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: Bob Lao-Tse who wrote (1133)	1/2/1999 10:48:00 AM
From: Rose Rose	Respond to of 2390

Bob, you wrote -- >>However, your original statement to Bill implied that your causes were objectively worthy, and that the only reason he (or anyone) would not support them is that they are "selfish."<< I really think this PARTICULAR debate (if it could be deemed such) is a little too silly for you to waste your time with. The argument began when Bill stated that I was a selfish hypocrite because I did not donate all my money to "my" causes. I showed him the ludicrousness of his statement, and he backed down a bit but still maintained that I was a selfish hypocrite because I spent money on things such as my S.I. membership instead of "my" causes. His stance was utterly absurd , and not worthy of a serious reply. Nor will he ever get a serious reply from me on any subject until he learns to be reasonable. Rose

To: Bob Lao-Tse who wrote (1133)	1/2/1999 11:35:00 AM
From: Rose Rose	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2390

Bob -- this is a reply to a post you made on another thread; S.I. was apparently in a bad mood and didn't feel like posting it a few minutes ago <G>. Bob, you recently posted that opinion should not be presented as fact, and yet you write: >>Personally, I found the most compelling and indisputable statement to be: "...William Jefferson Clinton has undermined the integrity of his office, has brought disrepute on the Presidency, has betrayed his trust as President, and has acted in a manner subversive of the rule of law and justice, to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.<< But HOW has he undermined the integrity of his office; HOW has he brought disrepute to the Presidency; HOW has he betrayed his trust as President; HOW has he acted in a manner subversive of the rule of law and justice, and HOW has he injured the people of this country? Understand, I am not saying that none of the above statements are true. I AM saying that those statements in and of themselves can not be termed "indisputable" because in fact they can be disputed very easily. Only facts are indisputable. And the Republicans seem to be mighty short of facts these days. Rose