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 (39254)	3/18/1999 11:41:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

Occam's razor cuts both ways. "Guileless Paula Jones" is arguable. The bit about her "simple litigators" is directly contradicted by, of all people, her "simple litigators". If you want to write that all off as "insinuating", that's ok, but it doesn't conform to Occam's razor as I understand it. P.S. Don't worry about how far gone I am, I assure you I don't take anything said here the least bit seriously. Last "substantive debate" I'd call anything I've posted on politics is when I was saying before the election that impeachment should be addressed, and candidates should state whether they thought the Starr report justified impeachment and conviction. Then, it was all so "unknowable". The idea of a real debate was a joke then, and it's even more of a joke now.