1998-09-13 - Re: Clinton–Why I am Chortling

Header Data

From: Alan Olsen <alan@clueserver.org>
To: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
Message Hash: ddab57bad69afcfdddf3a94517fe630a6b7e9a4ec763c1b09f67a4e0e528745e
Message ID: <Pine.LNX.3.96.980914042440.31317C-100000@clueserver.org>
Reply To: <Pine.GSO.3.95.980913130607.4039E-100000@well.com>
UTC Datetime: 1998-09-13 07:33:18 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 15:33:18 +0800

Raw message

From: Alan Olsen <alan@clueserver.org>
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 15:33:18 +0800
To: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
Subject: Re: Clinton--Why I am Chortling
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.3.95.980913130607.4039E-100000@well.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.96.980914042440.31317C-100000@clueserver.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

On Sun, 13 Sep 1998, Declan McCullagh wrote:

> On Sat, 12 Sep 1998, Tim May wrote:
> > * What goes around, comes around. The Liberal puke Democrats who crucified
> > Bob Packwood, Clarence Thomas, and any number of corporate people charged
> > with "sexual harassment," are now reaping what they sowed. "If she says it
> > happened, it happened," the mantra of the feminazi left, is now apparently
> > forgotten by Patricia It's not our business" Ireland.
> There's also the idea popular in some gender feminist circles that the
> imbalance of power in manager-employee relationships makes it impossible
> for genuine consent to be given. Can there be any greater power imbalance
> than the president of the United States and an intern? Where are the
> feminist cries of outrage?

"But Clinton is on their side!"

I think the gender feminists are being quiet because they supported
Clinton.  It all comes down to politics.  There are other feminists I know
(of the non-politically correct variety) that have very unkind things to
say about the man.

> > * Lawmaking is paralzyed, frozen, stillborne. This I count as a Good Thing.
> > Even better will be another 8-10 months of this nightly spectacle. No
> > Health Care Reform, no Communications Decency Act II, no Tobacco Act,
> > nothing.
> In general you might be right. But for "noncontroversial" measures like
> CDA II, well, it'll be in one of the appropriations bills that will be
> approved in the next three weeks.

Actually this is *JUST* the time for moralistic political posturing.
Expect to see a great deal of "holier than thou" legislation put through
under "bringing back morality to America". (And anyone who tries to fight
such lunacy will be labeled a hedonistic scum.)

It is scandals just like this that fuel the fires of the anti-sex league.

> > * This disgraces the Presidency, which I also count as a Good Thing. There
> > were hopes that Nixon's downfall would be the end of the Imperial
> > Presidency, but, alas, the pomp and circumstance continued unabated. It's
> The balance of power in the U.S. government is too tilted in favor of the
> executive and federal agencies; I think more should be returned to
> Congress and the states but don't think we're going to see that happen. To
> do that Congress needs to be willing to seize it; they're not. If we get
> Al Gore in the Oval Office we'll have business as usual.

And remember that Tipper is part of that baggage.  Expect a moralistic
crusade or two from the first lady if that happens.

alan@ctrl-alt-del.com | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply
Alan Olsen            | to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys.