigators will do a much more thorough job, right? Only 2 years left, though, they better get on the stick. Get on the phone to Drudge and all that. P.S. Would you care to take up my "fear mongering" about my citing "the position of the furthest fringe in an attempt to stereotype the majority of those who are far from the fringe" with those who are representing that furthest fringe position here? Or did I miss that one?