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: Borzou Daragahi who wrote (19563)	12/14/1998 11:19:00 PM
From: coug	Respond to of 67261

Borzou, Thank you for the nice post.. I am frustrated with his actions.. Somehow, he brings out the worst in people, his defenders and his critics, I'm like you.. I can NEVER align myself with his opponents, but I have helluva time sometimes supporting him.. Right now, I have to Go with his Plurality of support, which to me is so much more important than his NARROWLY defined supporters. Thanks.. the Coug

To: Borzou Daragahi who wrote (19563)	12/15/1998 1:47:00 AM
From: sea_biscuit	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 67261

Unfortunately, for decent, tolerant and enlightened people, we're once again forced to decide between the lesser of two evils, i.e. standing up for the electorate and defending the office of a mediocre and tarnished president vs. letting the bloodthirsty right score a victory and set an alarming precedent. What they're in essence doing is bringing the same tactics of political destabilization and subversion of popular will they implemented in Third World countries during the Cold War to the domestic arena. And ironically, the "lesser of the two evils" is what stands between decent, tolerant and enlightened people and an authoritarian theocracy...

To: Borzou Daragahi who wrote (19563)	12/15/1998 11:12:00 AM
From: JBL	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

<I've despised Bill Clinton and recognized him as the opportunistic snake he was since he showed up in New Hampshire back in 1992. That's what makes opposing the right's jihad against him such a tough task.> Hi Borzou, There are, without a doubt, Republicans who are extremists, and whose views border on racism, or who are plainly intolerant. However, the term "jihad" is not appropriate if you want to apply it to describe a situation where most Republican will vote to impeach Clinton in the case before us. I think you need to recognize that a majority of Republicans in the House are acting out of principle, and that most of them would also vote to impeach if a Republican President was involved in a similar situation. For if Republicans were just guided by politics, why then would they be daring to defy the will of 2/3 of the population ? Why wouldn't they let a weakened Clinton in office, instead of possibly puting Al Gore in the White House, and giving him the advantage of being the incumbent in the next Presidential race ? Is it really that most of them are simply guided by hatred for the man, or blindly following their leadership ? They are not. As unbelievable and distasteful as it may seem to some, a majority of those Republicans are voting to impeach based on their conscience. I predict that more Democrats will join them before this is over.