SI
SI
discoversearch

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: jbe who wrote (19572)12/15/1998 12:04:00 AM
From: MR. PANAMA (I am a PLAYER)  Respond to of 67261
 
PRESIDENTIAL PUTS.....make $$$$ as Amereeka goes down da drain....don't leave home without them....



To: jbe who wrote (19572)12/15/1998 12:14:00 AM
From: Lizzie Tudor  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 67261
 
Well jbe, all I can tell you is that Pat Robertson on the McLaughlin group echoed this same sentiment this weekend (yes I like that awful show, because I really like Eleanor -cant remember her last name-). Anyway she said the republicans would pay for going against the popular consensus in 2000. Robertson said "thats 2 years away", flippantly dismissing the topic. The tone, everything about it reminded me of their predictions prior to the November elections. They all predicted a republican landslide and Eleanor said she wasnt so sure, she was the only one to not blatantly dismiss the dems. So, my point here is I think there is arrogance on both sides - republican arrogance that the electorate is too stupid to remember these key events because they happened 12 months prior, and arrogance on the part of the dems thinking they have it made in 2000. My bet is with the dems but everybody knows that.......

Michelle



To: jbe who wrote (19572)12/15/1998 1:23:00 AM
From: sea_biscuit  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 67261
 
Yes, if it comes down to that, a protracted trial in the Senate is what Clinton should give the Republicans. That is what they fear and that is exactly what he should give them!

Also, the disparaging comments by many Republicans about Americans' attention span can be used by the Dems to good effect in the Year 2000 elections...



To: jbe who wrote (19572)12/15/1998 1:42:00 AM
From: greenspirit  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 67261
 
jbe, the real question should be. Will ignoring and defending perjury, obstruction of justice, sex harassment and witness tampering hurt the Democratic party?

The liberals in the media have worked up the elite electorate into believing the Republicans will be hurt by all this. It's their only hope to save face and the hero they voted nearly 90% to elect. My opinion, it's a big smokescreen in order to get a censure vote. Who ever heard of censure until Dan Rather and company started talking about it every night? Gee, I wonder what spin circle in the White House passed that one on to Dan and company?

Funny, I can't find censure in my copy of the constitution anywhere?

Three buzzwords the media have repeated in lockstep of late like a propaganda machine. Censure, contrite and in reference to the Republican congress "Control".

It's as transparent as the rest of their bias reporting.

Michael



To: jbe who wrote (19572)12/15/1998 7:47:00 AM
From: Axxel  Respond to of 67261
 
GOP "fade away?" It won't "fade" away; it looks like it will be thrown out on its ass with its rear end bumping down the stoop. So we at least agree on the semantics, right? A rather inglorious end to the GOP...and I, for one, think it unfortunate...for everyone. BUT THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN. And there is nothing anyone can do about it, because the Republicans are totally incapable of the vision necessary to understand what they are doing to THEMSELVES.



To: jbe who wrote (19572)12/15/1998 11:10:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 67261
 
Polls Find Most Americans Still Oppose Impeachment and Now Frown on the G.O.P. nytimes.com

To break briefly from our usual substantive debate, another poll with a somewhat different take. Like computer standards, the nice thing about polls is there's so many to pick and choose from.

"The Republicans don't seem to believe in polls; the only thing they seem to believe in is impeachment," Irene Bump, one of the poll respondents, said in a follow-up interview Monday. Mrs. Bump, a Democrat from Jacksonville, Fla., who is a retired grocery store owner, said, "My mind hasn't changed. The committee didn't handle it at all. It was a one-sided, partisan affair. It was awful. Nobody had a say except the Republicans."

Claire Reiss, 62, a poll respondent from Los Angeles who is an independent, said: "The unfairness of the hearings and the one-sidedness of it, and the self-righteousness of the Republicans, immediately changed my mind to thinking the whole situation was ridiculous." Mrs. Reiss, an engineering surveyor, added, "I'm embarrassed to think how ridiculous our country looks in the eyes of the world."


Oh, but everybody will have a say in the 6 hours the Republicans have allocated for debate on the floor. They have great respect for our Constitution, you know.

"Obviously in a political system there is some risk in doing something that is totally out of favor with the majority of voters," said Robert Teeter, a Republican pollster in Michigan. "The absolute power in this country lies with the voters. But is the Republican Party going to be forever blackballed? I don't view that as a great risk."

Of course, there's quite a difference between 2 years and forever. Apparently, Teeter feels lucky. It'd be nice for Republicans if Clinton went quietly, but why should he? Yes, Nixon did. After the tapes were finally turned over unedited, (which was after the bipartisan House Judiciary vote), Nixon was told he had maybe 100 votes in the House against impeachment. Senate didn't look good, either.

Clinton should do what's good for the country? Just like the adulterous papal knight Hyde has done now, with his current bleating about lying and perjury in stark contrast to his Iran-contra pronouncements? It's all politics. Nobody seems to want to take up the challenge and explain how this "non-partisan, professional" impeachment inquisition is going to get us the "moral leadership" we allegedly crave in the next election.

While Republicans insist they are guided by principle, many politicians and authorities on polling said they had never seen such a situation where members of a party so brazenly resisted the will of the people. Such a move, many said, is fraught with peril.

"The results have been amazingly consistent; these are very solid preferences," said Jon Krosnick, a professor of psychology and political science at Ohio State University. "It is quite surprising to see such a striking movement of the Republicans in Congress going in exactly the opposite direction of what the public seems to want."

Saying it was "tremendously risky" for Republicans to move toward impeachment, Krosnick said: "The Democrats have been enjoying for 30 years the fact that they have not had on their record a Democratic president who was thrown out of office. The attempt here is to balance the scales."


Revenge? My, what an honest Constitutional motive. Unfortunately, there was this non-partisan element to the Nixon hearings that hasn't been much evident in the current inquest. A subtle difference? Certainly for the substantive debate crowd here.

Still, the Republicans' image seems to be suffering the most. Thirty-seven percent of Americans said they think worse of the Republican Party because the votes on the committee to impeach Clinton were all cast by Republicans. In response to another question, 62 percent said Republicans voted to impeach Clinton mostly because they wanted to damage Clinton and the Democrats. Only 29 percent said Republicans voted that way because the charges were warranted.

The survey found that Americans do not like the idea of lawmakers ignoring their objections. Sixty-two percent said in voting on impeachment, members of Congress should pay a lot of attention to what people think.

John Adams, a poll respondent from LaBelle, Fla., put it this way: "One of the Republicans on the committee said that they don't have to do what the public wants, it is what they know is right that matters. I am extremely disgusted by the stance these elected officials have taken." Adams, 58, is an independent who opposes impeachment.


Nah, these people are all confused. What they need is some Christian clarity delivered to them on how filthy their opinion is.

Cheers, Dan.