From: Michael Motyka <mmotyka@lsil.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 18:32:39 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Re: Clinton's fake apologies
In-Reply-To: <199809112128.OAA14441@zendia.mentat.com>
Message-ID: <35F9B3BD.6DE6@lsil.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Jim Gillogly wrote:
>
> The fact is that this sex between consenting adults thing is the best
> Starr could do with his Whitewater investigation after umpteen years
> and witnesses and millions of dollars, and I'm not impressed.  I'm
> <much> more impressed with the kind of allegations Softwar digs up --
> sweetheart deals for some company to send encryption to China while
> sitting on the bulk of the domestic encryption industry, for example.
> If he's really done something that involves treason or high crimes and
> misdemeanors, let's hear about it and act on it.  But airing soiled
> linen in public isn't germane.
> 
It's worse than not impressive: it's PATHETIC. I thought we'd have 425
pages of real output relating to the last 6 years of "work" and 25 pages
of Monica. I'd rather finance $600 toilet seats and $1200 gold-plated
hammers with my tax money than Starr's brand of open political warfare.
It's simple, partisan, Rottweiler politics. The kind of stuff that makes
you leave your shoes outside the door when you get home at night.

> If they <do> decide this is now a requirement for high office, I'd like
> to see all the Congresscritters who've had sex out of wedlock and
> concealed it take one step forward.  Shall we make hypocrisy in high
> office impeachable also?
> 
I'd say hypocrisy is more of a hangin' offense, like horse thievin' or
cattle rustlin'. I seethe when I listen to an asshole like Arlin Spectre
or Jerry Falwell spouting off about Clinton. I'm no great fan of
Clinton's but the attackers in this particular shitstorm are lower than
pond scum. I can't wait till they crawl back to the cesspool they came
from.

Mike