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.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (29884)	1/26/1999 2:49:00 AM
From: Jack Be Quick	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

<<I call myself Neocon because I identify most with those who have been called Neo- conservatives.>> Really? Son of a gun! I would never, ever have guessed that! <<Paula filed too late for a conventional harassment suit, and had to meet a higher burden by proving job retaliation.>> Once again you ignore the point actually being raised. One wonders why you bother. <<If I accused you of being a Communist because you had some friends who were Communist, had contributed to a few left- wing causes, and had once signed a petition circulated by a Communist front group, would I be making reasonable inferences, or smearing you with guilt by association and innuendo?>> Yo, Neocon! - what we can reasonably conclude from the above is that there in the Coffeshop it is time for you to switch to the decaf, and not solely because of the lateness of the hour. Sleep well and have pleasant dreams Neocon, there will be plenty of time tomorrow for guilt by association and innuendo.

To: Neocon who wrote (29884)	1/26/1999 6:52:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Oh, please. Guilt by association and innuendo? The kind of crap that's been thrown at Clinton incessantly for the last 6 year by the Clinton hatred industry? Who killed Vince Foster, anyway? The kind of crap that's still the rule around here for whatever Drudge put out lately? The heroic Drudge, who can't be bothered with the high journalistic standards of the supermarket tabloid? It's so unfair to look into the background of the Jones suit and the smart but sleazy lawyers who were behind it right from the start. They were just interested in truth and justice and the rule of law, right? Do you think those guys could stand up to the Starr Inquisition? Personally, I think they'd be good witnesses at the impeachment trial.