Is David Grohl gay?
kdawg
sounds like one all the time now. Him and Pat Smear
Igor Bratic
>
> Not that it makes a difference but is David Grohl a homo? cause he
> sounds like one all the time now. Him and Pat Smear
Pat's gay, Dave might be.
Igor
--
Just sixteen a pickup truck
Out of money and out of luck
I've got no place to call my own
Hit the gas and here I go
Daniel
Igor Bratic wrote in message <35C589...@cadvision.com>...
Abort Me
Pat's like the most non-gay person in rock......Chad Channing on the other
hand.......
,tym
"All the thing I said I wanted turned out to be heaven haunted" -Dave Grohl
The NEW Sea Whores Web Site @ http://members.xoom.com/seawhores
The Dave Grohl Equipment FAQ http://www.foofighters.net/faq/davegrohl
KRIST NOVOSELIC FOR PRESIDENT!!
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill
his wife with Louise Post of Veruca Salt, and then cheated on Post
with someone else....wasn't it Wynona Rider, or did she come later
on... Yeah, Grohl's the most gay person I've ever seen...
David
---------------
http://www.netcom.com/~dperle -- Visit me on the Web!
672 NIRVANA Links, Other Nirvana Stuff, Poetry, and more!
NEW! You can find the Nirvana FAQ here at it's new home.
Chris Rinewalt
>
> Yeah, Dave Grohl is gay...that's why he committed adultery against
> his wife with Louise Post of Veruca Salt, and then cheated on Post
> with someone else....wasn't it Wynona Rider, or did she come later
> on... Yeah, Grohl's the most gay person I've ever seen...
>
> David
Yep, he's a straight up cake boy. He'll take your girlfriend from ya.
ImDrUgFrEe
>> his wife with Louise Post of Veruca Salt, and then cheated on Post
>> with someone else....wasn't it Wynona Rider, or did she come later
>> on... Yeah, Grohl's the most gay person I've ever seen..
Damn... I wanna be gay like Dave.
___________
Steve
-------------------
"Hail Hitler."- David Perle 7-6-98
"I love Tom Grant, he's much like the savior Jesus Christ"- David Perle 7-9-98
Igor Bratic
>
> > Pat's gay, Dave might be.
>
> Pat's like the most non-gay person in rock......Chad Channing on the other
> hand.......
>
> ,tym
Yeah, he just has a high voice and likes wearing dresses, that's one of
the funnies things i've ever heard. Sure, he has a girlfriend, but
that's all conspiracy, goverment conspiracy to hide the fact that he's
gay.
Abort Me
Have you heard him talk? Nope
>and likes wearing dresses
You should check out the Meatpuppets (or Nirvana for that matter) sometime....I
think you'll be pleasant at some of the outfits....
hp@i.i
>
> kdawg wrote:
> >
> > Not that it makes a difference but is David Grohl a homo? cause he
> > sounds like one all the time now. Him and Pat Smear
>
Hate ta burst yr bubbles, but Pat is in fact straight. Ask his longtime
girlie-friend, who he's been w since the Germs days.
He just happens to be a straight boy who enjoys dressing like a girl...
there are more of them out there than than you'd think.
The Tin Man
>
> >>committed adultery against
> >> his wife with Louise Post of Veruca Salt, and then cheated on Post
> >> with someone else....wasn't it Wynona Rider, or did she come later
> >> on... Yeah, Grohl's the most gay person I've ever seen..
>
> Damn... I wanna be gay like Dave.
>
> ___________
> Steve
"Like Dave, If I Could Be Like Dave" (Sung to the tune of the most
overplayed,
annoying, insipid, festering lesion-of-a-commercial I have ever heard or
seen...
...Sweet Jesus, Amen, Pass the relish!)
Sorry bout that....
Love,
The Tin Man
essex
ask him and dave is not he has been seeing jennifer of 7 year bitch for like
forever and a god damn day.
god you people are annoyingly stupid.
Monkeyboy
Dude, are you implying that I might be gay just cos I wear dresses
sometimes? I like the ventilation, okay? Deal.
James
and you start wondering if he's gay. Have You heard " Thi Is A Call" or
"Monkey Wrench" or "Everlong" or "My Hero". Those are some kick ass
songs.
James
A Sassy Guy
-Derek.
The Tin Man wrote in message <35C682...@Erols.Com>...
chase
chase
Laura BJ Armstrong
Laura BJ Armstrong
chase
chase
KP
Laura BJ Armstrong <haushi...@hotmail.com> wrote in article
<35CBAC3C...@hotmail.com>...
: Marriage doesn't mean that he doesn't like guys
:
:
:
:
KDC iz God
KURT WUZ MAREYD TO KORTNY
SMKCAK
Caffeine
~justin
In article <35CBDA...@prodigy.net>,
chase <WALLY1...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>oh shit! I never knew he got divorced! that sucks
>
>chase
Melora Foy
: i don't know if dave is gay , but pat smear is as queer as a $3 dollar bill.
Pat is very campy, but apparently he's straight. Not that it matters.
I also assumed he was gay before I heard he's not.
Melora
Amanda
divorced??? I thought he was dating someone (a female) now. In the
video for Walking After You he's with some girl for the whole thing. He
seems straight to me.
us...@msn.com
harry carry sword
Amanda wrote in message <35E8B1...@centuryinter.net>...
Stoney4429
>divorced???
Yes. Davey pulled a 'Clinton.'
So then they got divorced. So the story goes...
Stone. 'I live in a free country?'
--
"The newspapers of Utopia...would be utterly boring." - Arthur C. Clarke.
--
"It's 4:19. Got a minute?"
--
Some Boring Webpage: http://www.fortunecity.com/tinpan/miles/386/wws.html
Sharon Carver
>
> Wasn't Dave Grohl married to some girl named Jennifer Youngblood but got
> video for Walking After You he's with some girl for the whole thing. He
> seems straight to me.
He was dating the blonde from Veruca Salt for a while
Taylor
An all around good guy
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill
<sharon...@pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>He was dating the blonde from Veruca Salt for a while
Yeah, then he cheated on HER, too. She got what she deserved for
going with a married man, but it just shows what a shmuck he is...
David
---------------
http://www.netcom.com/~dperle -- Visit me on the Web!
672 NIRVANA Links, Other Nirvana Stuff, Poetry, and more!
NEW! You can find the Nirvana FAQ here at it's new home.
Krist Novoselic for TREASURER!
greg mcG
love,greg
| * the infamous evil goat and priest *:
| http://egp.hypermart.net
|
| question: People say your music is depressing. How do you respond to that?
| Mike Mills: Take some Prozac.
|
| i need you around to remind me what not to become
Amanda wrote in message <35E8B1...@centuryinter.net>...
Abort Me
>
>So then they got divorced. So the story goes...
>
>
From what I've heard, he's pulled enough of em to make Billy go "WAY TO GO
DAVEY BOY!!!!"
Groupies, Petra Haden, Louise Posts....you name it, he fucked it....
,tym, the man with the golden foot
"I'm called the cow" -Dave Grohl
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill
>From what I've heard, he's pulled enough of em to make Billy go "WAY TO GO
>DAVEY BOY!!!!"
From what I've heard, he's pulled enough to refer to Billy's
actions as "pulling a Grohl"...
Melora Foy
: Pat is as gay as a three dollar bill.
Pat is straight. You wouldn't think so from the way he acts and dresses sometimes,
but apparently he is.
Melora
Abort Me
>
>Pat is straight. You wouldn't think so from the way he acts and dresses
>sometimes,
>but apparently he is.
>
>
Ok, now this is definitely not suicide related......
Abort Me
>>DAVEY BOY!!!!"
>
> From what I've heard, he's pulled enough to refer to Billy's
>actions as "pulling a Grohl"...
>
>
Holy shit....soda just came out of my nose.......
aww shit, i gotta get some sleep
Bjorn Magnusson
>
> Amanda wrote:
> >
> > Wasn't Dave Grohl married to some girl named Jennifer Youngblood but got
> > divorced??? I thought he was dating someone (a female) now. In the
> > video for Walking After You he's with some girl for the whole thing. He
> > seems straight to me.
>
Wasn't it Louise Post? Isn't that the blacker-haired of the two
chicanas? Or did she dye her hair? Perhaps I am wrong?
--
Bjorn Magnusson
---
bjo...@home.se
http://www.algonet.se/~bara1
---
Why don't you trade those guitars for shovels?
Stoney4429
>DAVEY BOY!!!!"
Yeah. Bubba's probably envious. But you know....Grohl's got groupies, and so
does Bill.
What does everyone think of the current problems facing the States?
This is more a question for those of you outside of the U.S. I can imagine that
we must seem like Big Brother or something, always bombing other countries and
policing the world when we can't even take care of our own problems. Makes me
sick to turn on the news every night and see the same thing. Television news
makes me wanna puke on my cat. My advice? Read a paper...it's not much better,
but it'll do.
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill
>What does everyone think of the current problems facing the States?
It wouldn't be a problem if the babies would shut up and leave the
guy's personal life alone. For those who say that the big deal is
that he lied under oath, I agree that's not good...but the truth is
that no other American citizen, short of maybe Hillary Clinton, would
have been investigated for maybe possibly having lied about something
of that stature in a civil case and which was already thrown out as
irrelevant by the judge anyway. No, perjury isn't good from the
nation's leader. And no, the president isn't above the law. But he
shouldn't be _below_ the law, either, and that's what his opponents in
this case are insisting by wanting him out of office because of this.
And for those who admit that they want him out for having done what
he did with Lewinsky in the first place, grow the fuck up.
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill
>But David, he's the one who's screwed-up his personal affairs and allowed them
>to interfere with his job, which happens to be our leader.
I disagree. It's status-quo, as far as I'm concerned. It's only
interfering with his job because certain people stuck their noses in
where they do not belong. And certain people appointed by the
president whom I actually like let these other certain people do this,
which is a decision I'll never understand.
I agree that morally Clinton shouldn't have done that with Lewinsky,
and I despise adultery. However, it's his business and his family's
business. It only affects the country because Starr's on a power
trip. The guy was an attorney for the tobacco industry, he's spoken
at these conferences for ultra-conservatives, and shit like that, and
he's supposed to be an "independent prosecutor." Bullshit.
>>For those who say that the big deal is that he lied under oath, I
>>agree that's not good...but the truth is that no other American
>>citizen, short of maybe Hillary Clinton, would have been investigated
>>for maybe possibly having lied about something of that stature in a
>>civil case and which was already thrown out as irrelevant by the judge
>>anyway.
>
>Not so fast. I'm sure there will be civil appeals after Starr is done.
What does that have to do with anything? It's not Starr's
business, that's the bottom line. And citizens aren't prosecuted for
what Clinton did. That's it...
>And
>just because perjury in a civil case is usually taken lightly, that doesn't
>make it right.
People are talking about impeachment for something that you or I
wouldn't be punished for. Give me a break....
>>No, perjury isn't good from the nation's leader.
>
>I think it's a little more serious than "not good," it's a HORRIBLE thing for
>the president to do.
This is the real world. People lie, presidents lie. I was upset
after hearing these reports of this stuff with giving nuclear
technology to the Chinese and this and that, but those _serious_
accusations could not be proved by Starr. If the only thing they can
get Clinton on is that he lied about an affair with an intern, then
big damn deal.
>If he had told the truth all along, people would have
>gotten over it.
Yeah, and people said that if he'd just admit to the affair a few
weeks ago they'd forget about it.....but then right afterwards
everyone turns around and says that he should resign after admitting
it. Yeah, I know, they said that they wanted an apology and were
unsatisfied for only saying that he regrets having done that. Dave,
do you really think that if he HAD actually said that "I am sorry"
that he would have then been left alone? Bullshit. Today they say
that he only regrets that he got caught. If he had actually
apologized he would have been accused of being sorry only for being
caught, and that he should resign.
People would have gotten over it, yeah right. Plus, you're talking
about apologizing to the country about such a stupid thing in the
middle of dealing with these important issues with Iraq, Sudan,
Afghanistan.......yeah, what a freakin' sign of strength for the
United States for these people to be watching our leader apologizing
about sex with an intern.
This is the real world, Dave. It does not affect the country
whether or not he had this affair with this intern. Having to spend
hundreds of hours dealing with Starr and preparing, that affects the
country negatively, and I hold Starr accountable. There was no
importance of his Lewinsky investigation. None. Months back when we
were discussing this privately you said that the idea was to show that
he had lied in the past, and that that related to the whole Whitewater
deal. Even though it's now shown that Clinton lied about Lewinsky,
HOW does that mean anything towards Whitewater? Practically speaking.
The guy's a laughing stock, Starr. He should have taken that teaching
job when he had the chance....at another conservative institution, I
understand....but whatever. He was concerned about having a bad
reputation back then, so he took this lead about this intern. Like it
really matters, few people still care about the whole thing. The
polls show that the majority of people disapprove of Clinton's
actions, but the same majority is happy with his job as leader of this
count;ry. That is what matters, and they know it.
>Don't give me that "all politicians lie" argument, I know they
>do. But when they get caught it tends to be career suicide.
Not for everyone, apparently.
>>And no, the president isn't above the law. But he shouldn't be _below_ the
>>law, either, and that's what his opponents in this case are insisting by
>>wanting him out of office because of this.
>
>Who's the baby now? Look, I know Starr has gotten out of hand, but that
>doesn't excuse the fact that it appears they have caught Clinton breaking the
>law (perjury).
You or I would be left alone if we were caught having done the same
thing. So, good, hundreds of millions of taxpayers' money has been
spent by Starr to show that Clinton committed an unpunishable law.
Congratulations, Kenny, you were right; he DID have consensual sexual
relations with an intern and lied about it.
>And it's not only the "right-wing conspirators" that want him out of office.
>It appears the Democrats have had enough of him.
One, anyway. Others are unhappy with the whole deal and Clinton's
actions, but they have not wished for him to leave office.
>Barring a miracle, the
>Democrats will be hit hard in the fall elections because of Billy.
I disagree. The talking heads are speculating about everything
under the moon, but I don't think it will make a difference. The
voters should remember when the crybaby Republicans shut down the
government _twice_ because Clinton wouldn't sign off on what they
wanted him to.
>He's fast
>becoming a dead weight that could hurt the Democratic party for years to come.
Dave, Clinton's still got one of the highest approval ratings in
history, if not still _the_ highest approval rating in history. The
people don't like what he did in his personal life, but they know that
it's his personal life, and they are very happy about his politics.
>> And for those who admit that they want him out for having done what
>>he did with Lewinsky in the first place, grow the fuck up.
>
>What? So now you're criticizing people with morals?
Yes. Clinton didn't kill anyone. (Starr investigated THAT, too,
but came out empty-handed.) he got a blow job from an intern, or
maybe just masturbated with her or something like that, we don't even
know if they had physical contact....I don't personally care. The
majority of the public doesn't care either. We wish we'd never heard
about Lewinsky, and we don't hold Clinton accountable for the
circumstances that led to Starr's ridiculous investigation.
Abort Me
>interfering with his job because certain people stuck their noses in
>where they do not belong.
The second he got put in charge of the country, his personal life became our
business....
>>Who's the baby now? Look, I know Starr has gotten out of hand, but that
>>doesn't excuse the fact that it appears they have caught Clinton breaking
>the
>>law (perjury).
>
> You or I would be left alone if we were caught having done the same
>thing.
Yeah, but nobody elected you to be the leader of the free world........Clinton
did do a good job as president for a while, but there's no question that this
is affecting his ability to run the country...........Sure, if it wasn't for
Kenn Starr, none of this would've gotten as big, but at the same time Clinton
brought it all on himself with what he did and the fact that he lied about
it...Maybe I'm a little nutty in that I always thought the president should be
held up to higher standards than the rest of us.....
>
> Yes. Clinton didn't kill anyone. (Starr investigated THAT, too,
>but came out empty-handed.) he got a blow job from an intern, or
>maybe just masturbated with her or something like that, we don't even
>know if they had physical contact....I don't personally care. The
>majority of the public doesn't care either. We wish we'd never heard
>about Lewinsky, and we don't hold Clinton accountable for the
>circumstances that led to Starr's ridiculous investigation.
Don't equate public stupidity and apathy with anyone condoning Clinton's
actions.....
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill
keep up with the current events with my opinions of the whole thing,
to tell it as it is the way I see it...if anyone's interested.
There's a guestbook too, so you can respond. Does anyone know of a
good free bulletin board thing that I can use? I've come across a
million of 'em in my travels through the Nirvana pages....
Anyway, it's http://www.netcom.com/~dperle/news.html if anyone's
interested...
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill
>The second he got put in charge of the country, his personal life became our
>business....
I disagree again.
>> You or I would be left alone if we were caught having done the same
>>thing.
>
>Yeah, but nobody elected you to be the leader of the free world........
First everyone's saying that "He's not above the law." When it's
pointed out that anyone else would have been left alone, then you all
say that it's different because he's the president. No. He could
have been caught doing a lot worse. He has taken care of the country
brilliantly....he hasn't done a 'perfect' job of course, but he's done
a hell of a job. To get so upset over this stupid thing is
ridiculous.
>Clinton
>did do a good job as president for a while, but there's no question that this
>is affecting his ability to run the country...........
Absolutely, but only because of Starr. Otherwise, it wouldn't have
affected his presidency at all, and no one would have gotten hurt.
His family supposedly wouldn't have found out, and even if they would
have, that's their business. Yes, that would mean that someone would
have gotten hurt, but it's their private business. It doesn't affect
the country.
>Sure, if it wasn't for
>Kenn Starr, none of this would've gotten as big, but at the same time Clinton
>brought it all on himself with what he did and the fact that he lied about
>it...
I agree he was shmuck for doing it and cheating on his family like
that, and I'm not happy that my president lied in a legal hearing
about it, but considering the rest of his presidency, I don't think it
matters. (As a citizen it isn't a punished offense.) Most other
people don't think it matters. Shit happens in politics. A hell of a
lot of other lies have been told by presidents about things that
MATTER; this does not matter, and is not a punished offense for you
and me. I maintain my statement that while the president is not above
the law, he is not below the law either. You can hold him up to a
higher standard if you'd like, and I understand the significance of
the president's action of lying a hearing, but I still don't care. I
could also say that supposedly he did not technically lie about his
"sexual relations," but he also said that he didn't remember meeting
with Lewinsky which is clearly a lie, so that's it for that......but
still....
>Maybe I'm a little nutty in that I always thought the president should be
>held up to higher standards than the rest of us.....
If he's not higher above the law than we are, then why should he be
expected to be higher above anything else than we are? This is
something that is based on his private life. If Starr never got into
this, and I don't know why Reno let him get into it, then no one would
have gotten hurt.
>Don't equate public stupidity and apathy with anyone condoning Clinton's
>actions.....
Not at all, Tim. You failed to quote where I specifically
acknowledged that the same people who support him politically are
annoyed at his personal actions; the only thing is that they
acknowledge that it IS his personal life. They don't like what he's
done, but as far as the country goes, they don't care.
WHiTe VaMPiRe
--
-WHiTe VaMPiRe\Rem-
----
"You can only be young once, but you can be immature forever."
----
Remove the NOSPAM in my email address to email me.
----
My public PGP key is available at http://www.projectgamma.com/files/pgp.asc
and on key servers
----
WHiTe_VaMPiRe on Gamma Force IRC Net. Use server irc.gammaforce.org at Port
6667
http://www.gammaforce.org/ - http://www.projectgamma.com/
Evad195 wrote in message
<199809010702...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
>David Perle writes:
>
>>On 31 Aug 1998 18:31:44 GMT, stone...@aol.com (Stoney4429) wrote:
>>
>>>What does everyone think of the current problems facing the States?
>>
>> It wouldn't be a problem if the babies would shut up and leave the
>>guy's personal life alone.
>
>But David, he's the one who's screwed-up his personal affairs and allowed
them
>to interfere with his job, which happens to be our leader.
>
>>For those who say that the big deal is that he lied under oath, I
>>agree that's not good...but the truth is that no other American
>>citizen, short of maybe Hillary Clinton, would have been investigated
>>for maybe possibly having lied about something of that stature in a
>>civil case and which was already thrown out as irrelevant by the judge
>>anyway.
>
>Not so fast. I'm sure there will be civil appeals after Starr is done.
And
>just because perjury in a civil case is usually taken lightly, that doesn't
>make it right. Wanna jump off a bridge with me?
>
>>No, perjury isn't good from the nation's leader.
>
>I think it's a little more serious than "not good," it's a HORRIBLE thing
for
>the president to do. If he had told the truth all along, people would have
>gotten over it. Don't give me that "all politicians lie" argument, I know
they
>do. But when they get caught it tends to be career suicide. America is a
>combination of sympathy and apathy. Being more honest, without coming
totally
>clean, from the beginning would have served his interests much better.
>
>>And no, the president isn't above the law. But he shouldn't be _below_
the
>>law, either, and that's what his opponents in this case are insisting by
>>wanting him out of office because of this.
>
>Who's the baby now? Look, I know Starr has gotten out of hand, but that
>doesn't excuse the fact that it appears they have caught Clinton breaking
the
>law (perjury). Until a court says Starr has gone outside of the rules,
this is
>what's going on in the present. It's past the "they're picking on him"
stage,
>so deal with it.
>
>And it's not only the "right-wing conspirators" that want him out of
office.
>It appears the Democrats have had enough of him. Barring a miracle, the
>Democrats will be hit hard in the fall elections because of Billy. He's
fast
>becoming a dead weight that could hurt the Democratic party for years to
come.
>
>> And for those who admit that they want him out for having done what
>>he did with Lewinsky in the first place, grow the fuck up.
>
>What? So now you're criticizing people with morals?
>
>
>Big D
>The Collectors' Nirvana Discography: http://come.to/nirv-disc
>
>R.I.P. Rottentanx, BlueRose93, Atgoaiua,
>Homersdawg, and Gomer67 (OK, so he's dying a slow death... ;)
Stoney4429
>keep up with the current events with my opinions of the whole thing
You know what I hate...I try to keep up with "current events:", but in the
current news climate, there is only one or two 'current events.'
They talk and talk until it's all numbing and you can't stand to hear it
anymore...sort of makes you wonder who you can trust.
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill
>sort of makes you wonder who you can trust.
Walter Cronkite. And he hosted the Clintons last week, so there.
=)
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill
>> First everyone's saying that "He's not above the law." When it's
>>pointed out that anyone else would have been left alone, then you all
>>say that it's different because he's the president. No. He could
>>have been caught doing a lot worse. He has taken care of the country
>>brilliantly....he hasn't done a 'perfect' job of course, but he's done
>>a hell of a job. To get so upset over this stupid thing is
>>ridiculous.
>
>Yeah, it's a shame someone is enforcing the law.
But Dave, it wouldn't be enforced on you or me, so why him? Either
everyone is held accountable for this, or no one is. And for tens of
millions of dollars to be spent in order to prove such a mundane
thing, the whole thing is absurd. It took Clinton away from more
important matters, such as the situations in Afghanistan and Sudan,
not to mention our 'friend' over in Iraq.
>> I agree he was shmuck for doing it and cheating on his family like
>>that, and I'm not happy that my president lied in a legal hearing
>>about it, but considering the rest of his presidency, I don't think it
>>matters.
>
>That's where you are hideously wrong. No matter what ANYONE has done and their
>position in life, the law is the law.
But it's an unpunished law! So that's it! Let the man get on with
his job already! That's the point, this is an unpunished law. If
Bill and Hillary had an active sex life and participated in sodomy,
and if Washington D.C. happens to be one of those jurisdiction where
sodomy is technically illegal, then are you saying that they should be
punished for it? Now, I'm not an idiot, I realize the great
difference between lying in a hearing and consensual sex among adults,
but still. You say that the law is the law, and I do know where
you're coming from. But the fact is that information coming out that
someone had lied in a legal hearing about something that the judge
ruled inadmissible and in a case was totally thrown out anyway, that
is not a punished crime. It's not right, I do not like that our
nation's leader did that, but it's not a punished crime. And people
who go on and on about moral leader, they laughably underestimate what
politics is, what politics in the modern world deals with. In my
personal opinion (which of course is irrelevant to the law), Clinton's
moral actions in helping the country and the world (trying to help
Ireland, helping relations in the Middle East, helping the people in
Bosnia, etc.) FAR outweigh any stupid shit that he's done in his
personal life.
Religiously speaking, of course, the 'bad' things he's done are
still bad, and if the Judeo-Christian beliefs are true, then he will
be punished for them, unless he has truly repented for them, and only
he knows what he's repented. I don't know if there's any truth to God
and Heaven and all of that, but I am satisfied, personally, as an
American, that Clinton's political actions have far outweighed any bad
stigma of cheating on his family and committing an
practically-speaking unpunished crime.
Hey Dave, do you sell bootlegs by any chance? Ooh, I'm gonna call
the FBI on you....
>>(As a citizen it isn't a punished offense.)
>
>Which means the legal system isn't being run properly.
So get into the system and fix it. As it stands, it isn't a
punished offense.
>>Shit happens in politics. A hell of a lot of other lies have been
>>told by presidents about things that MATTER; this does not
>>matter, and is not a punished offense for you and me.
>
>I love how you're basing this on a flaw in the legal system...
I'm talking about reality. I am also a Clinton fan, which I
realize doesn't do much for my argument. I voted for the man because
I believed in what he did during his first four years and I
appreciated what he had to say about his next four. At the time I
figured that the Paula Jones stuff was true. But her own description
of the matter included her saying that he said he didn't want her to
do anything that she didn't feel comfortable with, and that was it.
And blah blah, I don't want to turn this into a Paula Jones debate,
I'm just saying that I knew the man's weaknesses before, but as far as
leading this country, I did not and do not feel that it is relevant.
And then you've got people comparing Clinton to Senator Packwood who
the democrats all wanted out because of his problems.....there's no
comparison.
>What presidents and lies are you talking about?
Nixon regarding a certain burglary and election-fixing, Reagan
(Bush too?) regarding selling arms to Iran and whatever else that
imbecile (for whom my state's turnpike is now named after.....Jesus
Christ....), Johnson for everything he kept from us regarding Vietnam,
I think it was Truman who lied about the U2 missle(s) or whatever that
was?....I don't know much about that.
>Come on, saying he "technically" told the truth is weak.
Weak or not, is stands up in court. In fact, a specific definition
was laid out on the table for him in that Jones hearing, and
supposedly, by that definition, he told the truth. So what more do
you want?
>Wrong. They do care. They're worried this will severely affect his ability to
>get things done
Then they don't have the confidence they should have in Clinton.
The man has done stupendously under pressure like this.
>and that he could hurt the elections. Aren't politics all
>about perception?
Unfortunately...nevertheless, I doubt this will have a big effect
on the elections.
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill
>David Perle writes:
>
>>On 01 Sep 1998 07:02:52 GMT, eva...@aol.com (Evad195) wrote:
>>
>>>But David, he's the one who's screwed-up his personal affairs and
>>>allowed them to interfere with his job, which happens to be our leader.
>>
>> I disagree. It's status-quo, as far as I'm concerned. It's only
>>interfering with his job because certain people stuck their noses in
>>where they do not belong. And certain people appointed by the
>>president whom I actually like let these other certain people do this,
>>which is a decision I'll never understand.
>
>How convenient of you to forget this isn't Clinton's first "personal matter"
>that has come to light and ended up becoming a focus of his job.
What does that have to do with anything? I conveniently forgot to
mention it? I mean, I didn't want to get into the whole Paula Jones
thing even though I mentioned it in my previous message, but, look at
the facts here. She took legal action on Clinton the _day_ before the
statute of limitations ran out on her case. I forget the name of the
institute behind her, but look at the institute that's been backing
her the whole time, this ultra-conservative institute! With this
"conservative activist" (whatever the hell that means) becoming her
spokesperson....but the institute is the kicker.
I don't know how true the "conservative conspiracy" theory is, BUT,
I mean, there IS some reason here to be wondering about that. And
Starr, as I already mentioned, is this big attorney for the tobacco
industry that Clinton's been toughest president in history on, and
Starr has been a speaker in front of these big ultra-conservative
groups recently....I mean, jeez! You're damn right Clinton's had a
lot of his personal matters brought into the spotlight....and look
who's responsible!!!
It's like I already said, I personally am not one to blame Clinton
for the fact that all of these conservative assholes (not that I'm
saying conservatives are automatically assholes, not at all....but
these conservatives in particular are assholes) want to destroy him.
Again, is this some big conservative conspiracy that started the day
Clinton announced his candidacy? Hell if I know, I don't know...but
to say that there's no reason to suggest such a thing, that's just
wrong. The Lewinsky thing wasn't made up by Clinton enemies, no. But
no one would be so clean as to be able to look good after as much
probing as has occurred in Clinton's life would occur in theirs.
>Then my complaint is that perjury offenses aren't prosecuted as they should be.
> Just because it's perceived to be "not a big deal" in civil cases doesn't make
Money talks. Hell, time talks...time is money I guess... The
legal world doesn't spend the time or the money to investigate someone
who may have lied about a sexual affair that has nothing to do with
what the hearing is about, and which was ruled inadmissible, before
the whole case was thrown out. You are suggesting that Clinton is
below the law.
Here's a question....do you believe that Starr SHOULD HAVE
investigated this in the first place? Or would you instead say that
you wouldn't have wanted him to have done so, BUT since he did and
found out what he did that Clinton must face the consequences?
>it any less illegal. BTW, today a judge said she is considering charging
>Clinton with contempt of court for "misleading" testimony in his deposition.
It won't go far.
>It is Starr's job BTW.
It absolutely is not. He was appointed to look into Whitewater.
This has nothing to do with Whitewater. Months ago you told me that
he was doing this now to show that Clinton had a history of lying and
that he could have lied in Whitewater...that still would have nothing
to do with Whitewater. If you can't show that he did lie about this
or that in Whitewater, then you're screwed.
>It's my understanding that he can look far and wide to
>find what he deems to be against the law.
Actually, you're partially right. Reno allowed him to get into
this Lewinsky deal. Why she did, I have no idea. But that is the
only reason he was allowed to do anything about it. Without getting
permission from Reno, he would have nothing to do with the case.
>Complain about how the independent
>investigator's guidelines are written, but don't whine about Starr.
By the guidelines I'd say that there is a severe conflict of
interest, actually.
>He has
>gotten permission from judges and the Justice Department. If he was so out of
>line he would have been stopped long ago. Accept this is how it is and move
>on.
The only thing left is a vote in Congress, after looking over his
report. Supposedly no one there short of a few people want to kick
him out. Speaking of the upcoming elections. But now I'm reminded of
months back when Newt Gingrich of all people were speaking all over
the place against Clinton while the whole Lewinsky thing was going
down....speaking of liars and ethics violations!!! Some of these
people are insane, I can't believe that he of all people was out
speaking out against Clinton's actions.
>You just don't get it, do you? Perjury is illegal. It's a pretty simple
>concept to understand, or so I thought.
Of course I understand it. But I sure as hell wouldn't see it fit
for the man to be impeached for selling a bootleg, for instance, and
that is something that is punished more than what he did!
>People get fired all the time, and for far less than breaking the law.
Of course, considering that he is our employee and 60-70% of us
want him to stay, then I don't think he'll be 'fired'.
>>I was upset after hearing these reports of this stuff with giving nuclear
>>technology to the Chinese and this and that, but those _serious_
>>accusations could not be proved by Starr.
>
>I agree, those are scary things to think about.
I suppose we can thank Starr for putting the rumors to bed, then,
huh?
>>If the only thing they can get Clinton on is that he lied about an
>>affair with an intern, then big damn deal.
>
>I'll remember this argument if I ever commit perjury - "big damn deal."
If your circumstances echo Clinton's, it won't be necessary.
>> Yeah, and people said that if he'd just admit to the affair a few
>>weeks ago they'd forget about it.....but then right afterwards
>>everyone turns around and says that he should resign after admitting
>>it.
>
>No, I think the problem is he mislead the public for months.
Yeah, and this public said that if he'd just admit to it already
and apologize then they'd forget it. He admits to it and says that he
'regrets' it, and then they're all over him.
>Once he started
>the lie he was in trouble. I think things would have been better had he told
>the truth, or more of it, from the beginning.
Do you think that situation is at all likely, or do you just feel
that it would have been 'better'?
>>Yeah, I know, they said that they wanted an apology and were
>>unsatisfied for only saying that he regrets having done that. Dave,
>>do you really think that if he HAD actually said that "I am sorry"
>>that he would have then been left alone? Bullshit.
>
>No, and I don't recall saying anything remotely close to that.
It has nothing to do with what you said, it has to do with what the
people said. Of course, truth be told, pretty much the polls didn't
change from the day before and after he testified to Starr...
>For months he
>maintained an image of innocence (and arrogance). Then he admits he lied. I
>don't think there was enough he could have said.
I think he said too much. You can criticize my individual voice in
the matter if you'd like, but I can say the same to yours, and the
fact is that I've got the majority on my side. You can make fun of
some of my "weaker" statements by saying, "Ooh, David feels this so
that is the way it is," but I have the majority on my side. Doesn't
mean you're wrong, of course; it's just difference of opinion. But
keep in mind that even though we don't know all of the facts, we know
a hell of a lot about this, so you can't blame the "ignorant public."
And the way I feel, just as I said in my first sentence in this
paragraph, I think we know way too much anyway. You know, months ago
regarding Whitewater I commented to you in our debate that the whole
thing that he was being investigated for was small potatoes. That's
not a phrase I use often so I remember the exact term I used. =) You
said that it certainly was not small potatoes, but in the end Starr
could find nothing to get Clinton on regarding it. Instead he had to
settle for something that had nothing to do with Whitewater or
anything that he had anything to do with, and it's a lie about sex
that no other citizen would have been punished for.
>Don't you think he could have
>eased the public into this rather than blindsiding them?
I don't think that the public wanted to know. I also think that
the public figured as time went by and leaks came out that he was
lying anyway. I also feel that he didn't owe us any answers to begin
with. It was not something that affected the country.
>> People would have gotten over it, yeah right. Plus, you're talking
>>about apologizing to the country about such a stupid thing in the
>>middle of dealing with these important issues with Iraq, Sudan,
>>Afghanistan.......yeah, what a freakin' sign of strength for the
>>United States for these people to be watching our leader apologizing
>>about sex with an intern.
>
>You forget about the part where he lied to the public for months...
No, I didn't. In fact that would have added insult to injury for
the perception of him and our country by these people. Don't you
realize the significance of a strong leader in the eyes of our
enemies? You want to bring that down because he lied about a sexual
affair in a legal hearing that had nothing to do with said affair? My
standards are different than yours, I suppose.
>Get over the affair, David. No one cares about it, or at least I don't.
So now you're doing what you criticized me for doing...making it
about personal opinion. Well, a lot of people crying for his actual
impeachment are whining about how he did what he did in 'their' Oval
Office. So, no, you can't say that no one cares, just like I can't
say that no one cares about any of this.
>My issue is trust and honesty.
I trust him fully with my country. How's that? As I said in the
beginning, I wouldn't expect him to be honest about everything, both
for reasons of national security and for reasons that he is a human
being. Again, we have different standards. I do not expect to be
able to know what is going on in my White House, I just care about
whether or not the job is getting done well, and for that, all signs
point to 'yes.'
>Why are you so fixated on Starr?
'Cause he's evil.
>He's playing by the rules.
So why is he being investigated for wrongdoings of his own? If, by
any chance, he is admonished of the accusations, he'll have something
in common with Clinton, won't he. Just don't go into his sex life....
>>that related to the whole Whitewater deal. Even though it's now
>>shown that Clinton lied about Lewinsky, HOW does that mean
>>anything towards Whitewater? Practically speaking.
>
>I don't know. I don't have access to Starr's investigation.
Well, sooner or later we will, so we'll see.
>But still, regardless of how you feel about
>perjury in a civil case, it IS illegal. Sorry, but I can't get past that.
So are my chances for being president shot since I buy, sell, and
trade bootlegs? Damn!
>Wasn't he told he wasn't allowed to leave until this was finished?
Absolutely not. Whitewater was overwith. He got special
permission to investigate the Lewinsky matter. He decided not to take
the teaching job, in favor of persecuting Clinton instead.
>Well those polls may change soon as the stock market crumbles.
It rose back up quite a bit yesterday, as I expected it to. I
don't know what's happening today. The stock market goes up and down.
It was doing extraordinarily well for a while. It was bound to fall,
but now it's going back up. And this also is obviously a result of
international occurrences that affected our markets, it wasn't an
internal problem.
>Aren't you the
>one who said as long as the economy is fine, that's all that people care about?
Possibly. Of course Clinton hasn't had the effect on that stuff
that a lot of people give him credit for. While the fact IS that a
lot of people are happy with him as long as their money is doing well,
the fact also is that it doesn't have much to do with his
administration. Not that he's done NOTHING for the economy regarding
jobs and stuff like that, but not to the extent that people give him
credit for. Nevertheless, for some reason people turn blind to
everything else as long as their money is doing well.
>>>Who's the baby now? Look, I know Starr has gotten out of hand,
>>>but that doesn't excuse the fact that it appears they have caught
>>>Clinton breaking the law (perjury).
Wait, if you admitted before that he's gotten "out of hand," what
does that mean from the note I'm replying to where before you said
that he's done nothing wrong?
>> You or I would be left alone if we were caught having done the same
>>thing.
>
>Not if prosecutors did their jobs, but that's another issue.
It IS another issue, you're right.
>For the sake of accuracy, are you sure it's "hundreds of millions"? The last I
>heard it was $40 million and that was earlier this year.
Ah, you're probably right. In fact I think I also wrote
"hundreds..." before...I'll go change that now...
>How many candidates do you think are eager to have Clinton appear at
>fundraisers and support them?
Heh, if history continues to repeat itself as far as Clinton's
concerned, then I don't think it's appropriate at this point to guess
that his political aura is dead.
>> Dave, Clinton's still got one of the highest approval ratings in
>>history, if not still _the_ highest approval rating in history.
>
>What? I could have sworn I heard his numbers were Nixon-esque after the
>"apology" compared to after the Watergate mess.
Clinton's rating was higher, but you're right. Either way, unless
Starr's got some BIG ass surprises in store for us, it's not getting
any worse for Clinton. He admitted to the affair which he'd been
lying about, and his approval rating for his JOB (as opposed to his
person) stayed very high.
>>The people don't like what he did in his personal life, but they know that
>>it's his personal life, and they are very happy about his politics.
>
>Did you write this before the financial mess today?
Didn't I write that yesterday, Tuesday, which was when the stock
markets rose?
>>>> And for those who admit that they want him out for having done what
>>>>he did with Lewinsky in the first place, grow the fuck up.
>>>
>>>What? So now you're criticizing people with morals?
>>
>> Yes.
>
>You're losing it. I'm not one of the moral fanatics, but I can understand
>their concerns.
So can I. I have similar concerns of my own, but the state of the
union concerns me more. A lot more.
>>Clinton didn't kill anyone. (Starr investigated THAT, too,
>>but came out empty-handed.) he got a blow job from an intern, or
>>maybe just masturbated with her or something like that, we don't even
>>know if they had physical contact....I don't personally care. The
>>majority of the public doesn't care either. We wish we'd never heard
>>about Lewinsky, and we don't hold Clinton accountable for the
>>circumstances that led to Starr's ridiculous investigation.
>
>Yeah, just pretend it never happened. Everything will be OK. David, deal with
>what is happening in the present. It's past what you're clinging to.
There you go making fun of me as if I'm totally out there; but the
country agrees with me, for the most part. Again, I'm not saying that
you're wrong....just that practically-speaking, the country is happy
with Clinton's job, and we don't want him out. And legally-speaking,
it's doubtful that he will be impeached. And definitely doubtful that
he'll resign.
Thank God this is over for now, I must have been on here for an
hour and a half replying to the last two notes....jeez....
Justin Slade
of our dear drummer wonder, David Grohl, but instead it's American
politics... please change the subject line next time.
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill wrote:
> >sort of makes you wonder who you can trust.
>
> Walter Cronkite. And he hosted the Clintons last week, so there.
Speaking of which, why did Conan and Jay have practically the same joke
about that on the same night? You'd think somebody at NBC would notice.
--
Justin (http://members.tripod.com/~justin_slade/)
Bouncy ball is the source of all goodness and light.
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill
>Clinton. Starr can look all he wants, but without Clinton doing these things
>there'd be nothing to find.
=) Dave, no one would be able to stand up against the probing that
Clinton's had to put up with without getting burned by their past.
Not Dole, not Reagan, not Gingrich, not Gore, not Carter. It's
ridiculous. Clinton's human. The people know he's human, that's why
the majority of citizens aren't making a big deal over this. You can
say all you want that ultimately Clinton is responsible for his own
actions, and you're damn right he is, but that doesn't change the fact
that ....I can't even finish this sentence it's so stupid. No one is
free of skeletons in their closets, you're acting as if Clinton has an
extraordinary amount of skeletons in there. Ha.
>>Or would you instead say that you wouldn't have wanted him to
>>have done so, BUT since he did and found out what he did that
>>Clinton must face the consequences?
>
>Yeah, I'd lean more towards this.
See, I understand that, but I personally find the whole thing to be
really dirty pool, and it makes me want to back Clinton against the
unfair persecution.
>> Actually, you're partially right. Reno allowed him to get into
>>this Lewinsky deal. Why she did, I have no idea. But that is the
>>only reason he was allowed to do anything about it. Without getting
>>permission from Reno, he would have nothing to do with the case.
>
>So? I'll say it again, we're past those concerns now.
It's all about ethics. He's being investigated right now because
of it.
>> By the guidelines I'd say that there is a severe conflict of
>>interest, actually.
>
>Where's the uproar over this? If this was so wrong he would have been shut
>down.
On Clinton's part, it would have been bad politics to shut down
Starr. I guess it's kind of like a drunk driver refusing to volunteer
to a breathilizer test or a blood test to a cop.
>> It has nothing to do with what you said, it has to do with what the
>>people said. Of course, truth be told, pretty much the polls didn't
>>change from the day before and after he testified to Starr...
>
>No, but they changed after he admitted he wasn't as honest as he should have
>been.
Well, no, because the day he testified to Starr was the day (night)
he addressed the nation. The polls did not change a heck of a whole
lot.
>He is viewed as somewhat of a sideshow.
Yeah, and Starr is directly responsible. I don't care what you say
about Clinton's responsibility. Even with Starr's investigation, we
were not to know any of what was being said. He and/or his people
leaked all of the information for the country and our enemies to hear.
That's fucked up. Grand juries are supposed to be secret. Did this
look secret to you?
>Let me put it this way, and I think you'll agree, no one SHOULD care about the
>affair. But they SHOULD take the perjury seriously.
Actually, I do care about the affair as far as his family is
concerned....but politically-speaking, I don't care.
Practically-speaking, I don't care. And I care about the perjury as
well, but not very much. I feel that the whole thing behind the
perjury is pretty groundless to begin with. That's my opinion as a
citizen and as a voter.
>>>Why are you so fixated on Starr?
>>
>> 'Cause he's evil.
>
>Good argument, whatever.
I was trying to be a bit humorous. I hope you understood that. =)
>I don't know, my crystal ball is broke. I guess it depends if someone makes an
>issue of it or you get arrested and convicted.
So what you're saying is that if someone does make an issue of it
that I will be in trouble if I run for president and my interest in
Nirvana and R.E.M. bootlegs is outted.
>Yeah, I'm done too. It's pointless for us to continue this. I'm at the point
>where it's best to not say some things to you.
Why, because I'm unreasonable or because it's just too tiring? =)
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill
wrote:
>Speaking of which, why did Conan and Jay have practically the same joke
>about that on the same night? You'd think somebody at NBC would notice.
Jay's an asshole, I stopped watching him the first night of the
Lewinsky thing and haven't looked back since. (Well, actually, I
guess I've still checked out some Headlines and Jay-Walking, but
that's it! :) Conan's cool, but I stopped watching that a year ago
when school started and I had early classes and didn't get back into
it....
Stoney4429
>that has come to light and ended up becoming a focus of his job.
"I didn't inhale."
Yeah? Well I do.
He later said he wasn't drafted, which he was. Of course, if I were drafted,
I'd be on the first train to Canada...
Barbarella
wrote:
>>
>> Walter Cronkite. And he hosted the Clintons last week, so there.
>
>Speaking of which, why did Conan and Jay have practically the same joke
>about that on the same night? You'd think somebody at NBC would notice.
That's interesting. What were the jokes?
DW
If replying by email remove x
"The dumber people think you are, the
more surprised they're going to be
when you kill them."
--William Clayton
Spam b8
christain coalition, California
CCC...@aol.com
Blueguy
>
> free of skeletons in their closets, you're acting as if Clinton has an
> extraordinary amount of skeletons in there. Ha.
better.
marijuana, the draft, gennifer flowers, jones, monica, i mean how many
times can someone lie and you believe them? with all that shit, to me it
points towards someones personality, namely, lying about anything that
you need to. yes, other politicians lie, but bill is in another league!
oh yeah, i heard (matt?) drudge say on tv, that billy was quoted back in
'73 or '74 (responding about nixon) that any prez that lies to the
public should resign. but then again he has only proven that he says
whatever he NEEDS to say.
Justin Slade
> Jay's an asshole, I stopped watching him the first night of the
> Lewinsky thing and haven't looked back since. (Well, actually, I
> guess I've still checked out some Headlines and Jay-Walking, but
> that's it! :) Conan's cool, but I stopped watching that a year ago
> when school started and I had early classes and didn't get back into
> it....
I used to hate Jay... a lot. Not him personally, just the show. I didn't
like it. I was hooked on Letterman. But, Letterman started getting (gasp!)
boring, and even the Top Ten Lists weren't "doing it" for me anymore, so I
started flicking between Jay and Letterman. Then, I started watching him
instead of Letterman. I started to watch Conan sometimes, whenever I got a
chance, beginning last spring, but this summer, I started watching every
night, and he's become my favourite of all 4. Of course, when school starts
(makes me sound like a kid... I'll be a big boy then...) I won't be watching
any of them very much, except for Fridays, and holidays.
Justin Slade
> >>
> >> Walter Cronkite. And he hosted the Clintons last week, so there.
> >
> >Speaking of which, why did Conan and Jay have practically the same joke
> >about that on the same night? You'd think somebody at NBC would notice.
>
> That's interesting. What were the jokes?
Something about how it must have been a change for Hilary Clinton to be
around the most trusted man in America for a change (referring to Cronkite).
WHiTe VaMPiRe
Hash: SHA1
Your outright loyality for Bill Clinton disgusts me.
- --
-WHiTe VaMPiRe\Rem-
- ----
"You can only be young once, but you can be immature forever."
- ----
Remove the NOSPAM in my email address to email me.
- ----
My public PGP key is available at
http://www.projectgamma.com/files/pgp.asc and on key servers
- ----
WHiTe_VaMPiRe on Gamma Force IRC Net. Use server irc.gammaforce.org at
Port 6667
http://www.gammaforce.org/ - http://www.projectgamma.com/
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill wrote in message :
> Jay's an asshole, I stopped watching him the first night of the
>Lewinsky thing and haven't looked back since. (Well, actually, I
>guess I've still checked out some Headlines and Jay-Walking, but
>that's it! :) Conan's cool, but I stopped watching that a year ago
>when school started and I had early classes and didn't get back into
>it....
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 5.5.5 for non-commercial use <http://www.nai.com>
iQA/AwUBNe67xd/q8ZpxA8pfEQIdKACgpGDFQxNramPmbQJbB1ClrpNmu6YAnA3i
yMUGmztPEWk0uFmym/2yythW
=6W5a
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
WHiTe VaMPiRe
WHiTe VaMPiRe
Hash: SHA1
He does. If you research his background enough you'll run into
his drug 'dealings' (He runs drugs, it's not just the CIA), he has
murdered(had them) many people in the past. He has done many awful
icky ass things especially for the bloody president to do. There _is_
evidence, it exists. You just have to look around and research the
subject.
I would expect you to listen to this being the main "murder
theory" backer, but I suppose you won't.
Regards,
- --
-WHiTe VaMPiRe\Rem-
- ----
"You can only be young once, but you can be immature forever."
- ----
Remove the NOSPAM in my email address to email me.
- ----
My public PGP key is available at
http://www.projectgamma.com/files/pgp.asc and on key servers
- ----
WHiTe_VaMPiRe on Gamma Force IRC Net. Use server irc.gammaforce.org at
Port 6667
http://www.gammaforce.org/ - http://www.projectgamma.com/
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill wrote in message :
> =) Dave, no one would be able to stand up against the probing
that
>Clinton's had to put up with without getting burned by their past.
>Not Dole, not Reagan, not Gingrich, not Gore, not Carter. It's
>ridiculous. Clinton's human. The people know he's human, that's why
>the majority of citizens aren't making a big deal over this. You can
>say all you want that ultimately Clinton is responsible for his own
>actions, and you're damn right he is, but that doesn't change the
fact
>that ....I can't even finish this sentence it's so stupid. No one is
>free of skeletons in their closets, you're acting as if Clinton has
an
>extraordinary amount of skeletons in there. Ha.
>
>>>Or would you instead say that you wouldn't have wanted him to
>>>have done so, BUT since he did and found out what he did that
>>>Clinton must face the consequences?
>>
>>Yeah, I'd lean more towards this.
>
> See, I understand that, but I personally find the whole thing to
be
>really dirty pool, and it makes me want to back Clinton against the
>unfair persecution.
>
>>> Actually, you're partially right. Reno allowed him to get into
>>>this Lewinsky deal. Why she did, I have no idea. But that is the
>>>only reason he was allowed to do anything about it. Without
getting
>>>permission from Reno, he would have nothing to do with the case.
>>
>>So? I'll say it again, we're past those concerns now.
>
> It's all about ethics. He's being investigated right now because
>of it.
>
>>> By the guidelines I'd say that there is a severe conflict of
>>>interest, actually.
>>
>>Where's the uproar over this? If this was so wrong he would have
been shut
>>down.
>
> On Clinton's part, it would have been bad politics to shut down
>Starr. I guess it's kind of like a drunk driver refusing to
volunteer
>to a breathilizer test or a blood test to a cop.
>
>>> It has nothing to do with what you said, it has to do with what
the
>>>people said. Of course, truth be told, pretty much the polls
didn't
>>>change from the day before and after he testified to Starr...
>>
>>>>Why are you so fixated on Starr?
>>>
>>> 'Cause he's evil.
>>
>>Good argument, whatever.
>
> I was trying to be a bit humorous. I hope you understood that. =)
>
>>I don't know, my crystal ball is broke. I guess it depends if
someone makes an
>>issue of it or you get arrested and convicted.
>
> So what you're saying is that if someone does make an issue of it
>that I will be in trouble if I run for president and my interest in
>Nirvana and R.E.M. bootlegs is outted.
>
>>Yeah, I'm done too. It's pointless for us to continue this. I'm at
the point
>>where it's best to not say some things to you.
>
> Why, because I'm unreasonable or because it's just too tiring? =)
>
>David
>---------------
>http://www.netcom.com/~dperle -- Visit me on the Web!
>672 NIRVANA Links, Other Nirvana Stuff, Poetry, and more!
>NEW! You can find the Nirvana FAQ here at it's new home.
>
>Krist Novoselic for TREASURER!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 5.5.5 for non-commercial use <http://www.nai.com>
iQA/AwUBNe68yN/q8ZpxA8pfEQKoRACeOn02xxgMGbwwZmTselgikejApXMAn07Z
QDRRQTCzrLAoFzsEvuqAZhms
=mIjZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Stoney4429
>Monica's<BR>
>"special day."
Can I say something? I think Matt Drudge is a fucking pin headed prick.
That's just my opinion. Oh, and lose that hat for god's sake.
Stoney4429
>his drug 'dealings' (He runs drugs, it's not just the CIA)
Yeah, it's not just your crackhead neighbor who see's the profit value in the
illegal substances market.
>he has<BR>
>murdered(had them) many people in the past.
Vince Foster? No. Who else?
>He has done many awful<BR>
>icky ass things especially for the bloody president to do.
Oh. And you've never done anything wrong...oh wait! I forgot, your 15 and
haven't had the chance to do all the good shit yet. Give it some time. Before
you know it you'll have a rap sheet that looks like James Brown's and Flava
Flave's combined.
>You just have to look around and research the<BR>
>subject.
Did you buy that video that Jerry Fallwell was selling on is TV show?
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill
>please, the guy lies just about anything, that will make him look
>better.
>marijuana, the draft, gennifer flowers, jones, monica, i mean how many
What did he lie about exactly regarding the draft? All I know is
that people call him a draft-dodger when the fact is that the man got
a scholarship to study at Oxford. Everyone in here can only dream
about being invited to study at Oxford on scholarship.
>times can someone lie and you believe them? with all that shit, to me it
>points towards someones personality, namely, lying about anything that
>you need to. yes, other politicians lie, but bill is in another league!
What does any of this have to do with what you quoted? What I'd
said was that no one would be able to look good if their lives were
invaded the way Clinton's has been.
>oh yeah, i heard (matt?) drudge say on tv, that billy was quoted back in
>'73 or '74 (responding about nixon) that any prez that lies to the
>public should resign.
I've heard that, and it's pretty interesting. Of course I don't
know if Clinton was talking about lying about sex......Nixon lied
about some very, very important matters; stuff that affected the
country. You can't compare the two situations.
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill
<whitev...@NOSPAM.mindless.com> wrote:
> He does. If you research his background enough you'll run into
>his drug 'dealings' (He runs drugs, it's not just the CIA), he has
>murdered(had them) many people in the past. He has done many awful
>icky ass things especially for the bloody president to do. There _is_
>evidence, it exists. You just have to look around and research the
>subject.
>
> I would expect you to listen to this being the main "murder
>theory" backer, but I suppose you won't.
Dude.....Starr's investigated all of that stuff and found nothing
to substantiate the rumors. What are you talking about? This is what
happens when people distrust the media so much that they start buying
into the crazy theories out in the "alternative media"...
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill
>Vince Foster? No. Who else?
I suppose he's referring to Ron Brown....not to mention whoever
else was on that helicopter. I remember before the '96 election
Hillary spoke at my school (I didn't know about it until, like that
day so I couldn't try to get in there) and I was leaving campus that
day and there was this small group of "protesters" I guess, and one
person was dressed in this white sheet with a sign, "I am the ghost of
Ron Brown." And a woman with this person was smiling like an idiot
waving as we passed.........shut the fuck up, idiots.
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill
<whitev...@NOSPAM.mindless.com> wrote:
> Your outright loyality for Bill Clinton disgusts me.
What, because I stopped watching Jay the night of the Lewinsky
story having broken? I'd been sick for the longest time at the
beating this guy gives people, from Courtney Love back when I used to
like her, to Jack Kevorkian calling him a murderer even though he
kills nobody, to the president of the United States, etc. Jay Leno is
supposed to be "the nicest guy in Hollywood." Bull-fucking-shit. The
guy is the meanest motherfucker in late-night. And for someone who
talks about the lack of morality and politeness these days, he's a
huge hypocrite. I'm really sure it does wonders in the eyes of our
enemies to be watching this guy making fun of how, God forbid,
overweight our president is. (As if Clinton's so fat...)
I can't stand the asshole, you're right. The hell with you if you
think it's because I'm upset he picks on Clinton. It just so happens
that the Lewinsky thing was the straw that broke the camel's back.
Here I was in my dorm room last year the night that the info came out,
I'm concerned about the rumors wondering what the fuck my president
did, everyone's talking like it's this huge problem for our country
now, and Jay Leno comes up making fun of our president and blah blah
blah....I know that's what he did, and I know that satirists make fun
of politics, but he's not even a satirist. He's just an asshole who
tries to make fun of anyone for the slightest weakness....not that
this was a tiny thing he was making fun of in this case, and that's
just the problem.
And pardon me for being loyal to my president who is doing a
fabulous job at his job.
Abort Me
>> free of skeletons in their closets, you're acting as if Clinton has an
>> extraordinary amount of skeletons in there. Ha.
>
>better.
>marijuana, the draft, gennifer flowers, jones, monica, i mean how many
>points towards someones personality, namely, lying about anything that
>you need to. yes, other politicians lie, but bill is in another league!
>
>
I seriously doubt David or any Clinton supporters aren't past the denial
stage....but I do think the Clinton debate is like the twilight zone version of
the murder theory debate.....words cannot describe how I've wanted to reply to
one of David's messages saying how I used to be just like him 3 months ago, but
alot has changed, you'll see.......
Oh and for the record, I hardly think anyone should be criticized for dodging
the draft for Vietnam......Both the draft and the war were not morally or
politically justified IMHO
>oh yeah, i heard (matt?) drudge say on tv, that billy was quoted back in
>'73 or '74 (responding about nixon) that any prez that lies to the
>public should resign. but then again he has only proven that he says
>whatever he NEEDS to say.
'73 or '74? So that'd make him in his 20's......a time which he was young and
idealistic (going back to the whole Vietnam thing).....It's not that he
necessarily changed his mind, but I think his opinion became a little more
based in reality..... However, if actual proof does turn up in the campaign
finance and Whitewater investigations, then I think resignation and/or
impeachment is necessary
,tym, the man with the golden foot
"I'm called the cow" -Dave Grohl
The Sea Whores Web Site @ http://members.xoom.com/seawhores
The Dave Grohl Equipment FAQ http://www.foofighters.net/faq/davegrohl
KRIST NOVOSELIC FOR PRESIDENT!!
Abort Me
>
> I suppose he's referring to Ron Brown....not to mention whoever
>else was on that helicopter. I remember before the '96 election
>Hillary spoke at my school (I didn't know about it until, like that
>day so I couldn't try to get in there) and I was leaving campus that
>day and there was this small group of "protesters" I guess, and one
>person was dressed in this white sheet with a sign, "I am the ghost of
>Ron Brown." And a woman with this person was smiling like an idiot
>waving as we passed.........shut the fuck up, idiots.
Damn if that guy has the sheet still.....he could loan it to Tygrefyfe for the
1998 MTV VMA's!
Haven't people also tried to pin Jim McDougal's death in prison on Clinton?
Saying stuff like how he never had a heart condition?
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill
>Oh and for the record, I hardly think anyone should be criticized for dodging
>the draft for Vietnam......Both the draft and the war were not morally or
>politically justified IMHO
Well......that's like the people who are saying that it's okay for
Clinton to have lied about Lewinsky because he shouldn't have been
asked in the first place. Wouldn't you say that that's irrelevant to
the law? Listen, you're either for the rules of the law or you're
not. I'm getting yelled at for picking and choosing what laws to care
about....if I go down, I'm taking YOU with me! =)
>However, if actual proof does turn up in the campaign
>finance
This pisses me off too. I can't believe that the Republicans of
all people have been making a big deal over this. Who's that guy that
was a real threat to Clinton, Johnny Wong or something? He or one of
those guys gave DOLE money a number of years back. For God's sake,
it's like I've been saying, ALL of these people are guilty of this
stuff that Clinton's guilty of.
As far as Whitewater, you can say all you want that we don't know
what's in Starr's report, and you're right, but no, he's got nothing.
Stoney4429
>enemies to be watching this guy making fun of how, God forbid,<BR>
>overweight our president is. (As if Clinton's so fat...)
As if Jay Leno is so "Kate Moss"
Stoney4429
for some opinions coming from OUTSIDE of the states.
When all is said and done, I'm alot more worried about those air strikes last
week than anything. Fanning the Flames?
I think so.
Abort Me
>Clinton to have lied about Lewinsky because he shouldn't have been
>asked in the first place. Wouldn't you say that that's irrelevant to
>the law? Listen, you're either for the rules of the law or you're
>not. I'm getting yelled at for picking and choosing what laws to care
>about....if I go down, I'm taking YOU with me! =)
Well you see....adultery and lying are not debatable issues...........the
Vietnam War and the draft on the other hand.........There is such a thing as a
bad law (cue comment from Stoney...). Slavery was once legal, does that mean
people have the right to criticize a runaway slave?
Stoney4429
>bad law (cue comment from Stoney...)
Instead of my comment I will give you Evad's:
The truth is that the law is still the law.
squa...@hotmail.com
> On Thu, 3 Sep 1998 11:59:05 -0400, "WHiTe VaMPiRe"
> <whitev...@NOSPAM.mindless.com> wrote:
>
> > He does. If you research his background enough you'll run into
> >his drug 'dealings' (He runs drugs, it's not just the CIA), he has
> >murdered(had them) many people in the past. He has done many awful
> >icky ass things especially for the bloody president to do. There _is_
> >evidence, it exists. You just have to look around and research the
> >subject.
> >
> > I would expect you to listen to this being the main "murder
> >theory" backer, but I suppose you won't.
>
IGOR???
Josh
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Thomas Morgan
> Your outright loyality for Bill Clinton disgusts me.
Note to self: Never get involved in a political or moral discussion with
anyone who calls themself "WHiTe VaMPiRe".
--
Thomas Morgan
Grand Rapids, 1998
OMIT THE "REMOVE" FROM MY E-MAIL ADDRESS WHEN REPLYING
http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Backstage/5974/
Bjorn Magnusson
>
> When I asked what everyone thought of the Clinton thing, I was sort of hoping
> for some opinions coming from OUTSIDE of the states.
So, you want to know what I think of this? I think that it's got way too
much attention. I mean, who WOULDN'T take the oppurtunity to "get hot"
with Lewinsky? Honestly!
It's quite obvious that Lewinsky did it to get a better job, by
blackmailing (is that the word?) Clinton...
"Yah Billy Boy...get me that job, or I'll make my cum-drenched dress
official!"
"Yikes! Umm...no!"
"Damn. How can I extort this situation to make the largest amount of
money possible?"
That's what I think of this. Umm...yeah.
> When all is said and done, I'm alot more worried about those air strikes last
> week than anything. Fanning the Flames?
That's...not good? He's just pissed because someone noticed that he
cheated on Hillary..."Damn...I have to fire some missiles...I'm so
down..."
--
Bjorn Magnusson
---
bjo...@home.se
http://www.algonet.se/~bara1
---
Why don't you trade those guitars for shovels?
---
Thanks to "you know who you are" for helping out here
HrtShpdBox
hearing these reports of this stuff with giving nuclear
technology to the Chinese and this and that, but those _serious_ accusations
could not be proved by Starr. >>
The accusations about Billy Boy's treasonous sales of technology to China have
not been part of Starr's inquiry; he has not looked into them.
HrtShpdBox
relations with an intern and lied about it.>>
That's one way to look at it. Another would be that he used the power of his
office to get bj's from a girl his daughter's age, during working hours, on the
Presidential seal. Some people find that beahavior rather intolerable from an
elected official.
Abort Me
>
>Note to self: Never get involved in a political or moral discussion with
>anyone who calls themself "WHiTe VaMPiRe".
Isn't that a given? (and yes I do realize this is coming from "Abort Me")
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill
>That's one way to look at it. Another would be that he used the power of his
>office to get bj's from a girl his daughter's age, during working hours, on the
>Presidential seal. Some people find that beahavior rather intolerable from an
>elected official.
Then these people are naive and care way too much about things of
such little importance compared to the wide view of things. If that's
their opinion, this is mine.
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill
>Well you see....adultery and lying are not debatable issues...........the
>Vietnam War and the draft on the other hand.........There is such a thing as a
>bad law (cue comment from Stoney...). Slavery was once legal, does that mean
>people have the right to criticize a runaway slave?
I'm just saying that there are a lot of people who like saying that
it's okay for Clinton to have lied because it was immoral for him to
be asked, there was no reason for him to be asked. People refusing to
fight for in the name of our country is a much bigger concern than a
lie about an affair.
AFS
bored. Thought I'd share that piece of info with everyone.
-Fly
--
Fly, Furai!
Amanda <fmp...@centuryinter.net> wrote in article
<35E8B1...@centuryinter.net>...
> Wasn't Dave Grohl married to some girl named Jennifer Youngblood but got
> divorced??? I thought he was dating someone (a female) now. In the
> video for Walking After You he's with some girl for the whole thing. He
> seems straight to me.
>
Stoney4429
>with Lewinsky? Honestly!
Honestly? I wouldn't.
>It's quite obvious that Lewinsky did it to get a better job, by<BR>
>blackmailing (is that the word?) Clinton...
Yes I think so. I mean, she did keep a dress with semen on it for god knows how
long. How fucking sick is that? I also have my theories about the tripp tapes
and the fact that Lewinsky may have known and wanted to trap the president for
bailing out on her.
This is rather like a bad soap opera, isn't it?
Can't wait for the book...so I can burn it.
HrtShpdBox
<< That's one way to look at it. Another would be that he used the power of
his office to get bj's from a girl his daughter's age, during working hours, on
an elected official.>>
<<< Then these people are naive and care way too much about things of
such little importance compared to the wide view of things. If that's
their opinion, this is mine. >>>
The people who look askance at lechery on the job are probably thinking that
someone inclined to act that way isn't the best choice to make decisions about
the "wide view of things". Can't call 'em naive for thinking that, nope.
Thomas Morgan
>
> << Congratulations, Kenny, you were right; he DID have consensual sexual
> relations with an intern and lied about it.>>
>
> office to get bj's from a girl his daughter's age, during working hours, on the
> elected official.
Uh...his daughter is 18...Monica is 22 or 23. BIG difference. Besides,
if I was 50, I'd rather have "relations" with someone 18-24 years of
age; wouldn't you? I mean, come on (pun intended, of course).
HrtShpdBox
was 50, I'd rather have "relations" with someone 18-24 years of age; wouldn't
you? I mean, come on (pun intended, of course).>>
Yeah, well when people get married they engage in a little thing called
"marriage vows", part of which includes not going after younger tail for the
grand fun of it. As far as I know, those vows were included when Bubba and
Hill tied the knot. Some people actually take those things seriously, though
I'm sure it's just another part of the Grand Lie of Living for our Degenerate
In Chief. And to a 50 year old, no, there's not much difference between an 18
or a 22 year old.
--
Jared476
><< Congratulations, Kenny, you were right; he DID have consensual sexual
>relations with an intern and lied about it.>>
>That's one way to look at it>>
It's the only way...
<<. Another would be that he used the power of his
>office to get bj's from a girl his daughter's age,>>
Or you could grow a brain, and realize she wanted it befroe she even came to
Washington, hence the quote " I'm going to washington to get my presidental
kneepads" as Monica said to a friend once upon a time..
<< during working hours>>
OH, so if he did after hours you'd have no problem with it, eh?
<<, on the Presidential seal.>>
Actually I heard it was only once on the "PS"
But who cares where it was?
<<< Some people find that beahavior rather intolerable from an elected
official.
>
And others think it's Bitchin....heh, heh......
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill
>Yeah, well when people get married they engage in a little thing called
>"marriage vows", part of which includes not going after younger tail for the
I share your disgust, but that's nothing to impeach a president
over. You're not even talking about lying in a deposition, you're
talking about the sex!
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill
>Washington, hence the quote " I'm going to washington to get my presidental
>kneepads" as Monica said to a friend once upon a time..
After having an affair with one of her married high school
teachers... Yet people the past seven months have actually had the
audacity to think that she needs to be stood up for. "Poor Monica,
why isn't anyone standing up for her?" Puh-leeze.........
Shane Virone
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill wrote in message
<35f1292a...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
>People refusing to fight for in the name of our country
>is a much bigger concern than a lie about an affair.
Like you'd be the first in line to be killed if there was a war... I know I
wouldn't - "Hello Canada!"
My Bootlegs
www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Underground/9023
Bra-cup sizing was invented in 1939-and World War II started. Coincidence??
Thomas Morgan
>
> << Uh...his daughter is 18...Monica is 22 or 23. BIG difference. Besides, if I
> was 50, I'd rather have "relations" with someone 18-24 years of age; wouldn't
> you? I mean, come on (pun intended, of course).>>
>
> "marriage vows", part of which includes not going after younger tail for the
> Hill tied the knot. Some people actually take those things seriously, though
> I'm sure it's just another part of the Grand Lie of Living for our Degenerate
> In Chief. And to a 50 year old, no, there's not much difference between an 18
> or a 22 year old.
> --
Well, how Clinton see's Monica's age is not the point. _You_ were the
one who made the Monica/Chelsea comparison, not Clinton. As far as the
marriage vows, that's entirely personal. Perhaps (likely), their
marriage is a professional one; a divorced president is un-heard of. Why
would Hillary divorce Bill? Who's coattails would she ride then? Isn't
G. Gordon Liddy coming on soon? Go.
David Perle, The Fool On the Hill
<svi...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Like you'd be the first in line to be killed if there was a war...
Of course not. I'm playing the Devil's Advocate as usual. I am
merely pointing out the hypocrisy of people saying that it was wrong
for Clinton to lie in a deposition about something that even the judge
said was totally irrelevant, and then saying that it's okay for people
to have broken the draft laws because, gee, according to them it
wasn't a noble war. Uh, yeah.
Cute subject, by the way.