Democrat Chaiman: How I turned 100k into 18mil in GLBX

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Pabst, Jan 1, 2004.

  1. Pabst

    Pabst

    I thought impeachment was an over the top reaction, However it had nothing to do with sex. I could care less if the Prez gets laid. I criticize Clinton for not doing HOTTER babes. The real issue, how the hell does a respected lawyer, a former ATTORNEY GENERAL, perjure himself in the deposition of a law suit that had apparently enough merit that it caused the normally cheap Bill Clinton to settle out of court for over a million dollars. Lying to 60 Minutes, lying even to your wife, fine! But don't impede the court with a flat out false denial. And then lie to the nation after your caught. REAL bogus. Given you're sexual psychological studying Rogue, you must admit, Clinton borders on serial predator.
     
    #11     Jan 1, 2004
  2. Do you think really think Kennedy would have told us the "truth" of his sexual affairs if he had encountered the same type of attacks from the Republicans and the overwhelming desire of the press to promote scandals that increase viewership?

    No, Kennedy would have likely followed suit of other politicians:

    "I am not a crook."

    "I don't remember."

    "I did not have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky."

    The question of lying to a grand jury is still a question of the technical definitions. I don't recall them asking him if he had a blow job.

    However, in the spirit of the question, I do believe he did lie, and he should have resigned for the good of the country. If he had been a man, and acted the way a man should act when caught the way he was caught, he should have resigned on the spot. If he had done so, I firmly believe we would not have Bush in the White House today.

    What Clinton did was unconscionable.

    Oh, and I do completely agree that Clinton has serious issues with sex and is likely a sexual predator, and is in denial about these aspects of his personality.

    What is fascinating to me is that the level of denial in the Clinton family about their addictive problems is equal to the problems in the Bush family about their problems with drug abuse and alcoholism.

    Both family problems have their root in a lack of true spiritual connection, denial, rationalization, enabling, and family secrets.

    It is a reflection of the moral degradation of our society that we allow such politicians to rise and stay in power, as we are such an alcoholic, drug addicted, and sexually addicted society that to confront our politicians on these issues would require we really confront ourselves on these issues.

    The country remains collectively in denial, and the leaders simply reflect that back to the people.

    It is a national disease, a national family problem, family secrets, and the families of the United States are in need of recovery.

    The rampant growth of capitalism at any price in this society is inversely proportional to the retardation of real spiritual values.

     
    #12     Jan 1, 2004
  3. Phreedm

    Phreedm

    One point of correction....

    Robin Hood (Robbed from the rich to give to the poor)

    The legend of Robin Hood was not about taking from the rich and giving to the poor.
    The sheriff of Nottingham, represented an oppressive government. Robin Hood took from a corrupt government and gave to the poor. I point ths out because there is a growing undercurrent in our society that somehow being rich or successful is immoral.

    It is our government that steals wealth (taxes) in the name of fairness. under the pretence of providing for the poor.

    I read a great article about wealth.

    Last week the world had 2 earthquakes half a world apart. A 6.5 in California, and a 6.6 in Iran.

    The death toll in California was less then 10. The death toll in Iran stands at 28,000 and may go higher. What was the difference? WEALTH!!!

    Wealth allowed us to build stronger buildings, build more hospitals, have better emergency services for our citizens.

    http://www.townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/ts20031230.shtml

    A little off topic but IMO important. Pay attention to what your kids are learning in school about wealth and the rich.
     
    #13     Jan 1, 2004
  4. Great stuff, Pabst. My question is, Why doesn't the now Republican Justice Department and SEC go after this stuff? Global stinks to high heaven, worse even than Enron in some ways. Yet there is no prosecution, no investigation, just a lot of angry defrauded stockholders, lenders and ruined employees, while that bastard Winnick and that arrogant SOB McAuliffe are rolling in dough. How f*cking corrupt do you have to be in this country to get prosecuted? Is it a matter of paying off enough pol's to get protection or what?
     
    #14     Jan 1, 2004
  5. Pabst

    Pabst

    My 93yo Grandmother got nailed with 2000@26.00 that she rode to zero. She bought it on the way up and was very smug at the highs...no one could have guessed what the finish was going to be.
    My guess AAA is that while Enron had fund raising ties, Enron didn't have government insiders actually abetting the rise in the stock. IMO McAuliffe is just one of many Global tools. Although I knew of his involvement for years, I had forgotten about GHB's stock until I read the link I posted here. This type of corruption is becoming so insidious NOBODY wants to cast the first stone. Gotta love it though, that weasel Waxman receiving $ from Winnick. My fantasy for years has been to show up someplace where Waxman is and tell him publicly to his face what a no good Communist c**k sucker he is.
     
    #15     Jan 1, 2004
  6. Pabst,

    Tell him I think the same thing.
     
    #16     Jan 1, 2004