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 (1181)	1/3/1999 9:32:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2390

Bob, if you wonder why I don't really try to debate people wanting Clinton removed, go back to the old Sanity forum. At least half the posts there the last few days are 1-line insults from JLA. And that's been the dominant spirit of the pro-impeachment crowd as long as I've participated in these forums. I tend to post excerpts from the press because I have no desire to think much and write something substantial only to be called an idiot or worse for no other reason than the fact that I'm not conservative Republican and anti-Clinton in my politics. And then have the post lost in a sea of hatred from people who call me a "partisan hater". You want to give me a lecture about my "behavior on these threads", that's fine, after being called a "fecal minded pot of mucus", there's not much anybody can direct at me that's going to make any difference. The political fact is that, barring some truly unforeseen revelation, the Senate trial is going to be mercifully brief and predictable, nobody seems much interested in rehashing at great length all the lurid details of the Starr report just to give Henry Hyde a chance to whine some more. Of course, nobody ever tires of reciting every other accusation ever raised against Clinton, despite the fact that Starr couldn't find any evidence worth presenting. You can go back to the other thread if you want to hear again why the lack of evidence doesn't matter. Then, if you want, you can give me the lecture about "defending a statement rationally". Who cares, by most indications the trial will wrap up quickly, and then we'll just have to go back to the normal stream of Drudge and Washington Times garbage without the constitutional crisis in the background to make anybody but the fringe take it seriously. I hope that people will move forward with the upcoming Presidential campaign, but every time I bring that up I'm told I'm going off topic from the only "rational" point of these forums, regurgitated Clinton hatred.