From: niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Subject: Re: Russians Release '69 KGB Blackmail Film of Clinton in Drug Orgy...
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 23:31:11 GMT

In <01GPRGT1PVXC0002VF@utarlg.uta.edu> B645ZAW@UTARLG.UTA.EDU (STEPHEN TICE) writes:
>Since Brave-Bill isn't telling one way or the other, why 
>shouldn't I believe he's been compromised??

He hasn't said a word about aliens, either, but that doesn't mean he's
from Mars.  Why *would* you believe he's been compromised?

>I wouldn't trust him in a fire-fight, why should I believe 
>the best of him or give him the benefit of the doubt?

I wouldn't trust *you* in a fire-fight, either.  Why?  Because you'd
take something I did 20 years ago, put "quotes" around it to make it
sound suspicious, come up with some sort of ridiculous generalization, 
then accuse me of being a Communist, and decide not to help me.  Or
something.

Better question: why would anyone trust ANY politician?

>Bill Clinton's background and personality fits a pattern
>that foreign intelligence agencies would have tried to 
>exploit. Why should I believe they didn't -- if he won't

From your vast experience in a foreign intelligence agency?  Are *you*
really a KGB agent, Steven?  Trying to confuse us into voting for the
guy who's going to destroy our country, Ross Perot?

>tell us about his "vacation" from Oxford to Moscow and
>other parts of the Soviet Union?? Especially, when it was
>known he had a problem with US policy which he had
>protested at Oxford, and that he had future political aspirations? 

Um, by 1969, millions of Americans had a problem with US policy.  Why is
this surprising?

>IF IT WAS JUST A VACATION -- THEN WHY NOT TELL US ABOUT IT?

Tell what?  He said he went there.  What else is there to tell?

>Was Clinton particularly susceptible due to his idealism,
>and the notoriety of being a Rhodes Scholar and an anti-war
>activist? How about his ego? With the way he's tried to 
>appeal to everyone now, isn't he particularly vulnerable to
>exploitation, even without considering his desire to be 
>president? How can I know? If he wouldn't stand beside his
>countrymen and fight with them, and instead would criticize
>them from abroad -- why should I give him the benefit of the doubt??? 

This is a new one.  I'm not a Clinton-basher, but to say that he has
"idealism" is like saying that George Bush tells the truth.  Bill
Clinton is as far from an idealist as I can think of, except for maybe
our current president.

Millions of other people wouldn't fight with their countrymen in a place
we shouldn't have been either.  Bill Clinton didn't criticize the
countrymen who were fighting.  He criticized the *war.*

>Right now I don't know what to believe; so be brave BILL 
>-- tell us about your excellent vacation. That's all it 
>was, right?

Right.

What exactly do you want him to tell?  Where were you on January 17,
1978, Steven?  Why won't you admit you were being recruited by the KGB,
Steven?  Go ahead, admit it.  Why won't you tell?

-- 
David M. Nieporent   | Orioles 1993 World Series Champions
niepornt@phoenix.    | Mike Mussina 1992 AL Cy Young Winner
   princeton.edu     | Roland Hemond: SIGN BARRY BONDS!!!!!!!!
Vote Clinton/Gore '92.   Four more weeks!!!   		"Bloody urine"
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:52174 alt.politics.usa.misc:231 alt.politics.clinton:10779