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: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (35028)	2/22/1999 11:17:00 PM
From: Dwight E. Karlsen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Are you saying it's okay to rape someone if it's a "private setting" like a hotel room? Is that what you would define a "private" behaviour? Or maybe you consider all rapes to be private behaviour. I never thought that I would actually see your argument in defense of rape. Amazing...............

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (35028)	2/22/1999 11:26:00 PM
From: JBL	Respond to of 67261

<You don't seem to understand one important point. You cannot differentiate between public and private behavior. Public behavior is what matters to everybody. Private behavior is private. There is one class of men that cannot seem to differentiate the two, and those imo are guys that don't view women as anything more than bedroom playtoys and baby factories. These are the guys from the far right.... the guys here are like that. Notice their wives, girlfriends etc are all a bunch of losers? (of course, not according to THEM ha ha)> Michelle, Private behavior is not private if it is criminal. No ammount of argumentation on your part can prove otherwise. Clinton can have sex with his dog 10 times a day on his desk in the Oval Office, and I wouldn't care. Clinton may well have been trapped by the Jones Lawyers for the Lewinsky affair, but you know what, sexual harassment laws, signed by this President, allowed them to ask him about his sexual behavior, and this entrapment was legal. If we do not like the law governing sexual harassment cases, and how they are prosecuted in a court, then let's change these laws, but we cannot disreguard them. Clinton, of all men, knew the risks he was taking. He took those risks, got caught, lied through his teeth, and engaged in criminal conduct in order not to pay the price. I suspect he did so because of his past as a sexual predator. I'm sorry that you consider all of us who cannot accept his actions as being political or religious zealots, keen to keep their wifes in chains in the kitchen. (If it can help you change your mind, my wife is an VP in a Multinational Company and travels the world over). I would have no problem voting for a black Democrat woman for President if she had the qualifications and integrity necessary for the job. However nothing will change my mind as to the fact that Clinton is a least a felon, and likely a criminal that needs to be locked up for the good of this country.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (35028)	2/22/1999 11:51:00 PM
From: Dan B.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

>>You cannot differentiate between public and private behavior<< Yes I can. You've defined it. Clinton's acts in court against Jones meets your definition IMHO. >>the guys here are like that. Notice their wives, girlfriends etc are all a bunch of losers? (of course, not according to THEM ha ha) << Let's see, you assume without evidence that the "guys" here have lied about their wives success. You build a fantasy to suit yourself built out of whole cloth, and your argument thus could scarcely be weaker. Hill "felt" she had a "professional" claim you say? She continued to work and followed him around in her work. Oh boy...she sure had a case...geez! >>the guys here are like that. Notice their wives, girlfriends etc are all a bunch of losers? (of course, not according to THEM ha ha) ...I don't think they should have done what they did to him, but all is fair in politics, just as it is fair that the feminists support the popular Clintons." The public sees that Democrats did what they did to Thomas...and like you they don't like what was done to him, like him or not. Clinton is popular. The public wants him to stay on as President. However, the public believes Clinton is guilty of both crimes as charged by the House of Representatives- while few believe Thomas is guilty of a crime at all. The public understands hypocrisy...One of these two was MORE unjustly attacked by a partisan congress than the other...Democrats ought to ease up on calling Republicans sex police; The public obviously knows Clinton was at least actually guilty of crimes, and if Democrats want to keep playing this crap, they'll do it to their own detriment. IMHO. The general distrust of Politicians won't be turned against one party over the likes of this issue involving these facts which have in fact convinced the public of the President's guilt.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (35028)	2/23/1999 2:15:00 AM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 67261

There was an outcry, Michelle, and he was confirmed. If I kill my wife, is that public or private? If I were president, should I remain in office? Paula Jones alleged workplace related issues, Kathleen Willey alleged assault, and Broaddrick alleges rape. But hey, the man is popular, so who cares? "All is fair in politics": the corruptest standard of all.