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: JBL who wrote (36925)	3/5/1999 8:27:00 AM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

This is a great article. I especially find the contrast between the Thomas case and the Clinton case quite interesting. JLA

To: JBL who wrote (36925)	3/5/1999 9:39:00 AM
From: Johannes Pilch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

>Yet one woman's word is enough to prosecute a rapist.< Not anymore. Were men to hold rape accusers to the same standard liberal women have held Broaddrick, the liberal women could not complain against it. Men merely need cynically ignore the accuser if the accused supports their causes. Should a woman ever accuse a conservative of rape, and should there be any sort of apparent loophole or oddity in her charge (“why didn't she file a report?”), we can now ignore that woman, at the most calling her a slut who wanted it. I suggest in the future that women who fall victim to rape say nothing about it, unless they have videos of the assault, even then the perpetrator can possibly claim he was a participant in a bit of rough, but consensual sex. Liberal women are simply not to be trusted because they have been shown without doubt to have used sex (not lying about sex but pure sex) as a political weapon. They have practically run naked in the streets concerning silly allegations about pubic hairs and whatnot, but have done no such thing regarding allegations of rape. They have done this simply out of political expedience, and so we see they have no ideals they deem worth defending regardless of the circumstances. They have no principles and therefore could again easily use sexual allegations dishonorably in the future. Had we seen them assault Clinton as stridently as they assaulted Thomas, then their integrity here would have lent merit to their claims of injustice. They should have breathed fire beginning even with Paula Jones-- certainly with Kathleen Willey. But now after very many females, all of which have claimed abuse at the hand of Bill Clinton, we see liberal women do not really care about injustice to women. They care about protecting their John. Business must be good. If the liberal ladies themselves do not care about what in the past they have called injustice, then it should not matter to anyone else. Indeed, we are all justified in wondering why the liberal women would ever get in a huff about anything if they can't get upset about rape.