10AM January 19 - 10AM January 24, 1998
Site Contents:
The Progressive
Alliance
PA
Home
PA
News
PA
Mission
PA
Supporters
PA
Events
Join
The PA
JK News
What's
Happening
JK In Print
My
Latest Column
Archives
JK On The Air
The
Link Lounge
Current
Playlists
Interactivity
Send
Me Email
The
Dialogue Page
*
Rules
*
Sign-In
*
Archive
Favorite
Email
Join
My Email List
JK Concerts
Hall
Of Fame
Who's
Coming
Live In Person
Come
See Me
Bio
About
Me
Search
Search
This Site
( To View Previous Dialogue Pages, click here)
Read This First: Rules For Jerry's Dialogue Page
Al Christensen <straay2@ix.netcom.com>
Charlotte, USA - Monday, January 19, 1998 at 10:38:37 (EST)
Thanks for you tips Andy, now I will return the favor. Tips on how to be a good conservative: 1.) Don't blame yourself, it is the Liberals fault. 2.) Hate everyone who is different from you. 3.) Take Civil Rights lessons from David Duke. 4.) Follow the moral advice of Televangelists. 5.) Make it a right for everyone to have full access to military armaments. 6.) Call anyone who opposes you UNGODLY! 7.) Hate everything but your view of how America should be. 8.) Give aid and comfort to racist, bigots and hate-mongers. 9.) Become a patriot and plan to blow up your own Federal Building 10.) Remember - there is ALWAYS A CONSPIRACY!! And for posters on this page: 1.) Attack liberalism at every turn. 2.) Never add substance to the discussion. 3.) Always quote wackos who support your beliefs and call them "Independent" 4.) Attack those who oppose your hatred. 5.) Cry persecution if you don't get your way. Follow these simple tips and you can follow Andy and David along with Pat Robinson and David Duke. Now repeat your need Pledge of Honor: "I pledge to comfort the comfortable and afflict the afflicted, stand for the rights of oppressed white males, persecuted Christians, and the common millionaire; fight against compassion in all its forms, and to battle for what Rush says is the truth, jus t us, and the Republican way."
guest
USA - Monday, January 19, 1998 at 10:39:21 (EST)
This went away with the weekly site flushing, but here it is for reference: 15 Tips On How to be a Good Leftist by Jamie Glazov--- Tip 1: Don't Blame Yourself: Society Did It Tip 2: Hate Capitalism: Politicize Your Angst Tip 3: Be a Socialist, But Don' t Call Yourself One Tip 4: Think Class and Other Hateful Enemies Like Gender and Race Tip 5: Hate America Tip 6: Hate Western Civilization Tip 7: Reject Free Will Tip 8: Posture as a Martyr Tip 9: Maintain a Gulf Between Your Beliefs and Actions Tip 10: T ake the Moral High Ground Tip 11: Never Take Individual Responsibility Tip 12: Repress Your Emotions Tip 13: Play Leftist Softball Tip 14: Go To Demonstrations Tip 15: Have a Death Wish
Al Christensen
- Monday, January 19, 1998 at 10:42:18 (EST)
Heeeeyy!!!!!
What do you mean "weekly site flushing" Al? I keep all the posts archived. Please look at the previous dialogue pages: http://jerryk.com/dialogue/dialoguearchive.htm. You find it all there - the good, the bad and the ugly.
Folks I am still looking into Internet broadcasts and better threading of messages. Just not enough hours in the day....
Y'all have a great day and play nice. :-)
Best,
-- rdm
Not to bad, Glad to see you all still have a sense of humor! It was all in fun, juvenile or not.
Andy <tcp12@ibm.net>
USA - Monday, January 19, 1998 at 16:27:20 (EST)
BUMPER STICKERS::::::"Give me Hate radio............ or.......Give me Death!!!!! "--- "If You Are Against Logging Try Using Plastic Toilet Paper. "---"Bill Clinton ... Making the world safe for hypocrisy!!! "---" If 96 gave you the Willies 2000 could be downright GOREY!"--- "I'm Not Part Of The Problem, I'm Republican"--- "Liberalism is a Social Disease"---"Democrats: Proof abortion has a failure rate"---"Al Gore says: Hug a tree, they can't sue for sexual harassment!"---"Happiness is Bill Clinton's face on a milk carton!"---"Embarass the Media: Vote Republican."---"Clinto n thinks Foreign Affairs is Cross-Cultural Dating."---"Watergate Gap: 18 minutes v. Filegate Gap: 6 months!""Clinton: The Best President Money can Buy!"---"Hail to the Cheat!"---"Clinton: Endorsed by 4 out of 5 dead presidents."---"Free Willy!"---"Bobbitt Babbit"--- "Clinton: 99% Fact-Free!"---"Whitewater, White House, White Trash "---"First Hillary, Then Gennifer, Now Us!"---"Clinton: The Bill of Lefts."---"Clinton: Your Toll Bridge to the 21st Century!"---"Off the Bridge with Bill and Ted!"---
Andy <tcp12@ibm.net>
Charlotte, USA - Monday, January 19, 1998 at 16:39:28 (EST)
Thought I would lend a hand to the TPA. Before your go to any commisioner meetings or city council nights, you might think about this for help:---http://www.lib.msu.edu/spc/digital/radicalism/asininestudentmovements/001.htm---I crack me up!
Andy <tcp12@ibm.net>
Charlotte, USA - Monday, January 19, 1998 at 16:55:09 (EST)
Andy, you're so special. May I bask in the light of your borrowed wisdom? Will you have my baby?
Al Christensen <straay2@ix.netcom.com>
- Monday, January 19, 1998 at 17:44:41 (EST)
PC Goes Global "Cologne, Germany—A German court said Friday it had banned a 22-year-old man from driving for four-and-a-half months for shouting 'typical woman' at a female driver following an incident in a congested street. "The male driver, who was not named, was also fined 1,800 marks ($980) for insulting behavior after losing his temper when the oncoming female driver failed to let him pass in a street where cars were parked on both sides. "The judge in the city of Cologne rejected the male driver's plea that he had been provoked after the 36-year-old woman called him a 'young whippersnapper.' " —Reuters, January 16, 1998
Andy <tcp12@ibm.net>
Charlotte, USA - Monday, January 19, 1998 at 18:51:48 (EST)
Well Mark, it seems that if either of us were to build a better mouse trap there would always be some big politician or lobbyist group to stop us from seeing it through! Is there any part of the Constitution/Bill of Rights that could give the people power to demand that certain issues be dealt with by the elected officials? (Other than "Oust The Incumbent".)
Marcia <IOKAYUOK@aol.com>
USA - Monday, January 19, 1998 at 19:11:06 (EST)
Surprise Surprise. Andy has once again posted another example of something bad. (Notice how he doesn't mention the PC of the radical right wingers.) Andy you are tiresome and pathetic. It seems like you post something negative EVERY DAY. Sometimes you do it multiple times a day. What is he trying to accomplish? We get it Andy! You don't like Liberals! There are lots of people who do not like Liberals! Is it your life's work to grace Jerry's pages with your negativity EVERY DAY? Let me make it easier for you. Just copy and paste the follow: "Liberals Bad. Conservatives good. Government Bad. Clinton Bad. It is a conspiracy! Vote Republican." That just about covers it for Andy. Everything else is just filler. Andy has said nothing more since he has been here. He is really sick.
guest
USA - Monday, January 19, 1998 at 19:17:14 (EST)
Coffeehouse Discussion Report - Last night was such a rush of positive energy it is close to indescribable. When it was time to leave I was reeling! Our guest speaker was Ahmad Daniels, a community activist, an American of African decent. My personal impression: an incredibly positive speaker and a genuine person whose aura is truly captivating. My personal experience was energizing to my inner most soul. I left the coffeehouse with feeling that every person there had just made a huge leap towards bridging a gap in our community. A gap that should never have been, but unfortunately is. This isn't much of a report, I told you guys the experience is very close to indescribable. If you were not able to attend I feel sorry because you missed a remarkable experience. Onward and Upward towards a higher ground! Jerry - you should have Mr. Daniels back very soon!
Marcia <IOKAYUOK@aol.com>
USA - Tuesday, January 20, 1998 at 06:30:25 (EST)
GUEST,---maybe you could set the example by your future post.
Andy <tcp12@ibm.net>
charlotte, USA - Tuesday, January 20, 1998 at 06:43:46 (EST)
So the clock radio came on this morning tuned to WFAE, and in those few seconds before I could hit the snooze button I’m fairly sure I heard, “...is sponsored by the National Congressional Republican Committee...” or some such combination of those word s. How odd that any organization with Republican and Congressional in the title would be spending money on public broadcasting after working so hard to cut its funding.
Al Christensen <straay2@ix.netcom.com>
- Tuesday, January 20, 1998 at 08:56:55 (EST)
Al, the Republicans fought to cut PUBLIC funding, not to abolish NPR the entity. A dollar of private funding is much more valuable to its intended recipient than a dollar of tax money, because its an actual dollar when it's received - not a dollar minu s layer after layer of bureauacracy plus layer after layer of regulations. If you really want to support the arts or public radio or any other worthwhile effort, make a personal or corporate gift - it's worth much more than your tax dollar.
Another Guest
USA - Tuesday, January 20, 1998 at 10:13:19 (EST)
Andy...just a quick thought...if you follow that closely when you drive to read all those bumperstickers, you're not only a closed minded little conservative but a terrible driver. Please do me the favor of staying away from my car. Also, I'm sorry t o reaport I missed last night...3rd shift is killin' me...Marcia, thanks for the update, glad you had a great time :) Also, Lee, great site, I like it!
Mary T. <you all have it by now, by gum>
Charlotte, NC USA - Tuesday, January 20, 1998 at 11:31:54 (EST)
Andy...just a quick thought...if you follow that closely when you drive to read all those bumperstickers, you're not only a closed minded little conservative but a terrible driver. Please do me the favor of staying away from my car. Also, I'm sorry t o report I missed last night...3rd shift is killin' me...Marcia, thanks for the update, glad you had a great time :) Also, Lee, great site, I like it!
Mary T. <you all have it by now, by gum>
Charlotte, NC USA - Tuesday, January 20, 1998 at 11:32:20 (EST)
Stelle, is that you (Other Guest)? Actually, I was thinking of those Republicans who dislike public broadcasting because they feel it’s programming is too liberal. I remember the fuss about the old PBS logo. Supposedly some conservatives with enough cl out to get it changed hated the fact the head on the P faced left. I was also thinking that a non-mainstream medium that supposedly panders to bleeding hearts and effite intellectuals is an ironic media buy. And I was thinking about those conservatives wh o feel public broadcasting is unfair competition for private broadcasting. Or the conservatives who’d whine loudly (withhold campaign contributions) if their corporate welfare were taken away. I'd guess that for many GOP faithful, spending money on public broadcasting would be helping the enemy. ;-)
Al Christensen <straay2@ix.netcom.com>
- Tuesday, January 20, 1998 at 12:28:57 (EST)
Stelle, is that you (Other Guest)? Actually, I was thinking of those Republicans who dislike public broadcasting because they feel it’s programming is too liberal. I remember the fuss about the old PBS logo. Supposedly some conservatives with enough cl out to get it changed hated the fact the head on the P faced left. I was also thinking that a non-mainstream medium that supposedly panders to bleeding hearts and effite intellectuals is an ironic media buy. And I was thinking about those conservatives wh o feel public broadcasting is unfair competition for private broadcasting. Or the conservatives who’d whine loudly (withhold campaign contributions) if their corporate welfare were taken away. I'd guess that for many GOP faithful, spending money on public broadcasting would be helping the enemy. ;-)
Al Christensen <straay2@ix.netcom.com>
- Tuesday, January 20, 1998 at 12:30:19 (EST)
Looks like the system has a glitch today resulting in double postings. I know in my case when I tried to post, things hung up and I got a "waiting for reply" message. Thinking the first hadn't gone through, I stopped and sent it again. Sorry for the re dundancy.
Al Christensen
- Tuesday, January 20, 1998 at 13:39:27 (EST)
You're forgiven, Al.
Ghost
USA - Tuesday, January 20, 1998 at 13:45:47 (EST)
You're forgiven, Al.
Ghost
USA - Tuesday, January 20, 1998 at 13:45:57 (EST)
You're forgiven, Al.
Ghost
USA - Tuesday, January 20, 1998 at 13:46:03 (EST)
In Case You Missed It... Ferraro Delivers Knockout Punch to Herself! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ January 14, 1998 Just six days after officially announcing her candidacy for U. S. Senate, Geraldine Ferraro appeared on NBC's "Meet the Press" and all but endorsed Republican Senator Al D'Amato.--- Ferraro began by accusing Senator D'Amato of being "anti-teacher and anti-education." But when pressed by NBC's Tim Russert about whether or not she agreed with D'Amato's platform on ending lifetime tenure for teachers, here's what she said:--Russert:"But do you think that lifetime tenure for teachers is a good idea?"----- Ferraro:"No. Lifetime tenure is a very unpopular thing with people, especially [in] New York. Eighty-four percent of them don't like it. So maybe then if you deal with the teachers, say , 'Maybe that should be negotiated.' That's nothing I want to get into."----Now that she agrees with Senator D'Amato on ending lifetime tenure, does this mean that Geraldine is also "anti-teacher and anti-education?" --This post seems positive, What do ya think!
Andy <tcp12@ibm.net>
Charlotte, USA - Tuesday, January 20, 1998 at 15:56:23 (EST)
I think that you are looking for a way to attack/smear/discredit Ferraro. Face it Andy, you just want to post things that make Liberals/Democrats look bad and NOTHING ELSE. Ever think about postings the "ethics" of D'Amato? Of Course not. Maybe you w ould want to look at this: http://www.ny-politics.com/eony/eonynews/1998/01139801.shtml No. Andy just wants to post his usual junk several times a day. Andy hates liberals…blah blah….. Democrats always screw up…. Blah blah…. Poor Andy he never gets a break… blah blah blah …… If it isn't conservative its bad… blah blah blah …… Watch out for the next conspiracy… blah blah blah……
guest
USA - Tuesday, January 20, 1998 at 16:18:51 (EST)
If communism was so bad, why do Canadian tourists prefer Havana over Miami? And both are largely populated with Cubans. Yet, all the violent crime is in Miami. Why do so many so-called free Cubans commit so much crime?
Che
Havana, Cuba - Wednesday, January 21, 1998 at 01:14:24 (EST)
You know this whitehouse intern is lieing through her teeth. I think she might be a spy. The secret service has numerous log entries of her when she went in and out of the whitehouse in the wee hourss of the morning. Just what was this girl doing there . I think we need to see the movement logs inside the whitehouse. Not just when she entered! What do you all think?
Andy <tcp12@ibm.net>
Charlotte, USA - Wednesday, January 21, 1998 at 08:07:18 (EST)
Marcia, it would be a really good idea not to get me started on the Constitution. Read it. (Yeah, I know it seems archaic and perhpas boring, but its a worthwhile enterprise.) Pay particular attention to Article I which described the make up and powers of Congress and in that article pay particular attention to Section 8, where you will find ennumerated the power of Congress. At the very beginning of that section you will find the words "The Congress shall have Power. . . provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;. . ." followed by a specific list of all tha tCongress was empowered to do. Since the words quoted above appear (and are frequently taken to mean by readers of the document) to provide an almost unlimited authori ty to to anything to further defense or public good, take a look at the explanation of that section and those words by the man who wrote them: James Madison. You'll find that explanation in, among other places, Federalist Paper #41. It begins around the 4 th from the last paragraph (or thereabouts) of that document. Once you've done your homework, (I don't mean that to sound as it does, but if you read the source documentation you can form your own informed opinion rather than merely reading mine)you tell me: does the constitution provide any means to help the poor at all, let alone to do it well?
Mark Hodroff <mhodroff@juno.com>
CLT , NC USA - Wednesday, January 21, 1998 at 10:50:01 (EST)
<<why do Canadian tourists prefer Havana over Miami?>> 1. It's really cheap. 2. Excellent cigars. 3. No Americans.
Fidel
Havana, Cuba - Wednesday, January 21, 1998 at 10:53:37 (EST)
So, the good president has been fiddling around with the hired help in the White House...Tsk, tsk. Such arrogance !!!
Another guest
USA - Wednesday, January 21, 1998 at 12:31:43 (EST)
Lewinsky denies it. Clinton denies it. Still the republican Starr will get millions more to continue his witch hunt.
guest
USA - Wednesday, January 21, 1998 at 12:57:38 (EST)
Clinton's problem is that he should have stuck to the hambergers and left the women alone just like George Bush. I could not belived that Netenyahu appeared on the 700 club with Pat Robinson. Is this a Jew or a Christian? When do you think Netenyahu would become a born again Christian? Before or after Arafat? here's to all the women I intend to marry. Bring them Young.
BYU
Provo, UT USA - Wednesday, January 21, 1998 at 12:58:57 (EST)
This is interesting!--http://www.rbn.com/cgi-bin/findsplitter.cgi?swave/abc/demand/980121ginsburg.ra--straight From ABC
Andy <tcp12@ibm.net>
USA - Wednesday, January 21, 1998 at 14:03:33 (EST)
"Lewinsky denies it. Clinton denies it." ergo, it is false? Another Republican slam? I think not. Just more evidence of the most amoral leadership ever. He is being hoisted by his own petard.
Another guest
USA - Wednesday, January 21, 1998 at 16:23:25 (EST)
So, Tom Bush is proposing hiring more district attorneys (more government employees, bigger government), managing county growth (more regulations), cleaning up local waterways (spending more money, hugging more trees), building a light rail system (pub lic works boondoggle), and maybe restoring some arts funding (giving your tax money to immoral artsy types). Is Tom a--gasp--closet LIBERAL? How long do you suppose he can hold together his majority voting block? Will there be a realignment of the board a long fiscal lines? Is money thicker than morality? Stay tuned, folks.
Al Christensen <straay2@ix.netcom.com>
Charlotte, USA - Wednesday, January 21, 1998 at 16:54:36 (EST)
Word on CBS is that Lewinsky will take the fifth regarding her diddilation with BC. Sounds to me like they may have both commited perjury already and are looking for damage control.
Another guest
USA - Wednesday, January 21, 1998 at 17:56:32 (EST)
Seems Like Little Willie Just Has A Thing For The Ladies...Nothing Wrong With That...Just Get Out Of The White House While You Still Have A Little Dignity...Better Yet Let Us Proceed With The Impeachment...The Day He Is Out Of Office I Will Have A Pers onal 21 Gun Salute...
David Klinger
USA - Wednesday, January 21, 1998 at 18:56:46 (EST)
http://www.msnbc.com/news/133531.jpg
Slick Copy
USA - Wednesday, January 21, 1998 at 19:39:11 (EST)
Al, More DA's means more law and order. Managing growth protects property values. Light rail is cheaper than massive highway construction and arts education is a part of a quality school experience. Those goals sound pretty good to this conservative. I n an interview this morning Mr. Bush talked about doing this without adding to the tax burden. That's the real challenge because government is good at growing, and not at all good at getting rid of the outdated or unnecessary. Our local government is bett er than most at privatization and cost cutting.
Stelle
USA - Wednesday, January 21, 1998 at 19:57:51 (EST)
OK People, Let me explain how conservaties operate. 1.) Make up a Story. (No need for any of it to be true.) 2.) Repeat it over the Internet and Hate-Radio. 3.) Tell the mainstream media that they are missing the biggest story of the decade. 4.) Get one mainstream media outlet to report the rumor. 5. ) All other media outlets will report on the report. 6.) Damage is now done. 7.) THe feeding frenzt begins. 8.) No aleigations will need to be proven. 9.) Cry "cover up" to anyone who denies the story. Has everyone got it???!!!!!!!! Now more damage has been done to the president and a young woman's life has been destoryed. Are you conservatices happy? You have NOTHING but rumors!!! You people who relish in this event HAVE NO SOUL!!
guest
USA - Wednesday, January 21, 1998 at 20:28:26 (EST)
Stelle, you know my tongue was in my cheek about Bush's statements. But I have to imagine the anti-tax hawks are going to dig in their heels. And admit it, you probably know personally a few conservatives who would condemn with jerked knees such propos als if they came from the other side.
Al Christensen <straay2@ix.netcom.com>
- Wednesday, January 21, 1998 at 20:37:21 (EST)
Al, I'm torn between responding to your rational question and responding to the anti-conservative rantings posted just above your note. Maybe my response to you will get a message to the other poster. This is not an always/never world and assumptions a bout how a group or individual members of a group will "always" behave or think are fruitless. Yes, some individuals are so anti-tax that will oppose Bush's ideas - until they understand that they don't need to raise taxes to meet the goals. The national news is moving so fast that I don't think any sensible person should comment until we have more facts. It is clear from the way CNN and others are handling this particular situation that experienced reporters see this as quite different from the sort of t hing they would deem unfounded and unworthy of news specials. If these charges are true, they are very sad. No matter how we try to dodge the issue, character counts.
Stelle
USA - Wednesday, January 21, 1998 at 21:31:11 (EST)
No matter how evil you think Clinton is, nobody thinks he is stupid. ANd he isn't stupid enuf to have had an affair with a 21 year old in 95-96! That was right after the 3rd Riech took over the House of Reprehensibles. Clinton was in election mode (is he ever out of it?) and he would have never been f*ing some damned secretary. This girl was lying to make herself look important, and now she is caught in her stupid lies. The outrage is ABC news running with this like it comes from God. The outrage is Ken Starr making this part of the "Whitewater" investigation. Was this girl in Arkensas? Did she buy land? Or was Ken Starr trying to help out the Paula Jones team? I can't wait till the republicans have a president in office (probable in 2005, Gore will screw it up I bet) because I have secret information about whoever it is will be in office. I will make it up, but the allagation will have to be investigated, and reported on!!!! "As you sow, so shall you reap"
Marc <marc@vnet.net>
Allymarle, NC USA - Wednesday, January 21, 1998 at 22:09:15 (EST)
Oh, lets bring up abortion one more time! My pet theory - The republicans never want to end abortion because they will lose an easy wedge issue. If abortion ends, the republicans are afraid that conservative christians would lose some interest in politics, and send the republicans less money. So the republicans will do nothing to curb the number of abortions on america. I noted that the republicans will continue to give money to support to candidates who support partial birth abortion. I thought all abortion was murder? But it is OK because the "holocost of abortion" isn't worth fighting because the republicans are afraid of offending people? All you abortion opponents out there, the republicans are playing with you. They are taking your cash and laughing at you. The slaves are sure lucky that the original republicans and abolitionists were liberals, because liberals actually want to solve problems, and end them, not keep the wounds bleeding for political gain! Henry Hyde might as well be an abortionist for all the good he has done his cause.
Marc <marc@vnet.net>
Albemarle, NC USA - Wednesday, January 21, 1998 at 22:33:36 (EST)
Tuesday Tom Bush says we might have to dig into our pockets a bit to do what’s right for the future of the county. I agree, and it’s probably the more realistic position. Wednesday morning he modified his statement to say it wouldn’t be necessary to ra ise taxes to do all he envisions, a more idealistic and less likely eventuality, but more in keeping with the party line. Maybe someone showed him rosier revenue projections, or maybe he got heat from the anti-tax corps. I don’t know. But he’s walking a t ightrope, and it’ll be interesting to see what happens. He might lose allies on the right and gain them on the left. When it comes time to approve the budget, will Carter (who would probably admit storm drains are good for the community but who doesn’t wa nt to help pay for them himself), Higgins and James be willing to go on record supporting only a non-increase in taxes while many of their constituents are howling for tax reductions? Will those commissioners agree to essentially maintain the size of gove rnment rather than reduce it? We’ll see.
Al Christensen
- Wednesday, January 21, 1998 at 23:14:41 (EST)
Just goes to show...drag a hundred dollar bill through the White House and you can get anything
Another guest
USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 00:05:50 (EST)
Al, your mixing apples and oranges with the county government. Adequately funding government is quite a bit different from adding new departments and or taking on new responsibilities.-- You have aknowledged defeat and so its now onto PHASE II, which is attack them for what they are about to do.--I would be worried also if I expected them to be successful. So your feelings are normal, they just dont serve any purpose other than venting.--Unlike guest, it doesn't bother me that you have this hatred-- s ome one once told me to get over it about Clinton, That he was the president and that we should support him, regardless of how we felt about him.
Andy <tcp12@ibm.net>
Charlotte, USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 05:25:52 (EST)
Anita Hill comes to mind when I listen to Liberals lament about current on-going events in regards to Clinton and his womanizing--Paula Jones,republican trailer trash/Lewinsky, democratic trailer trash--Which one is better looking?
Andy <tcp12@ibm.net>
Charlotte, USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 05:36:35 (EST)
Andy your level of insensibility never ceases to amaze me. Do you only like to name call or are you incapable of discussion on a subject? Al's observations about the upcoming budget deliberations are right on the money. If you like drama, mystery, intrigue, suspense . . . stay tuned. Bush has put himself into an extremely delicate position - over $300 million to clean up the major water sources and their tributaries? Very "left" minded thinking - I wonder if Carter and Higgins are feeling a bit "used" now that Bush has the chair position on the commission? That's all for now - my "teacher" has assigned me homework and I'm afraid I'm going to be late turning it in (I haven't even started yet), I guess I'm in trouble again!
Marcia <IOKAYUOK@aol.com>
USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 06:10:32 (EST)
Hey Marci, one of your Liberal Icons started the thing about trailer trash. His name is James C__r__lle. I'll let you fill in the blanks. Some more clues. This guy was largely responsible for getting Bill elected the first time.--But from the tone of your post I take it that you didn't mind when snake head said it, but now its bad because I said it. Flowers, Tripp, Willey, Jones and who else?
Andy <tcp12@ibm.net>
Charlotte, USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 06:46:36 (EST)
Hi all. It's been a while since I posted here. It's not that I haven't logged on, but rather I've had nothing to say. It's been like watching my kids senselessly bicker over nothing. I guess it is part of the process, but I see no gains on either s ide from it. I do want to comment on Andy's post >>"Paula Jones,republican trailer trash/Lewinsky, democratic trailer trash--Which one is better looking?"<< WHICH ONE IS BETTER LOOKING????? Just when I thought your boneheaded remarks could n't get any worse. Congratulations, you've taken yourself to a new low. More to the point though, the economy is doing good, the IRS is getting examined finally, we are the ONLY viable super-power left in the world, WHO CARES WHETHER CLINTON SLEPT WITH THE INTERN OR NOT? Any more than I care whether he and Hilliary use whips and chains in the bedroom. If it's OK with her it's none of mine or YOUR damn business.
Mike Koch <shmoodad@aol.com>
Lancaster, SC USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 06:58:36 (EST)
Mike Koch, If I understand your point about 'who cares' correctly. You then agree that the Anita Hill Clarence Thomas thing was wrong. That clarence Thomas sex life with a aid was not a issue and should never have beem exploited by the left like it wa s? A simple YES OR NO answer will suffice!
Andy
Charlotte, USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 08:10:39 (EST)
NEWS FLASH: Report: Clinton deposition admits affair WASHINGTON - President Clinton acknowledged for the first time last Saturday that he had an affair with Gennifer Flowers during the 1970s, The Washington Post reported in Thursday's editions. The statement came during the president's six-hour deposition in the Paula Jones sexual harassment lawsuit, the Post quoted unidentified sources familiar with his testimony as saying. During the 1992 presidential campaign, Clinton denied Flowers' statements that he was romantically involved with her. By The Associated Press
another guest
ft. Myers, VA USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 08:31:12 (EST)
NEWS FLASH: Conservatives HATE CLINTON! Look for more postings to prove this point. NOTE: Truth is not necessary to support any postings by conservatives.
guest
USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 08:36:43 (EST)
Yo Andy The problem with C. Thomas is that he is either an idiot or he purjured himself under oath. When asked about his views on abortion, he claimed to have never given the subject any thought. As a judge, a voter, a republican, or just a man, to have not thoug ht about abortion or formed an opinion would mean he is a complete idiot who refuses to think (common among conservatives). I do not believe he is that stupid (although Thimas often tries to prove me wrong). I am sure he lied under oath, and is thus compl etely unqualified to be sitting on the supreme court. Anita Hill, Schlimita Shmill, who cares about that? Thomas would have lied about that anyway. (PS, don't bring Clinton's lying into this, as we are talking about Thomas)
Marc <marc@vnet.net>
AlleyMarlboro, nc USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 09:20:19 (EST)
Mike, et al: While the tittilating aspect of the current Clinton issue might be whether he did or didn't have an affair with a 21 year old White House aide, that is NOT a particularly important issue. What is significant is whether or not he suborned p erjury by encouraging the young lady to lie about an affair when giving sworn testimony. All the breaking news about tapes, etc notwithstanding, there simply won't be a clear indication of whether that actually occurred unless credible evidence arises ind icating 1.) The affair did indeed occur, 2.) She was enticed to lie about that in sworn testimony, and 3.) Bill Clinton, either directly or through representatives was involved in that enticement. There will certainly be a strong indication that the affai r occurred IF she invokes her rights under the 5th amendment in the testimony that she gives tomorrow. That alone, however only satisfies the first requirement above, and simply does not speak to whether or not she may have perjured herself wholly of her own volition, nor if perjury WAS suborned that, by whom it was suborned. Is it interesting? Sure. Is there enough there for a rational person to conclude on the evidence that Clinton committed a crime? Not by a long way.
Mark Hodroff <mhodroff@juno.com>
CLT, NC USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 09:28:32 (EST)
Marcia I don't know that Carter's objection to the storm water fee is in paying for drainage improvements. I rather suspect that it arises out of the mechanism that was used. Recall that when that fee was instituted our local officials were proudly tru mpeting that they had not raised property taxes, yet they imposed a new tax that is due from every property owner. Carter's objection may be the same as mine: they lied for purely political purposes by calling a tax by another name and claiming to have no t added a tax. User fees exist for all manner of things legitimately in areas where a limited number of people use a service or facility that the entire taxpaying population ought not have to pay for. (Landing fees for aircraft at some municipal airports come to mind.) That is very different from our stormwater fees which are assessed uniformly and are in fact a tax by another name.
Mark Hodroff <mhodroff@juno.com>
CLT, NC USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 09:37:36 (EST)
One last thing: is everybody else as tired as I am of the anonymous postings of people who post here openly at times and then disguise themselves at others? The humour attempts are not what I'm referring to, but rather the attempts to be contentious of provocative without the courage to be identified. It seems to me that if you folks believe what you post is a realistic reflection of your views or personality, you ought to have enough backbone to show your face. (And I don't get the "I get nasty e-mail " nonsense. I receive bizarre e-mail all the time. I simply consider the source and flush it. And it doesn't overload my mailbox. I simply use a free mail service for the address I use here and my ISP mail box for other correspondence. It allows me to ig nore the Juno box at will and still get that which is important to me for other reasons.) OK, now that I've vented, I feel better.
Mark Hodroff <mhodroff@juno.com>
CLT, NC USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 09:53:23 (EST)
NEWS FLASH:
Mary T <chiachiachia@juno.com>
Charlotte, NC USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 10:11:20 (EST)
NEWS FLASH: Nothing has been PROVEN in court yet about Clinton sleeping with ANYONE. So people, especially you conservatives out there (I'm sure this is a Republican plot anyway) cool your jets until something conclusive is reached. OOPS my paranoia is showing. AND...I gotta agree with Mike. None of my business where our President dips his wick. As long as he keeps it away from me. :::snicker::: who's better looking. Geez.
Mary T. <chiachiachia@juno.com>
Charlotte, NC USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 10:14:11 (EST)
I am not talking about Clarence Thomas being a liar. I am not talking about Clinton being a liar. I am addressing the fact that some of you think that these allegations should not be made or that they are unfounded thus, they dont count. My question to any of you is simply this: What is the difference between the two episodes.--I personally see no difference, which simply means that you will have to indure.
Andy <tcp12@ibm.net>
Charlotte, USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 10:21:16 (EST)
Mark Hodroff, you must have a thicker skin than me. I do NOT care to have myself or my famlilies health and well being threatned. It has happened before because of posting on this page. Another observation on the latest Clinton-Starr episode: It is all or nothing now. If the aligations are true then Clinton should be run out of office. If they are not true, Starr should be dismissed and prosocuted for abusing his power and trying to d estroy the lives of Clinton and Lewinsky. It is time for this mess to end. Either Clinton OR Starr MUST GO!! I know how you conservatives feel but you ought to admit that it is now break point - either put up or shut up! Remember aligations MUST be pr oven! (Unless you want to cry cover-up)
guest
USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 10:54:33 (EST)
People, don't you know what is happening! Linda R. Tripp works in the White House. Is she a loyal Clinton supporter. I think NOT. Why else will she be making all this ruskus? Getting Monica Lewinsky to spill the beans over a phone conversation tha t was being taped without Lewinsky knowledge. Entrapment? Not so. More like coercion. Lewinsky lived in fear of Tripp. Why did Tripp follow Lewinsky to the Pentagon? Why did the two become so close friends? Why did Lewinsky spill the beans on Clint on to Tripp? Why Tripp? Why did Tripp mentioned another woman named Willey (sic) who was forced to testified before a house committe because of Tripp? Tripp is a mole planted in the White House. But, by who?
BYU
Provo, UT USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 10:59:26 (EST)
On the "Starr has stepped over the line" if the allegations prove untrue issue: Let us not forget that Mr. Starr does not have the authority to broaden the scope of the inquiry. That decision was made by a panel of Federal Judges on a request from the Justice Dept. forwarded by Atty. Gen'l Reno. If its his witch hunt, its theirs as well.
Mark hodroff <mhodroff@juno.com>
CLT, NC USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 11:47:49 (EST)
Good point Mark. Now image for a moment that the charges are untrue. Who is keeping Starr, the Judges and the DOJ in check? Who are these judges and where did they come from? Can they allow Starr to do what ever he wants? Have they ever denied a r equest of Starr's to investigate ANYTHING about Clinton? Just thoughts. I am trying my best to remind people that they are aligations, keep low key and wait for the facts to come out. I DO NOT want a president who did such things that are being said an d I DO Not want a man like Starr to have freedom to destroy lives on rumors. This must end soon one way or the other! Clinton OR Starr must go!
guest
USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 12:03:06 (EST)
Andy, in reference to " You then agree that the Anita Hill Clarence Thomas thing was wrong. That clarence Thomas sex life with a aid was not a issue and should never have beem exploited by the left like it was? A simple YES OR NO answer will suffice!", YES you are a single minded insensitive, politically jaded jerk. NO, I could care less about Mr. Thomas and Ms. Hill's sex life. That is there own business. It's when it becomes SEXUAL HARRASSMENT that it becomes wrong. If Anita and Clarence were foo ling around so be it. If her job was threatened because she said no, then that is where the wrong began. The same with Bill and whoever. If Paula Jones was not interested in Mr. Clinton, then who cares. I've never heard her say that Bill was holding the door closed and she had to exit out the window. I'm sure if you asked most of the women on this page whether or not they have been on a date or just meeting with a man when things would have gotten out of control by the man's choice, I'm sure you wou ld have a lot of yes answers. At the same time I'm sure that a lot of these meetings progress further because of mutual attraction between the two parties. If Bill and this new girl were involved with each other, I'm sure that it has become exposed bec ause of the draw of fame and fortune.
Mike Koch <shmoodad@aol.com>
Lancaster, SC USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 12:57:13 (EST)
Mark, I agree with you completely. The perjury and coercion charges are VERY serious, and should be dealt with to the fullest extent of the law. It's one thing to fool around. It's another to try to force or blackmail another into being quiet. < br> Mike Koch <shmoodad@aol.com>
Lancaster, SC USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 13:01:57 (EST)
On the point of the Three judge Panel. These were appointed by Mr Bill. On the point of sexual harrasment by Clarence Thomas. This might have been believable had these been allegedly at one job site. Problem is Mike, Anita Hill followed Justice Thoma s around from one assignment to another. In her complaint she was harrassed at each site. hmmmm as Uncle Bob says, I smell a rat!
Andy <tcp12@ibm.net>
Charlotte, USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 13:08:54 (EST)
Forgot something. FTW, I thought Nixon was a sleaze bag. I despised the man for what he did. It was dirty, It was illegal and he paid the price. In spite of all the good he did with China, it still doesn't dismiss his behaviour. And that children is the core issue with Clinton. I pray that he doesn't start a Jimmy Swaggart thing. I have been sickended enough by this.--consequence of Clinton gettin g the boot. Al Gore will be president, boy that should scare everyone.
Andy <tcp12@ibm.net>
Charlotte, USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 13:14:20 (EST)
no comment---just signing in as i feel my way around your page.......
'Becca Thompson <BeccaWrenn@aol.com>
Charlotte, NC USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 13:49:18 (EST)
Andy wrote: "On the point of the Three judge Panel. These were appointed by Mr Bill." OK Andy, who are they and when did "Mr. Bill" appoint them? We await your answer..........
guest
USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 15:00:43 (EST)
One of them judges is a Republican appointee by the name of Santelle(sp). I haven't been able to find the others names. Seems the process for appointment to independent counsel starts with Janet Reno after she determines the merit of the evidence. Oh well, Glad to see that they all may be republicans.
Andy
Charlotte, USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 18:19:27 (EST)
Andy - You seem to have the absolute worse case of tunnel vision I have ever encountered! First, there was nothing in my post about National Politics, only Local. You seem to have somehow twisted my posting around. Secondly, while posting on this page I have NEVER aligned myself with the Democratic Party. You might call me a liberal - but not a Democrat - and not a Republican. Yes, I am registered as a Democrat but I am in no way, shape or form playing their games. When choosing my political affiliation I chose the lesser of 2 evils. Some of the postings on this page now are the perfect example of what is wrong in politics today. Petty name calling and back-biting! It is to despicable to call childish behavior. Allegation = Cover Up = Counter-Allegation = Counter-Cover Up. All the while the media is running uncontrollable.
Marcia <IOKAYUOK@aol.com>
USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 18:34:04 (EST)
Mark - you got me on the Storm Drain Tax - I agree with you. The way it all came about was underhanded. No person wants to pay more taxes and certainly no person wants the increases handled in such a manner. What do you think will become of the property reevaluations??? Like Al posted earlier - everyone better watch this one close its going to be one heck of a show! Check the Observer today about the retreat for the commissioners. PS - Mike - good to see you back, posts are getting better already!
Marcia <IOKAYUOK@aol.com>
USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 18:36:24 (EST)
Way to Go ANDY!! Glad to see that you admit that YOU ARE A LIAR!! You are also an effective liar because you often tell the truth. They say the best liar is someone who tell the truth 90% of the time!! It is amazing that you would dare show yourself on this page. People like you don't care you just like to spread lies and hate and we should all consider that when ever we see your name signed to a post. Andy should NEVER be believed. He is an admited LAIR!!
guest
USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 18:38:36 (EST)
Way to go Marcia!! Andy hates it when people can see what he is!
guest
USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 18:41:16 (EST)
Hi, kids. Just for the record -- Judge Sentelle, Andy, is one of Jesse Helms' and Lauch Faircloth's people, who chose Ken Starr as special prosecutor for Whitewater at the urging of their right-wing, Republican buddies, despite Starr's obvious bias, w hich was well-known in advance. Now, as to the latest Clinton mess -- 1. If he messed around with a 21-year-old intern while in the White House, after all that's gone on before -- and I said "if" -- his bad judgement alone is a major disappointment. No t that I care a hoot what his sexual habits are, but his poor choices make this a problem. 2. If he suborned perjury, he's gone. 3. If this stuff is true, I have a better sense now of how you right-wingers felt 25 years ago watching Richard Nixon self -destruct. But shouldn't we allow the facts to emerge before we draw conclusions? What if the real story is that Monica had an obsessive crush on Bill and exaggerated, or imagined the whole thing? Be careful what you wish for. Some day there'll be a c onservative in the White House who gets caught, again, with his pants down.
Jerry Klein <jerryk@jerryk.com>
Charlotte, NC USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 19:30:09 (EST)
At the moment it is merely "he said, she said". It may always remain an allegation denied, at least in the sense that if it were true, and even if she admits to the affair, it seems extremely unlikely that he would admit it. What I find fascinating abo ut this at the moment is some of what IS known. The logs show repeated telephone and personal visits and there are apparently 9 mesenger slips for items sent to Clinton by ML and signed for by his personal secretary. That is all quite unusual considering the way that the President is insulated from all but the most senior staff. (White house interns DO NOT routinely if ever at all meet with and correspond with the President.) Assume for a moment that he never had any but chaste thoughts about her and that SHE was a deluded, emotionally unstable young lady pursuing him. (And I'd guess that the spin Dr.'s will cast her as exactly that, no matter what.) Why in the world would a man who has had to deal with questions of philandering from the Gennifer Flowers affair forward not simply put a stop to it? It seems to me that under those circumstances nobody would risk the potential problems when they could be so easily cut off at the start. I'm not suggesting that this indicates that he had an affair with her. Ra ther I'm simply saying that White House records seem to indicate that a 21 year old who was essentially a gofer had extraordinary access and contact with the leader of the free world, and that I can't imagine that a careful person would not have dealt wit h that to curtail any potential problems.
Mark Hodroff <mhodroff@juno.com>
CLT, NC USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 20:34:51 (EST)
Mark -- the White House staff did EXACTLY what you're asking about. They shipped her off to the Pentagon, precisely because of the problems inherent. It's not hard for me to envision Clinton developing a friendship with a bright, attractive young wom an, who then takes it too far -- wouldn't you look for a way to "let her down easy?" I'm not saying that's what happened, or that I do, or do not, believe Clinton's denials of a sexual relationship, but is it so hard to see how something innocent gets ou t of hand? I think we better be careful until we know more about Monica, and Linda Tripp, who's involvement in this whole thing smells, not to mention Starr trying to get Monica to wear a wire to trap Vernon Jordan AND the President, before he'd been giv en the authority to do so. My bet is you're going to hear plenty about Tripp, and Monica's personality, before we hear the end of this. And -- never underestimate the potential of "creating" a scandal, on the part of someone like Starr, who's spent $30 Million and more than three years, and come up empty. His whole career's at stake, and I wouldn't put ANYTHING past him.
Jerry Klein <jerryk@jerryk.com>
Charlotte, NC USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 21:27:01 (EST)
Watching the news...this Lewinski gal admitted she was a habitual liar...lordy, I smell a conservative plot (paranoia again). Like Nixon never fooled around. Like, we all know Kennedy did. Like, I'll bet Reagan did. C'mon you conservatives out ther e. Get real. The girl is a habitual liar and nothing's been proven so hang onto your shorts. And like Jerry said, if Clinton did mess around with this little intern he should be punished to the full extent of the law, no doubt. So should have Nixon. : ::ah, pardon me....:::: god it's SO depressing.
Mary T. <chiachiachia@juno.com>
Charlotte, NC USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 21:56:10 (EST)
I speak as a Clinton supporter (1) If Clinton was doing this 21 year old with his wife and daughter in the house, he should resign, after pardoning all the people that Kenn Starr has been after. Put all the scandles behind the country, but get out. Cheating on your wife is bad enough, but during the election season, after they went through this before, he should just quit. (2) If Clinton is innocent in this, it is time to stop the whole "Whitewater" thing once and for all. The Republicans should be shamed into calling for the investigations end with no summery by Starr, and Clinton should pardon all involved. Let's end this thing one way or another.
Marc <marc@vnet.net>
AbleMable, NC USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 22:08:21 (EST)
By the way, if the conservatives get what they want and Clinton quits, we may get 10 years of Gore. Just think of the presidential race in 2000 with Gore having been in for 2 years of a great economy, and being the president that balenced the budget. "When the Gods become angry with us, they answer our prayers" "Be careful what you wish for, you might get it"
Marc <marc@vnet.nett>
Ablemarble, NC USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 22:11:29 (EST)
Roger dodger Jerry, Judge Sentelle is from Mecklenberg county. Kinda got quick with the left clicker on the ole mouse. Interesting that you can find almost anything on Whitewater and related matters except the names of these three judges.---- TO me the bad part of this whole mess is the fact that a 21 year old girl is involved with the Leader of the free world. How could this person get that close to the president. How could the president let her get that close.--Jerry your point on illegal wi re taps is interesting. Why and how was the FBI tied-in with TRIPP. If the FBI was involved then Janet Reno knew what was going on! Whoa, this is really big.
Andy <tcp12@ibm.net>
Charlotte, USA - Thursday, January 22, 1998 at 22:16:32 (EST)
Apparently the president, being a good old fashioned southern baptist, wishes to differentiate between the missionary position as being a sexual relationship, while fellatio does not qualify since it is essentially a taking experience. Thus he sees no conflict in his statements. Wait and see. After all, his initials are BJ.
Another Guest
Spartanburg, SC USA - Friday, January 23, 1998 at 00:17:11 (EST)
this is a good explanation of why K. Starr is involved---http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/digest/daily/jan98/23/starr.htm?
Andy <tcp12@ibm.net>
Charlotte, USA - Friday, January 23, 1998 at 05:19:06 (EST)
We'll, I've pretty much kept my mouth shut, I wanted to see, without any prompting from me, wether there was anything or anytime when a democrat would say "enough is enough" if these alligatuions are true. I am heartened, thank you! I think that we sho uld all remember that if Clinton goes, Egor comes in --- God help us! A president with the looks and personality of a tree stump --- spare me!!! One thing is obvious, that little thing a couple of months ago with Reno finding out about the video tapes too late ---- pay back! As it stands now, subpoenas are going out all over the place from Starrs office and Monica isn't going to testify today, in fact I doubt wether Monica will testify at all ---until Starr gets her COMPLETE IMMUNITY. Then, and only then, if there is anything to her alligations, will she destroy Clinton. You can bet your last dollar, that's what Starr is doing at this very moment. I really don't know how I feel about this anymore, if all this is true --- I fell sorry for Hillary and Chels ea. Jerry is right, this is big, someone is gonna take a fall, either Clinton or Starr will not make it through these proceedings, it's gone too far for that. Heck, I even feel sorry for the President's press secretary, did you see his face trying to reco ncile what Clinton admitted to with Genifer Flowers --- two statements, diametrically opposed, both are true --- sounds like "time compression". You can hide the fire, but what you gonna do with the smoke. I guess that I'd look for some kind of statement from Bill this weekend, otherwise he may be the only one who shows up for the State of the Union message next week. Guest, mind if I ask a dumb question, what's this about remaining annomyous because of posssible problems posting to this page? That was a long time ago, very different circumstances.
pressin'on <sawtooth@trellis.net>
monroe, nc USA - Friday, January 23, 1998 at 06:11:38 (EST)
I want to make a few more comments about this business of annomyous postings. You make take solice in the fact that nobody knows your idenity, that you can make derrogatory statements about other people's character without much fear of retalliation --- but I don't understand why you would want to go through life without taking a few chances, without making yourself known, without personally standing up for your own experiences and convictions. Sure, there are some who will not like what you say, but th e enemies you make by taking a stand for something you feel passionately about will have more respect for you than the friends you can make by sitting on a fence or remaining annomyous. Fear is a valuable thing and has much use, but cowardice has no use w hatsoever. Sooooo, until you can get the courage to "come out of the closet" how about not removing flies from other people's foreheads with a hatchet, unlike you --- we're only human.
pressin'on <sawtooth@trellis.net>
monroe, nc USA - Friday, January 23, 1998 at 06:45:56 (EST)
Pressin, your right on the money with anonymous posting. Guest doesn't want to be accountable. Guest doesn't want to admit when she's wrong. Guest is a known member of TPA, vis a vie they know who she is. Guest doesn't want to embarras the others. It w ouldn't be so bad if Guest contributed something of substance to the page. But as you all know guest engages in personal attacks, which is all she knows and/or is capable of doing. These attacks will not end because I will keep posting and others will fol low. Even when some one corrects a misinformmed post the attacks still come. So since I cant win I might as well continue for as long as Jerry lets me. -----PS: Randy M, Did you know about this:---ADA Online "Coming soon to a Web site near you: federal anti-discrimination law. The World Wide Web Consortium, which sets Web standards, is looking at ways to make the Internet more friendly to the deaf and blind. These handicapped-friendly standards may not be voluntary. The director of the project says the standards might be used by government to force Webmasters to make their sites handicapped accessible." —Charles Oliver, Reason, February 1998
Andy <tcp12@ibm.net>
Charlotte, USA - Friday, January 23, 1998 at 07:35:04 (EST)
Nice bait pressin'on but I am not bitting. Andy you are unbeliveable! You are the greatest liar this page has ever known and attack people here everyday. My "personal attacks" as you call them is me telling the truth about your garbage and you can't stand it! HA! You are right about one thing. My "personal attacks" will not end if you keep posting because I will continue to point out your lies and let people know that you can not be trusted to tell the truth. I would most likely not confront Andy with so often a nd directly but Andy is full of hate for ANYTHING BUT the ultra right-wing and conspiracies continues to post personal attacks on anyone who opposes his way. Call me what you will but I will continue to tell the truth about your posts. That must be what is making you so mad - I am not letting you get away with your lies.
guest
USA - Friday, January 23, 1998 at 08:26:41 (EST)
I’ve been watching and listening, and there are no heroes in this Lewinski business. There’s lack of judgment, rush to judgment, vindictiveness, political jockeying, self righteousness, self loathing, manipulation, duplicity, dirty laundry, prurient cu riosity, wounded bystanders, culpable third parties, huge egos, stupidity, lying, hatred, fear and too many lawyers. On ALL sides. If Clinton goes down for perjury or suborning it’s a shame, because it’s over something so petty. We aren’t talking matters national security here. This isn’t on the scale of secret wars, election tampering or payola. It’s just some stupid extracurricular boinking. The president has character flaws. We all do, including the various women who may have joined ol’ Bill in a quick ie and the political vultures waiting on the sidelines.
Al Christensen <straay2@ix.netcom.com>
- Friday, January 23, 1998 at 09:42:39 (EST)
Jerry it may be just a matter of a different perspective, but no, I CAN'T envision man in his position allowing a young lady to have that kind of access at all. Saying hello in the halls or chatting with interns, cooks, waiters, etc, sure. But it simpl y seems to me that caution and self interest in the circumstances in which he lives would make ANYTHING beyond that set off alarm bells. Keep in mind that if an intern want's to talk to the President on the telephone the call will not go through unless th e switchboard and the president's personal secretary have been instructed, either by the President or his Chief of Staff to allow it. Essentially the same is required for personal access. Surely it should have occurred to him that ANY personal relationshi p with a 21 year female would create difficulties. And while indeed she was transfered it was only AFTER he gave her extraordinary access for a period of many months. And according to the messenger service slips he continued to accept letters and packages until late 1997; well after her transfer to the Pentagon. Assuming that it was innocent, and assuming that she was transfered at his request in order to curtail the appearance impropriety, what must he have been thinking to continue to allow the receipt of corespondence?
Mark Hodroff <mhodroff@juno.com>
CLT, NC USA - Friday, January 23, 1998 at 10:38:21 (EST)
Off the subject a bit...I added a link to my TPA page I am working on. You can access it through Jerry's TPA news section. It has snapshots of The Gathering on it...(so far, only managed to get Jerry up there) so you might want to check that out in t he next couple of days or so. There is much gnashing of teeth going on in my living room with a new scanner, an ftp server that won't cooperate...and you think things are bad in the White House. Y'all have a great one...
Mary T. <chiachiachia@juno.com>
Charlotte, NC USA - Friday, January 23, 1998 at 11:09:47 (EST)
I just checked on the W3 Web Accessibility Initiative. It is at: http://www.w3.org/WAI/.
I don't see a problem with it as written. The W3 is usually accommodating
so I stay more concerned about Micro$oft's actions on the Internet than
the W3. I will keep watch and recommend those interested to visit the
W3 site.
Randy McCracken <
rdm@soundview.com>
Starkville, MS USA - Friday, January 23, 1998 at 13:16:54 (EST)
OUR NEXT PRESIDENT?------ "During the rancorous Senate debate before the Gulf War, Sen. Albert Gore, Jr. of Tennessee was looking for leverage. He wentto Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell, his fellow Democrat, and asked how much time his party would allow him for a speech decrying George Bush's plan to send troops into Iraq. Five minutes, he was told. So he went to Minority Leader Bob Dole. If you can beat five minutes, I'm with you, he told Dole. The answer came back: We'll give you seven. So Gore delivered a prime-time speech in support of the Bush policy: he voted with the Republicans." --- Limbaugh Letter, December 1997
Andy <tcp12@ibm.net>
charlotte, USA - Friday, January 23, 1998 at 17:25:29 (EST)
Andy, in reference to >>>OUR NEXT PRESIDENT?------ Limbaugh Letter, December 1997 <<< Ha ha ha. That Rush, he just slays me. Thank God, nobody in their right mind takes him seriously. And thank God the few that aren't in their right mind are in such small numbers.------Koch Letter, January 1998. Love ya, mean it.
Mike Koch <shmoodad@aol.com>
Lancaster, SC USA - Friday, January 23, 1998 at 18:07:10 (EST)
SUPER BOWL HUMOR------A guy named Joe receives a free ticket to the Super Bowl from his company. Unfortunately, when Joe arrives at the stadium, he realizes the seat is in the last row in the corner of the stadium, he's closer to the Goodyear Blimp than the field.----------About halfway through the first quarter, Joe sees through his binoculars an empty seat 10 rows off the field right on the 50 yard line. He decides to take a chance and makes his way through the stadium and around the security guards to the empty seat. As he sits down, Joe asks the gentleman sitting next to him,"excuse me, is anyone sitting here?" The man says no.---------Now, very excited to be in such a great seat for the game, Joe again inquires of the man next to him, "this is incredible! Who in their right mind would have a seat like this at the Super Bowl and not use it?!"--------The man replies, "well, actually, the seat belongs to me. I was supposed to come with my wife, but she passed away. This is the first Super Bowl we haven't been together at since we got married in 1967."-------"Well, that's really sad," said Joe, "but still, you couldn't find anyone to take the seat? A friend or close relative?"------ "No," the man replies, "They're all at the funeral."
Andy <tcp12@ibm.net>
Charlotte, USA - Saturday, January 24, 1998 at 05:04:54 (EST)
I heard that some of the 'press' have managed to get in touch with some of Clinton's aids and inquired as to how they were holding up under the stress and strain of the last few days and could they sleep at night? One is rumored to have said,"Well, I'm sleeping like a baby, every two hours I wake up and cry!" On the serious side though, if Clinton resigns because Lewinski paid 'lip service' to the 'head of state' and the 'monk milker' becomes prez --- does anyone think that he will pull a 'Gerald Ford' and try to pardon Clinton. If anyone remembers the aftermath of Watergate, that little move pretty much destroyed Ford's political career. Nah, I guess not, Egor would let Clinton 'swing', --- of course Egor might just try to get Teddy Kennedy to be VP, you know --- the guy who got caught by a photographer in a 'compromising position' in a boat with a young lady --- that was about the same time that he changed his position on 'off shore drilling,' wasn't it? ------- Oh well, you're right, I really do need to get a life ---- okay, okay --- but let me ask one more question --- yall keep saying that Clinton isn't stupid enough to do something like this, whatever gave you that idea, this is in keeping with everything this administration had done to date, they have been their own worst enemy, right from the start --- everytime there has been trouble, it has been caused by their own absent-minded fumbling around, stupidity has been the hallmark of this administration --- if he starts a 'scuffle' with Saddam to take attention off this mess, it will be the biggest mistake he ever made --- Saddam needs to have his face 'caved in', but he can wait till this is taken care of. Sources close to Saddam have said that Iraq has a 'nose' for weakness and perceives our current situation as a weak spot --- WRONG!
pressin'on <sawtooth@trellis.net>
monroe, nc USA - Saturday, January 24, 1998 at 07:42:05 (EST)
Is this the "Andy's Idiot opinion" page? If Andy is so damned stupid ignore him! He is just a troll, and so many of you reward his vulger and idiotic comments with the attention he craves so much. He is just like a bad little boy, if you ignore his bad behavior, he will go away.
marc <marc@vnet.net>
Abbemarle, nc USA - Saturday, January 24, 1998 at 08:53:11 (EST)
Linda Tripp is a 48 year old woman with two children. Tripps marriage of 21 years to a Army man ended in 1992. She started to work at the White House in 1992 for George Bush. I don't believe Tripp has a college eduaction nor is she Jewish. Now would Tripp become a close friend of Monica Lewinsky from Beverly Hills (California) who is 24 years old, a college graduate, and Jewish? The two don't fit together. So why is Lewinsky confiding all these lurid details about her alledged sex life with Clinton? And why will a close friend, Tripp, record on tape the confdentials details that Lewinsky was telling a friend? Also, Tripp was in the middle of writing a book. I think Tripp hates men.
BYU
Provo, UT USA - Saturday, January 24, 1998 at 09:20:56 (EST)
Marc, I think you are right about Andy craving attention but I don't think he will go away if we ignore him. I don't think he will go away at all. Andy is a habitual liar and needs to spread his hatred so he will use this page as long as Jerry allows him. I just keep exposing him for the liar that he is because people must know that Andy can not be trusted to tell the truth.
guest
USA - Saturday, January 24, 1998 at 09:29:54 (EST)
Just heard that Clinton agreed to live interview by a panel of three on the Fox television network. The panel would consist of Marv Albert, Frank Giffort, and O. J. Simpson. But, due to the subject matter the interview has been given a parental guide rating of "X". Thus, most people will not be abled to watch it. Because of the "X" rating it is also expected to have more viewers watching then the Super Bowl.
BYU
Provo, UT USA - Saturday, January 24, 1998 at 09:45:40 (EST)
This site was produced by Soundview Communications and Randy McCracken.
It is maintained by Jerry Klein, jerryk@jerryk.com .