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 : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sea_biscuit who wrote (27532)	1/2/1999 11:34:00 AM
From: Grainne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Dipy, first of all you misquoted me. I believe the phrase I used was "punishable by impeachment and possible conviction" and I don't see anything wrong with saying that. Do you really believe that Clinton would not feel that he had been punished if he is removed from office? Or that impeachment itself is not a punishment for a man who wanted to go down in history as a very good president? Is it possible for you to write a civil post without being rude and condescending? I am afraid people here will soon just start ignoring your posts unless you can be reasonably polite, and also reasonable in your arguments, using facts instead of slurs. As an example, Paula Jones' social class, hairstyle, and whether she ever lived in a trailer park should have nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not it is true that Bill Clinton sexually harassed her, and yet you and other lovely feminist Democrats like James Carville used character assassination to discredit her. I do have a problem with feminists when they assume that only college-educated, upper-middle-class women are like them, or deserve to the protected by the same laws that they are. You have also assumed, apparently, that I am some sort of right-wing member of the Christian coalition, where in fact I am a liberal Democrat and have no religious beliefs whatsoever, and in fact argue with Christian coalition proponents here on a number of issues. I simply believe that Bill Clinton does not have the moral character to be president at this point, and that he has violated the public trust and made a mockery of his office, dragging it and all of us through some very smelly mud. I have a teenaged daughter, and find it really hard to explain truthfulness and moral values to her when the public example is so counter to basic honesty and decency. I can say that obfuscations like "it depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is" do not go far in our household at winning arguments. Drudge, on the other hand, I find refreshing. I tend to like people who stir things up, and he certainly does. You may remember that he broke the Monica Lewinsky story, although Newsweek and several other more reputable publications were working on it. The story that is on Drudge's web site at the moment refers to a thirteen-year-old black boy who may have been fathered by Clinton during a three-way sex encounter with Clinton and two black prostitutes. This is a child whose pictures were on the cover of a tabloid in 1992; he is adorable and certainly resembles Clinton. Of course we do not know whether this story is true, but according to Drudge, there is a DNA test for paternity in process, and we will be able to find out. According to Richard Gooding, the writer who is doing the story, the child's mother passed a lie detector test, but we really will not know whether there is any validity to this until the results are released. I am not going to waste much time on this unless I find out that it is true. I must say that one family value I do support is parents taking responsibility for their children, regardless of the circumstances of their birth. Of course it is the height of stupidity and recklessness for a married man not to wear a condom when having sex with two prostitutes, but hey, that does sound a lot like our Billy! I guess we will know soon enough. I feel sorry for Clinton because his childhood was a painful and abusive experience for him. He is very bright and had enormous potential, but it must have been obvious to him by early adulthood that some of his sexual wanderings were less than ethical and might come back to haunt him. He seems to leave ruined lives in his path; surely the decent part of him must feel horrible about the damage he has done. I had an abusive childhood and got enough therapy to lead a reasonably normal adulthood; this is not an impossible accomplishment. But ultimately, no matter how much you have been damaged it is your own responsibility to create a life that is livable, and he did not. I think that is a tragic waste of his potential. I am just tired, though, of having his pathology thrust on the entire nation.

To: sea_biscuit who wrote (27532)	1/2/1999 1:45:00 PM
From: Graystone	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

Dipy....do or Complete morons Complete morons generally hang out on the AZNT thread, we don't see them over at this thread, much. Only a complete moron would expect anyone to believe Clinton. An "incomplete moron" would actually think Clinton didn't do anything wrong and attempt to defend this position. So which one are you Dipy...do tell us. People who actually think things through on a basic* level come up with some incontrovertible truths, all of which reflect very poorly on Mr. Clinton.*