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: TigerPaw who wrote (36005)	2/26/1999 11:23:00 AM
From: JBL	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

Michelle, this one is written by a woman. I hope she explains it better than I do. San Francisco Chronicle February 26, 1999 Debra J. Saunders I Believe You Juanita Debra J. Saunders Friday, February 26, 1999 I DIDN'T believe Gennifer Flowers when she said she had an affair with Bill Clinton. I felt the burden of proof was on the accuser. Then I didn't even listen to her whole story because her accusation -- that they had an adulterous affair to which she had consented -- seemed so, well, cheesy. Then I read Clinton's own testimony and learned that he lied to the American people when he denied the affair. Now I believe Gennifer Flowers. (I still don't believe Clinton when he testified under oath that he only had sex with Gennifer Flowers ''once.'') I didn't believe Paula Jones' claim that Clinton dropped his drawers in front of her. I believed Clinton had a trooper invite Jones to a hotel suite, because there were corroborating witnesses. I could figure out what he wanted Jones for, but I didn't think he would be that crude. Then, her case was thrown out of court, and Clinton still paid her $850,000. Now I believe Paula Jones. I didn't know what to believe when Kathleen Willey came forward. She seemed credible. Her story fit with the Jones accusation and what we knew about Clinton and Monica Lewinsky. So I believed that what Willey said could be true. I didn't believe President Clinton when he told me he ''did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.'' I do believe he never would have rescinded that months-long lie if Lewinsky hadn't kept her dress. I believe Juanita Broaddrick's charge that Clinton sexually assaulted her in 1978. I don't believe Clinton's attorney's denial. I believe that this White House -- or Clinton's outside operatives -- will do everything possible to smear the reputations of women who tell the truth about Clinton. They'll sneer about book deals, they'll whisper about the women's twisted motives, they'll bash them for being poor. I believe Broaddrick didn't come forward because she was afraid she would not be believed if she accused Arkansas' attorney general. I believe Bill Clinton hates women. He treats them as if they were fungible, abusable and disposable. Fortunately for Clinton, women-hating (unlike racism) is an acceptable vice in modern America. Hollywood glitterati fete him when he comes to town. A casting couch don can relate to this president. A rock star who cares about the environment doesn't care how the big guy mistreats women. When Clinton comes to San Francisco, he's the toast of the town. Big donors don't refuse to attend his fund raisers. They pony up. They fawn. They get their pictures taken with him. The cream of The Special City throws big money at the women-hating president. They don't care if he betrayed his wife. They don't care if he smeared his old girlfriends. They don't care if he lied under oath before a grand jury. They don't care if his defense is that Monica serviced him, but he never gratified her. They don't care if Paula Jones told the truth. They don't care if he assaulted Juanita Broaddrick. They don't care how many more women get chewed up just so he can use them. I don't believe the National Organization for Women stands up for women. NOW released a prim statement supporting Broaddrick's credibility but asserting that her charge of a rape 21 years ago can't be proven. That didn't stop them when they went after Clarence Thomas for talking dirty 10 years before. I don't believe Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein care about women. Elected in the Year of the Woman, which was supposed to bring gender equity to the once male bastion of the Beltway, their offices had no response when asked if the Senatorettes had anything to say about Broaddrick's charge. Party biggies don't care if he abuses women. They don't care about swollen lips or torn pantyhose. They don't care about uninvited gropes down the the hall from the Oval Office. They don't care if a cad is the role model for American youth. They don't care whom he hurts. They only care about one thing. He is so good on their issues.

To: TigerPaw who wrote (36005)	2/26/1999 11:38:00 AM
From: one_less	Respond to of 67261

<<If you cannot do it, then your statements amount to nothing but faith-promoting propaganda, just as I have said all along. >> Time to duck and dive. <<I'm just too busy for you today.>> nuff said.