Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Bill Clinton. It ain't what it seems.

Expand Messages
  • Susan Donahue
    Dear Wings...I was away for a short time and have come back to see that you have stirred the pot nicely. I think you know my political leanings, so I won t go
    Message 1 of 13 , Jun 4, 2005
      Dear Wings...I was away for a short time and have come back to see
      that you have stirred the pot nicely. I think you know my political
      leanings, so I won't go into that, but in light of the recent
      revolation of the identity of "Deep Throat" who used his access to
      information in his role as the number two man in the FBI to bring
      down a president because he was passed over for a promotion, I
      wonder if people are giving second thoughts to their feelings about
      one Linda Tripp who got fed up with what her president was doing and
      spilled the beans. All things considered, and in light of what
      happened to some political foes in Arkansas, Linda Tripp may very
      well have saved the life of a young intern who was too young and
      dumb to just walk away from a very charming man with a great deal of
      power. It seems wrong that she was so harshly delt with by the same
      press which is treating an FBI leaker, who broke every rule in the
      book, as some sort of hero.

      Suzianne

      P.S. For what it is worth, I think Bill Clinton, together with the
      elder George Bush, may be setting new standards for former
      presidents. Their work with providing aid to Tsunami victims and
      other worthy causes is highly laudable.

      --- In ticket2write@yahoogroups.com, wings081 <no_reply@y...> wrote:
      >
      > My dear friends
      >
      > I am obliged to all who responded to my post of Clinton and his
      > Ladies. Such stalwarts as: Matt, Carol, Diva, Krys, Kate, Sherry
      and
      > Bill Murray. Other points of view. Cogent arguments about a topic
      > which shook the maiden aunts of the western world and
      demonstrated
      > the old adage that; `He who sits highest, topples easiest'
      >
      > Of course Confucius would never have used `ain't'. That was only
      my
      > way of writing `is not'with tongue in cheek. Those among you who
      > have come to know my ways over the years will accept such
      > contractions as ain't for isn't and `cos for because, knowing
      there
      > is a deeper inference in the word. It is my way of having fun
      with
      > this beautiful language of ours. Writing to me has never been a
      > chore and I enjoy the literary intercourse with others. When
      members
      > of this site seem to be taking too long a break in the garden, I
      > will dig up a bone of contention and let them all have a nibble
      > before burying it in the archives.
      >
      > I receive many posts off-site to my Yahoo e-mail address and I
      > thought the following excerpt might amuse you: It is in the form
      of
      > an anagram; a re-arrangement of the letters of a phrase using all
      > the letters, but only once.
      > "President Clinton of the USA" becomes "To copulate he finds
      interns"
      > As a crossword fanatic I found that rather clever.
      >
      > Now, to hopefully ingratiate myself with any ladies here, who
      might
      > have taken umbrage at my reference to their habit of stalking
      > powerful males, I offer the following for you to mull over.
      >
      > Men are no better than you girls when it comes to uniforms. I have
      > been attracted to many female members of the armed forces; WRNs,
      > WAAFs and ATSs. and found them just as smart `out of uniform'.
      >
      > How many men here, being hospitalised, have not fallen in love
      with
      > those angels tending them in their distress. Immaculately attired
      in
      > those crisply starched white coats with the fob watch hanging from
      > the lapel as they tenderly hold your wrist to take your pulse,
      > (deducting a few beats for their proximity). White headdress with
      > just a hint of the softest hair peeking from beneath.
      >
      > Excuse me, here comes Florence Nightingale, it's time for my
      blanket
      > bath.
      >
      > As always
      >
      > Wings
    • Susan Donahue
      Dear Haluk...Is Turkey looking for a new president? Mr. Clinton is available. Actually, I have hopes that he will set his sites on Koffi Annan s job which
      Message 2 of 13 , Jun 4, 2005
        Dear Haluk...Is Turkey looking for a new president? Mr. Clinton is
        available. Actually, I have hopes that he will set his sites on Koffi
        Annan's job which should become available soon.

        Suzianne

        --- In ticket2write@yahoogroups.com, "halukdireskeneli"
        <halukdireskeneli@y...> wrote:
        > I would say that Bill Clinton was the best president the world have
        > even seen in recent years.
        >
        > His private life is his own, and it is NOT our business.
        >
        > Haluk
      • Carol Carpenter
        Haluk, Your position concerns me. Clinton was a public official that used his office and the power therein to take advantage of a young foolish girl. Now
        Message 3 of 13 , Jun 4, 2005
          Haluk,
          Your position concerns me. Clinton was a public official that used his office and the power therein to take advantage of a young foolish girl. Now that's just being a womanizer and we've forgiven other presidents their indiscretions, JFK among them. However, Clinton's position as the President of the United States automatically puts his life, private or otherwise, under public scrutiny. Would you want this man to set an example for your sons to follow? I have enough difficulty teaching my sons to take responsibility for their actions in this world filled with lawsuits and tax dodgers. Clinton refused to admit receiving oral sex was sexual contact. It's much more than a matter of boys being boys when the boy lies to cover his own backside. And that's what I object to the most. We value honesty and integrity as important characteristics for our public officials. Clinton refused to tell the truth when he got caught with his pants down. It's always been about dishonesty and not sex, Haluk.
          Carol
          For a more detailed response, see post 23660 from our friend Matt.


          halukdireskeneli <halukdireskeneli@...> wrote:
          I would say that Bill Clinton was the best president the world have
          even seen in recent years.

          His private life is his own, and it is NOT our business.

          Haluk






          Learn more about ticket2wite at http://ticket2write.tripod.com

          __________________________________________________
          Do You Yahoo!?
          Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
          http://mail.yahoo.com

        • Matt Lamoreux
          P.S. For what it is worth, I think Bill Clinton, together with the elder George Bush, may be setting new standards for former presidents. Their work with
          Message 4 of 13 , Jun 4, 2005
            P.S. For what it is worth, I think Bill Clinton, together with the
            elder George Bush, may be setting new standards for former
            presidents. Their work with providing aid to Tsunami victims and
            other worthy causes is highly laudable.

            ---Now I get to practice an essay! (Insert happy Snoopy dance).

            ---I write about war sometimes. I have an agenda. There are better ways to
            solve disputes between nations. At the level of the soldier, war beats any
            infidelity abomination we can wrestle up here and expose no matter how jaded
            our sick button is. I once was affiliated with a party. I believed that how
            I defended it was how I really thought about things. I overlooked horrible
            crimes they committed many times more deadly than an office tryst, because I
            identified personally with the crap my party dragged up into the public
            debate and passed off as intelligent discourse. It's only recently that I've
            arrived at the revelation that debates based on political bias is the
            equivalent of a room full of one legged people in an ass kicking contest. As
            the train approaches, wisdom says to get out of the way.

            ---The agenda of my war stories is simple. No political or nationalized
            ideology is worth the blood, pain and fear of war under any circumstances,
            nor do our parties and their offshoots, offer one modicum of rational relief
            from war. What they bring to the table is yards and yards of bullshit, and
            partisans take that bullshit and get it all over themselves, their families,
            their neighbors and their sovereign duty to be the part of our checks and
            balances that makes a democracy a democracy. It rises to the surface and
            floats there buoyed by gaseous particles that serve as "facts" and only
            accomplishes one thing: the manipulation of over 120 million people (the
            estimated voting public in 2004 out of 300 million Americans) into cognitive
            impairments that reduce college educated Americans to the level of ninth
            graders in a sand box dispute. This is not how we make America safe, strong,
            or worthy of calling itself "One nation under God." This is how powerful
            nations fall...every time. This is how we lose the thing we say we're
            protecting...freedom.

            ---Clinton has become synonymous with office trysts and blow jobs in the
            oval office. That's where we focus when that name comes up because we've
            been trained to look there like trick mules. There is a question that we
            need to ask ourselves beyond the two dimensional one of "how could he do
            such a terrible thing." The question? How did he get two terms? I'll answer
            it. The "booty marauder" understood then as well as now that you can't make
            a country safe with only one half of 120 million people on your team and
            most of them so beguiled and confused by propaganda their input into the
            national debate is less than useless. Bush in his second term will be
            leaning more that way too, because in spite of us trying to chunk down this
            debate into red and blue state myopia, the truth is everyone suffers from
            pollution. On 9/11 no one asked over 3,000 Americans that died what their
            political affiliation was. No one was asked if they served in Vietnam or if
            their daughter was gay or if gays should be able to marry. Yet this was the
            crap that we focused on in 2004, this was our "National Debate," because
            someone else dictated what we should be concerned about...and we bought it.


            ---What we should be concerned about today is not who blew who, or who is a
            war monger and who is a pacifist. What we should be concerned about today is
            being in an endless war, with no plan to wrap it up any time soon, a useful
            war to the political agendas of both sides...a situation that guarantees its
            being waged for eleven years (as long as the Vietnam war) and considering
            our pathetic attempts to almost understand its dynamics and where if comes
            from...well beyond that. As our children get chewed up in it because we have
            lost control...we're busy tisk-tisking people with a meatless form of
            "morality" we use as a convenience, not a standard. By no stretch of the
            imagination does this remotely resemble a formula for success. This is a
            monkey playing with a loaded pistol. This is the American electorate.


            KING: President Bush told us last night that he's very appreciative that you
            are non-critical of his son. Why are you non- critical of his son?

            CLINTON: Well, I think he appreciates the way I disagree with him, too. I
            made up my mind when I left the White House, you know? And they've been
            pretty tough on me, the Republicans had. And I just kept on working with
            them.

            And I made up my mind when I left the White House that I was going to figure
            President Bush out as a person. I always thought he was a very formidable
            political talent. I told all of our crowd in 2000, when I saw him give his
            first speech, that he was capable of winning, that he was an extraordinary
            talent.

            And he'd never been particularly friendly to me, and I didn't blame him. I
            defeated his father, and I didn't think he should like me. You know, it
            didn't bother me a bit. But I just kind of kept working at it. And then he
            was so nice to me, and to Hillary, and to our families when we had the
            portrait unveiling.

            KING: I'll never forget that.

            CLINTON: It was really nice. And I said, you know, there's got to be a way
            for me to disagree with this man when I disagree with him, to support him
            when I can support him, and to express my personal goodwill toward him.

            As I said at my library dedication, I was beginning to think, at the end of
            October, that I was the only person in America that liked both John Kerry
            and George Bush. But I think that's important.

            I mean, you know, this idea that somebody we disagree with on economic or
            social policy or something we have to turn into some kind of ogre or demon,
            I think, is a mistake. I mean, it's like telling the American people or half
            the American people that don't agree with you they're all fools. That's just
            not true.

            Most of the people I've known in politics, by the way, in this country and
            in other countries, before I became president and when I was in the White
            House, most of them have been good people. They'd been smart, hard-working,
            well-motivated, and they pretty well did what they believed was right.

            So this image that most politicians are dumb, or lazy, or self- centered, or
            without conviction is simply not true. Whether they're conservative or
            liberal, Republican or Democrat, American or foreign, there was the
            occasional dumb person, the occasional lazy person, and the occasional
            crook, but they were very rare.

            http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0506/01/lkl.01.html
          • Jay Doggett
            Let s not forget that in his official capacity Clinton used the power of his office to crush and smear those that threatened to expose his (Cathleen Willy,
            Message 5 of 13 , Jun 4, 2005
              Let's not forget that in his official capacity Clinton used the power of his office to crush and smear those that threatened to expose his (Cathleen Willy, victim of his sexual harassment, and Monica Lewinski (ditto imo)) indiscretions. Worse, he perjured himself under oath (a felony crime) for which he was fined $95,000 US Dollars which caused him to lose his civil case vs. Paula Jones for which he (actually Hillary paid the settlement) lost $750,000 US dollars. As far as I know that makes him the only president convicted of a felony.
               
              The supreme court if Arkansas DISBARRED Clinton. The supreme court of the United States revoked his privilege to appear before them.
               
              Now I should say that I voted for Jimmy Carter, and JFK was one of my heroes. Bill Clinton was among the worst Presidents we have ever had. I believe that he made a deal with the Chinese government to give them our nuclear technology in exchange for $390 million that he used to get re-elected. While that act was never proven, in my opinion it's still true. Of course, it was never -going- to be properly investigated by Janet Reno. Some folks may howl and claim that Bush or the Republicans would smear Clinton with proof if they had it, I wholeheartedly disagree. What would it gain them to do so?
               
              Would the act be undone? Um, no? One could not embarrass Clinton more than he already is and more importantly he would deny his involvement no matter how persuasive the evidence, wouldn't he? Is that not his modus opperandi; "deny, deny, deny" ?
               
              For those who are unfamiliar with what happened at Los Alamos, Clinton in his first term appointed Hazel O'Leary to Los Alamos. She loosened security there. Classified and very specific nuclear research was stolen by agents of the PRC. Johnny Chung and Wen Ho Lee conduited $390 from the PRC to The DNC and Bill Clinton in time for the election. Clinton gets re-elected, Hazel O'Leary winds up in a nice private sector job and Los Alamos security is completely FUBARed. They are still fixing the mess.
               
              Jay
               
              -----Original Message-----
              From: ticket2write@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ticket2write@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Carol Carpenter
              Sent: Saturday, June 04, 2005 1:49 PM
              To: ticket2write@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [ticket2write] Haluk's opinion of Clinton

              Haluk,
              Your position concerns me. Clinton was a public official that used his office and the power therein to take advantage of a young foolish girl. Now that's just being a womanizer and we've forgiven other presidents their indiscretions, JFK among them. However, Clinton's position as the President of the United States automatically puts his life, private or otherwise, under public scrutiny. Would you want this man to set an example for your sons to follow? I have enough difficulty teaching my sons to take responsibility for their actions in this world filled with lawsuits and tax dodgers. Clinton refused to admit receiving oral sex was sexual contact. It's much more than a matter of boys being boys when the boy lies to cover his own backside. And that's what I object to the most. We value honesty and integrity as important characteristics for our public officials. Clinton refused to tell the truth when he got caught with his pants down. It's always been about dishonesty and not sex, Haluk.
              Carol
              For a more detailed response, see post 23660 from our friend Matt.


              halukdireskeneli <halukdireskeneli@...> wrote:
              I would say that Bill Clinton was the best president the world have
              even seen in recent years.

              His private life is his own, and it is NOT our business.

              Haluk






              Learn more about ticket2wite at http://ticket2write.tripod.com

              __________________________________________________
              Do You Yahoo!?
              Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
              http://mail.yahoo.com

              Learn more about ticket2wite at http://ticket2write.tripod.com

            • Bill Marcy
              All war is a form of tribal warfare, where it is either your tribe that wins, or the other guys, usually the losers tribe is exterminated. I always choose for
              Message 6 of 13 , Jun 4, 2005
                All war is a form of tribal warfare, where it is either your tribe
                that wins, or the other guys, usually the losers tribe is
                exterminated. I always choose for my side to win, and I really wish
                that my side would stop being so wishy-washy about their victories,
                and free up some new land for my children. Don't you?


                On Jun 4, 2005, at 2:12 PM, Matt Lamoreux wrote:

                >
                > ---Now I get to practice an essay! (Insert happy Snoopy dance).
                >
                > ---I write about war sometimes. I have an agenda. There are better
                > ways to
                > solve disputes between nations. At the level of the soldier, war
                > beats any
                > infidelity abomination we can wrestle up here and expose no matter
                > how jaded
                > our sick button is. I once was affiliated with a party. I believed
                > that how
                > I defended it was how I really thought about things. I overlooked
                > horrible
                > crimes they committed many times more deadly than an office tryst,
                > because I
                > identified personally with the crap my party dragged up into the
                > public
                > debate and passed off as intelligent discourse. It's only recently
                > that I've
                > arrived at the revelation that debates based on political bias is the
                > equivalent of a room full of one legged people in an ass kicking
                > contest. As
                > the train approaches, wisdom says to get out of the way.
                >
                > ---The agenda of my war stories is simple. No political or
                > nationalized
                > ideology is worth the blood, pain and fear of war under any
                > circumstances,
                > nor do our parties and their offshoots, offer one modicum of
                > rational relief
                > from war. What they bring to the table is yards and yards of
                > bullshit, and
                > partisans take that bullshit and get it all over themselves, their
                > families,
                > their neighbors and their sovereign duty to be the part of our
                > checks and
                > balances that makes a democracy a democracy. It rises to the
                > surface and
                > floats there buoyed by gaseous particles that serve as "facts" and
                > only
                > accomplishes one thing: the manipulation of over 120 million people
                > (the
                > estimated voting public in 2004 out of 300 million Americans) into
                > cognitive
                > impairments that reduce college educated Americans to the level of
                > ninth
                > graders in a sand box dispute. This is not how we make America
                > safe, strong,
                > or worthy of calling itself "One nation under God." This is how
                > powerful
                > nations fall...every time. This is how we lose the thing we say we're
                > protecting...freedom.
                >
                > ---Clinton has become synonymous with office trysts and blow jobs
                > in the
                > oval office. That's where we focus when that name comes up because
                > we've
                > been trained to look there like trick mules. There is a question
                > that we
                > need to ask ourselves beyond the two dimensional one of "how could
                > he do
                > such a terrible thing." The question? How did he get two terms?
                > I'll answer
                > it. The "booty marauder" understood then as well as now that you
                > can't make
                > a country safe with only one half of 120 million people on your
                > team and
                > most of them so beguiled and confused by propaganda their input
                > into the
                > national debate is less than useless. Bush in his second term will be
                > leaning more that way too, because in spite of us trying to chunk
                > down this
                > debate into red and blue state myopia, the truth is everyone
                > suffers from
                > pollution. On 9/11 no one asked over 3,000 Americans that died what
                > their
                > political affiliation was. No one was asked if they served in
                > Vietnam or if
                > their daughter was gay or if gays should be able to marry. Yet this
                > was the
                > crap that we focused on in 2004, this was our "National Debate,"
                > because
                > someone else dictated what we should be concerned about...and we
                > bought it.
                >
                >
                > ---What we should be concerned about today is not who blew who, or
                > who is a
                > war monger and who is a pacifist. What we should be concerned about
                > today is
                > being in an endless war, with no plan to wrap it up any time soon,
                > a useful
                > war to the political agendas of both sides...a situation that
                > guarantees its
                > being waged for eleven years (as long as the Vietnam war) and
                > considering
                > our pathetic attempts to almost understand its dynamics and where
                > if comes
                > from...well beyond that. As our children get chewed up in it
                > because we have
                > lost control...we're busy tisk-tisking people with a meatless form of
                > "morality" we use as a convenience, not a standard. By no stretch
                > of the
                > imagination does this remotely resemble a formula for success. This
                > is a
                > monkey playing with a loaded pistol. This is the American electorate.
                >
                >
                > KING: President Bush told us last night that he's very appreciative
                > that you
                > are non-critical of his son. Why are you non- critical of his son?
                >
                > CLINTON: Well, I think he appreciates the way I disagree with him,
                > too. I
                > made up my mind when I left the White House, you know? And they've
                > been
                > pretty tough on me, the Republicans had. And I just kept on working
                > with
                > them.
                >
                > And I made up my mind when I left the White House that I was going
                > to figure
                > President Bush out as a person. I always thought he was a very
                > formidable
                > political talent. I told all of our crowd in 2000, when I saw him
                > give his
                > first speech, that he was capable of winning, that he was an
                > extraordinary
                > talent.
                >
                > And he'd never been particularly friendly to me, and I didn't blame
                > him. I
                > defeated his father, and I didn't think he should like me. You
                > know, it
                > didn't bother me a bit. But I just kind of kept working at it. And
                > then he
                > was so nice to me, and to Hillary, and to our families when we had the
                > portrait unveiling.
                >
                > KING: I'll never forget that.
                >
                > CLINTON: It was really nice. And I said, you know, there's got to
                > be a way
                > for me to disagree with this man when I disagree with him, to
                > support him
                > when I can support him, and to express my personal goodwill toward
                > him.
                >
                > As I said at my library dedication, I was beginning to think, at
                > the end of
                > October, that I was the only person in America that liked both John
                > Kerry
                > and George Bush. But I think that's important.
                >
                > I mean, you know, this idea that somebody we disagree with on
                > economic or
                > social policy or something we have to turn into some kind of ogre
                > or demon,
                > I think, is a mistake. I mean, it's like telling the American
                > people or half
                > the American people that don't agree with you they're all fools.
                > That's just
                > not true.
                >
                > Most of the people I've known in politics, by the way, in this
                > country and
                > in other countries, before I became president and when I was in the
                > White
                > House, most of them have been good people. They'd been smart, hard-
                > working,
                > well-motivated, and they pretty well did what they believed was right.
                >
                > So this image that most politicians are dumb, or lazy, or self-
                > centered, or
                > without conviction is simply not true. Whether they're conservative or
                > liberal, Republican or Democrat, American or foreign, there was the
                > occasional dumb person, the occasional lazy person, and the occasional
                > crook, but they were very rare.
                >
                > http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0506/01/lkl.01.html
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------
                > ~-->
                > What would our lives be like without music, dance, and theater?
                > Donate or volunteer in the arts today at Network for Good!
                > http://us.click.yahoo.com/pkgkPB/SOnJAA/Zx0JAA/TpIolB/TM
                > --------------------------------------------------------------------
                > ~->
                >
                > Learn more about ticket2wite at http://ticket2write.tripod.com
                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
              • Bill Marcy
                For me it was his selling off our military secrets to China, for campaign contributions, and not about the blow jobs.
                Message 7 of 13 , Jun 4, 2005
                  For me it was his selling off our military secrets to China, for
                  campaign contributions, and not about the blow jobs.


                  On Jun 4, 2005, at 1:48 PM, Carol Carpenter wrote:

                  > Haluk,
                  > Your position concerns me. Clinton was a public official that used
                  > his office and the power therein to take advantage of a young
                  > foolish girl. Now that's just being a womanizer and we've forgiven
                  > other presidents their indiscretions, JFK among them. However,
                  > Clinton's position as the President of the United States
                  > automatically puts his life, private or otherwise, under public
                  > scrutiny. Would you want this man to set an example for your sons
                  > to follow? I have enough difficulty teaching my sons to take
                  > responsibility for their actions in this world filled with lawsuits
                  > and tax dodgers. Clinton refused to admit receiving oral sex was
                  > sexual contact. It's much more than a matter of boys being boys
                  > when the boy lies to cover his own backside. And that's what I
                  > object to the most. We value honesty and integrity as important
                  > characteristics for our public officials. Clinton refused to tell
                  > the truth when he got caught with his pants down. It's always been
                  > about dishonesty and not sex, Haluk.
                  > Carol
                  > For a more detailed response, see post 23660 from our friend Matt.
                  >
                  >
                  > halukdireskeneli <halukdireskeneli@...> wrote:
                  > I would say that Bill Clinton was the best president the world have
                  > even seen in recent years.
                  >
                  > His private life is his own, and it is NOT our business.
                  >
                  > Haluk
                  >
                  >
                • halukdireskeneli
                  Our president Ahmet Necdet Sezer, is a former judge, first judge of the supreme court. He is at the age of 60, happily married, grandfather. So we do not need
                  Message 8 of 13 , Jun 4, 2005
                    Our president Ahmet Necdet Sezer, is a former judge, first judge of
                    the supreme court. He is at the age of 60, happily married,
                    grandfather. So we do not need any better.

                    Anyhow I still instist that Bill Clinton was an extraordinary
                    president in his two terms, and the ladies succeded to be with him,
                    were not so innocent, but hunters of fame, and they got it.

                    I have no objection of having Bill Clinton as our president.

                    If he were a president of an European country, his private life
                    would not be scrutinised, and fame hunter ladies would not succeed.

                    Bill Clinton was a Rhodes scholar, a bright young talent in his
                    younger years. He is an extraordinary intellectual. I do not want to
                    compare him with any other person. You all know much better than me,
                    an outsider to your environment, an allien. His followup activities
                    now are also worth credit.
                  • halukdireskeneli
                    Thank you for making me a celebrity of t2w. I do not deserve that much. Anyhow have a great weekend with your loved-ones and enjoy Haluk
                    Message 9 of 13 , Jun 5, 2005
                      Thank you for making me a celebrity of t2w.

                      I do not deserve that much.

                      Anyhow have a great weekend with your loved-ones and enjoy

                      Haluk
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.