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: Machaon who wrote (19349)	12/14/1998 3:56:00 PM
From: Yoav Chudnoff	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

I figured it out - if the Democrats are called Tax and Spend Liberals, the Republicans must be Juris Prudence and Spend Happy Conservatives (over 130 million dollars and still counting .... totally cool) when it comes to investigating anything Clinton ....

To: Machaon who wrote (19349)	12/14/1998 4:55:00 PM
From: RJC2006	Respond to of 67261

<<<So, what's your point? Do you expect the President to have to pay for sex? <<<As long a Clinton continues to do the exceptional job that he is doing, I don't think think that he should be forced to pay for his "fringe benefits". >> Gee Robert, as you are such a devout Constitutionalist I think you should lobby for a Constitutional Convention so that you can get that wrote in!

To: Machaon who wrote (19349)	12/14/1998 11:23:00 PM
From: Dan B.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

Actually, that's pretty good humor! Good one. Really. LoL. And if he quits doing a good job, let's make him pay for it! Or better yet, let's require the President to father a child by a virgin once a week throughout his term- after all, the President should be one of our finest citizens and he should procreate often and improve the gene pool! The point is obviously that evidence mounts that few if any claims from women against him can be denied credibility. The man is a sexual predator of sorts. The point is that Democrats are thoroughly disgusted with him on moral grounds. It is simply significant that he would partake of a gal who was only two years older than the current age of his own daughter. Which is why the public won't fry the Republicans for going through with this. Take one sexually overactive male, make him President, have him lie through his teeth over an incident in which he didn't even get any- thereby destroying the reputation of Paula Jones so he could pretend he isn't what he is, and I hate to tell you, but few are going to ultimately give a poop what happens to him. I don't even want to get into whether he has actually done a good job. Suffice it to say that it's debatable. Sigh.