From: lbaum@bcsaic.boeing.com (Larry Baum)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Kremlin_Gate: Bill Clinton in Moscow during Viet Nam.
Date: 12 Oct 92 04:53:03 GMT
Organization: Boeing Computer Services AI Center, Seattle

In article <10OCT199216483909@utarlg.uta.edu> b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (Stephen Tice) writes:
: lbaum@atc.boeing.com (Larry Baum) writes...
: >
: 
: >>>   Bill Clinton may or may not have done this - he was more likely a
: >>>   "willing dupe" - but for him to protest the war IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY,
: >>>   and to travel to the capital of the main enemy, is, to say the
: >>>   least, very suspect. As a veteran of that period, I find it
: >>>   reprehensible and offensive.
: >>
: >>John I agree, it sucks.  While other young men were fighting and dying 
: >>in Viet Nam -- Bill Clinton took a "vacation" around the Soviet Union. 
: 
: >...you have no reason to suggest that we were not sincere in our desire 
: >to end the suffering of those doing the fighting.
: 
: You?? 

Yes.  What about it?
: 
: Bill-Clinton is being offered up as a leader. Where is the evidence?
: He didn't lead on the battlefield, and now I'm being told he didn't lead
: in the peace-movement. So where is the evidence to back up Brave-Bill's
: dedication to the cause he supposedly felt strongly about? 

His leadership credentials are no different than those of
Ronald Reagan, who spent WW2 making movies.  Where's your
outrage where he's concerned?
: 
: >>While others such as Sam Johnson and Jim Stockdale were rotting in POW
: >>camps -- BRAVE BILL CLINTON was (at least) on a merry Christmas tour in 
: >>the heart of communism. At most, BRAVE BILL was planning out his presi-
: >>dential career 20 years later as a fellow-traveler in the communist 
: >>enlightenment, and the ultimate mole.
: > 
: >This is slanderous garbage.....
: 
: No. The possibility exists, as stated, somewhere between a vacation and
: gravest danger to national security. I don't like the whole range, and I 
: see no compelling reason to ignore the extreme case -- having been trained 
: to be sensitive to such matters. 

The possibility exists that you are any number of evil things.
I have no such evidence of course, but it COULD be true.  If I
were to make such a charge (note, the previous sentence is
entirely hypothetical and is not meant to insinuate anything
about you, just make a rhetorical point) that would be slander
or libel.  You could easily sue me successfully.  Bill
Clinton, as a public figure is unable to avail himself of the
libel laws; but your assertions are equally libellous.  You
cannot call someone a "fellow traveler in the communist world"
with absolutely no evidence and be innocent of slander.

: 
: Moreover, there is nothing in all this that presents Brave-Bill Clinton 
: as a leader. He avoided the draft then -- played a minor roll in the
: protest (if his supporters are to be believed) -- and is avoiding the
: question of foreign influence now. He also is avoiding dealing with the 
: Federal Debt.

He has stated his position on the debt quite clearly: he has a
plan which conceivably (but not very likely) would reduce the
deficit substantially, but he freely admits that he is less
concerned about that than about jobs and economic growth.  But
if you want to challenge him for his policy positions, that's
much more legitimate than this "Brave-Bill" crap.
: 
: There is a clear pattern of avoidance in Brave-Bill Clinton's character.
: 
There is a clear pattern of meanness in George Bush's
character (remember his "I kicked her ass" comment after
debating Ferraro).  And he clearly has been lying about Iran
and Iraq.
  There is a clear pattern of little respect
for privacy rights in the Perot character.  Which character
flaw is least disturbing?


-- 
Larry Baum
Computer Science Organization
Boeing Computer Services     uucp:       uw-beaver!bcsaic!lbaum
(206) 865-3365               internet:   lbaum@atc.boeing.com       
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc