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: Daniel Schuh who wrote (32897)	2/9/1999 6:36:00 AM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Daniel, here's an article I'm sure you will enjoy...:-) Michael _____________________________________________________________________ A tale of two thugs Two thugs got their due this weekend. One wears a suit and uses the telephone, power lunches and the cover of the White House to destroy people. The other is a violent street thug and uses his fists (and on one occasion his teeth) to destroy people. They may seem different, but Sidney J. Blumenthal and Mike Tyson are cut from the same cloth: Common thugs who are nothing more than threats to society. Blumenthal, the White House smearmeister whose sole job is to spread dirt on real and perceived enemies of William Jefferson Clinton was a pseudo-journalist whose only claim to fame was an undying devotion to spread the lies of the President. So the White House hired him to do the same out of 1600 Pennsylvania. Often working with fellow mudslinger James Carville, Blumenthal smeared Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr, White House volunteer Kathleen Willey, Judiciary Chairman Henry Hyde, Clinton critic Dan Burton and -- of course -- Monica Lewinsky. And the man who lies for a living lied whenever confronted with questions about his actions. Blumenthal swore he never did any of it. Which didn't get him into trouble as long as he lied to reporters. He was paid to lie to the press. But Blumenthal also lied under oath: First to Ken Starr's grand jury and then to the Senate impeachment trial of Clinton. He swore he never, ever, tried to smear Monica Lewinsky. That didn't sit right with British journalist Christopher Hitchens, who went public late last week, recounting a lunch with Sid the Squid where Blumenthal tried to paint young Monica as a sex-crazed stalker who was trying to nail a reluctant Bill Clinton. Hitchens told his story on Meet the Press Sunday. Sid phoned in a lame denial through his attorney. Suddenly the mouth that had spilled so much bile about so many was silent. Senators from both parties are now demanding a Justice Department investigation of Sid and his lies. The man who lies for a living may have told one too many. Up in Maryland, boxer Mike Tyson got tossed into the clink for assaulting two motorists after his car was in a minor traffic accident. Tyson, who is on parole for a previous rape charge, just regained his boxing license after biting off a piece of the ear of another boxer. Now he may be out of boxing forever. Tyson's imprisonment is good for boxing which, like too many sports today, is dominated by former street hoods. Tyson deserves what he got. In fact he deserves more. So does Sidney J. Blumenthal. Thugs Tyson and Blumenthal should be punished for their crimes. Along with a few others we can think of.

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (32897)	2/9/1999 1:13:00 PM
From: Les H	Respond to of 67261

You're a liar everytime you change your mind, Daniel. What a hypocrite. When other people change their postions in response to consultation or negotiation with other politicians or people, that makes them a liar in your eyes. (Well, Clinton does all that and more without external stimuli. He just revises history. The same as you.)

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (32897)	2/9/1999 1:20:00 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

<<The end is near...>> Yikes, can you spare some rice for a Y2K bro?

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (32897)	2/9/1999 3:12:00 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Actually, yes, the rate of compliance improved, and people stopped grasping for shelters. Also, since the cuts were supposed to increase economic activity, the subsequent growth was part of the deal. And yes, although Reagan did very well in getting cuts through, the specific supply- side plan, perhaps unrealistically, included deeper cuts. I'm sorry that I intruded into your attack on Les, but I felt some responsibility, having corrected him myself, to indicate that I thought that some mistakes were pretty trivial. I have no grudge, I just wish you had been a little less eager to score points, and a little more eager to explore issues. When you did so, I think it was productive. And you may be right about the "kinder, gentler" effort, but I will linger awhile longer...