From: ae642@yfn.ysu.edu (Kelley Miller)
Subject: Re: Russians Release '69 KGB Blackmail Film of Clinton in Drug Orgy...
Reply-To: ae642@yfn.ysu.edu (Kelley Miller)
Organization: St. Elizabeth Hospital, Youngstown, OH
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 07:34:29 GMT


In a previous article, B645ZAW@UTARLG.UTA.EDU (STEPHEN TICE) says:

>Since Brave-Bill isn't telling one way or the other, why 
>shouldn't I believe he's been compromised??
>

Perhaps because the accusations are so ludicrise that he feels they aren't
worth responding to?

>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?
>

Innocent until proven guilty, remember?  Or don't you recognize the
constitution?

>Bill Clinton's background and personality fits a pattern
>that foreign intelligence agencies would have tried to 
>exploit.

Evidence, EVIDENCE!!  Even his primary accuser, Robert Dornen, says
he has no proof, he just "feels it in his gut"...

> Why should I believe they didn't -- if he won't
>tell us about his "vacation" from Oxford to Moscow and
>other parts of the Soviet Union??

Perhaps because he's no longer in grammer school, and "What I did on my
summer vacation" is not required writing beyond then.

Or maybe, he feels his vacation was nobody's fucking business but his
own.

> Especially, when it was
>known he had a problem with US policy which he had
>protested at Oxford,

Suprise!  About 10 million young people had the same problem with the same
policies.  His going to england (or Russia) in no way should have any affect
on his beliefs.

> and that he had future political aspira-
>tions? 
>

Yeah, right.  23 years ago, he KNEW he was going to be one otf the major
presidential candidates, out of the 150 odd million eligible citizens in
1992.  


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

HE HAS!  HE SAID HE TOOK A VACATION!!!  BIG DEAL!!! I TOOK A VACATION
23 YEARS AGO, TOO, AND I HAVE NO NEED TO RELATE THE DETAILS!!!  WHY THE
FUCH SHOULD HE????

>
>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??? 
>

Because he thought the police action in Southeast Asea was WRONG, and
did what over a million other citizens did--used all legal measures
to avoid it. (an action, BTW, that was PARDONED, in case you forgot...)

>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?

Again, he has.  He took a vacation, and enjoyed it.

He's just not willing to say the blatent lies that you and Dornen
wish to propigate have any substance to them, which is the only thing
you'll be satisfied with.


>
>-- Stephen Tice     Arlington Texas    10-09-92
>                              ^^^^^

Now why doesn't that suprise me...
    

-- 
*...your Friendly Neighborhood Atheist  //  Newsflash from the Vatican: *
*      the KelleyMan:Kelley L. Miller  //  "Easter has been cancelled...*    
*                  ae642@yfn.ysu.edu  //  Someone found the body...."   *
****************Know God...No peace.  No God...Know peace.***************
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,ba.politics