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: John Lacelle who wrote (15028)	11/16/1998 11:07:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Staunch defender? Have you joined K in knowing what I think better than I do? I don't like Clinton particularly much politically, and I think Hillary is worse. I have posted words to that effect. Which, of course, makes me a White House agent, in K's view. But I also see the "decline of the west due to Clinton" line always being pushed here as patently ridiculous. There's endless vitriolic hatred of the man spewed here in the name of, what? Objective, non-partisan civic concern? I wish Clinton wasn't so dumb as to get caught up in BJgate while being perpetually circled by the hounds of Starr. But that's all Starr's got on him, after 4+ years. Doesn't keep anybody here from bringing up whatever Drudge or the Washington Times is recycling this week as further evidence for impeachment, you guys should write your favorites on the House committee and make sure Starr gets asked about those other matters. "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 Many think it's time to move on, John. Only two years left in Clinton's term. Who do you see on the Republican side looking pretty these days? The new House leadership seems to be looking for ways to move on, too, if you guys think that's a bad idea, let them know. Dragging the thing out into the 2000 election season may play well politically to the red meat crowd, but there's danger beyond that, by most readings of the last election.

To: John Lacelle who wrote (15028)	11/16/1998 6:46:00 PM
From: sea_biscuit	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

I find it interesting that recent poll data indicates that 35% of Americans still think Bill Clinton has never lied to them. So you think that those people are stupid? At least that is what the Republicans keep saying! Perhaps it doesn't occur to some folks that the 35% felt that Clinton didn't lie to them about any issue that they care about? And that means, they are not bothered about his private life and whether or not he lied about it. And keep in mind that campaign promises that weren't kept are NOT lies! Because if it were, George Bush would be high up on the list with his, "Read my lips -- NO... NEW... TAXES!" bit. Dipy.