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.

Pastimes : Impeachment=" Insult to all Voters" -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RavenCrazy who wrote (616)	12/22/1998 5:36:00 PM
From: Andrew Martin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2390

Raven, if Clinton had been charged with lying about the FBI files with taped conversations from one of his accomplices don't you think CNN, etc. would also be detailing his involvement in a graphic manner? It is not the subject of his lies or the manner of their description which is the issue here. Clinton is being impeached/tried soley for his response to allegations made against him regarding sex. The subject of the lying and obstruction of justice is not the issue since the responses by the President are illegal and impeachable in and of themselves. The graphic detailing is meant to reveal Clinton's lying not his sexual behavior. Nobody, but nobody gives a darn about his private life so long as he doesn't use the public office to protect and secure private interests. Unfortunately, that's just what he did and he manipulated the legal system in doing so. Do you think he'll tell the truth about the FBI files? As for your slipping-in the criticism of Reagan allow me to address your arguing points: 1) "Thousands of dead Central Americans" (murders) were done by their own governments fighting armed, socialist rebellions against these countries by Cuban and Nicaraguan-led insurgencies. This hardly compares to Clinton's causing the deaths of over 240,000 Iraqi children under the age of 5 through his use of punitive civil sanctions against the Iraqi population. These particular sanctions are likely done as a ready-made pretext for bombing when the Iraqis "violate" the sanctions. You will note in UN documentation the only verified violations were on the humanitarian sanctions. The policy seems to keep Saddam as the ready made "enemy" of brother Bill. This is what the Arabs, French, Russians and Chinese already think of his Iraq policy. 2) "lies over Iran-Contra" -for what? Well, the results are in: 1, The end of the Iran-Iraq war; 2, return of US hostages from Lebanon, and 3, Democratic elections in Nicaragua. Sounds like a success story to me. You should be proud to see the nation's leadership sticking its neck out for the welfare of others and democracy -instead of using their office for their own personal gratification. 3) "the failed economy of trickle down". You're living in the economy Reagan and Bush built. As for the debt -the majority came from the social welfare additions added by the Democratic Congress(es). You do remember Reagan's shutting down the government to protest the Democratic expenditures? It was oft stated if the economy was helped the people would have better jobs and the taxes would be paid off to lower the debt. This is the environment we live in now, thankfully secured by a proactive Republican Congress continuing the 'Reagan Revolution'. 4) "and the near collapse of social civility in caring for those who could not care for themselves" by politicians who raid the Social Security Fund to get the money for their own programs. All of them are guilty of that. Clinton is just the most hypocritical of the lot since he goes on to pine about how it must be "secured for the future" whilst he's taking from it today.

To: RavenCrazy who wrote (616)	12/22/1998 5:37:00 PM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 2390

nor do I receive assistance from them. Frankly, I doubt that. Our government is so far-reaching that virtually everybody (except possibly a hermit in Montana) gets assistance of some kind from them. No student loans? No HUD guaranteed mortgages? No federally guaranteed flood insurance? Don't work for a company that gets corporate welfare which trickles down to your benefit? Don't buy tobacco which is cheaper than it should because of federal subsidies, or any food which is supported by marketing boards, subsidized water, etc.? The big difference is that the poor get their assistance directly; the rich are clever enough to make it less obvious. And I'm not a socialist, or flaming liberal, or any of that. In fact, I voted for Reagan. Twice. And would again if he were still the man he was then. But I'm realistic, and I hope honest about things as they are, not as I wish they were. A Huskie should have been taught to think straight! GO HUSKIES. BEAT AIR FORCE.