Is Clinton The Leader We Need At This Time??? : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Here are some very good points regarding our current president and his fitness to lead this country into the Year 2000...


Clinton and Y2K

Joseph Farah WorldNetDaily -- 12/22/98

While there is reason to celebrate the House of Representatives votes of impeachment, the Clinton White House now must be viewed by Americans as a wounded animal -- even more dangerous and unpredictable than it has been.

That's saying a lot, because this administration is by far the most dangerous and most unpredictable in the history of the United States -- at least for those of us who still care about freedom, equal protection under the law, the Constitution, and the other ideals upon which this great country was founded.

America is one year and nine days away from what may be one of its most critical tests. Call it "the millennium bug," Y2K, or the day the earth stood still. There is simply no debate in any quarter that it will be a severe problem. The only question is, "How bad?"

Will there be power? Will there be telecommunications service? Will there be food and water? Will there be a global depression? Will there be martial law? These are not questions being asked only by Y2K doomsdayers. They are legitimate questions being raised by such respected, established and official sources as U.S. congressmen, the Red Cross, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the U.S. Department of Defense, the Canadian government, the British government, and computer experts worldwide.

With so little time before all our questions about this potential disaster are answered, the big question every American, and particularly every member of Congress, should be asking themselves is this: Is it in the best interests of the United States for Bill Clinton to be serving as president when we approach that momentous and dreaded day?

It's a question, ironically, I hear no one else asking. And it's a question that propels the impeachment debate to the forefront of all other national public policy issues.

Bill Clinton keeps telling us he's got important work to do for the country -- work such as solving the Social Security crisis. Multiply the seriousness of the Social Security crisis by a factor of 1,000 or so, and you begin to comprehend that it pales in comparison to the threats we face beginning Jan. 1, 2000, 374 days from now.

Like it or not, life as we have come to know it is going to change overnight -- in the blink of an eye. I'm not suggesting a worst-case scenario is inevitable. What I am saying, unequivocally, is that, even in a best-case scenario, Y2K is a far bigger danger to Americans than Social Security going bust.

And with that crisis coming, the question arises: Is a seriously damaged, discredited, desperate, unscrupulous, immoral, authoritarian, self-obsessed, potential despot the man America wants at the helm of the all-too-powerful executive branch of government when it hits? Is he the man who should be commander-in-chief of the most powerful armed forces in the world, with extraordinary and frightening emergency powers, when tough decisions need to be made?

For the life of me, I don't know why no one else is asking these brutally honest and timely questions. But I will continue to ask them whether or not I remain a lonely voice crying out in the wilderness.

Through his cavalier use of executive orders, his willingness to create wars for political advantage, and most of all, his blatant disrespect for the Constitution of the United States, Bill Clinton has demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that he is the worst of all possible bad choices for political leadership in a time of crisis.

The countdown has begun. No matter how bad the Y2K crisis turns out to be, the bigger, long-term threat to freedom in America and throughout the world is the question of how government responds to it.

An impeached president, one who admits he lied, cheated, and covered up, and one with more critics than he can count, is the worst possible alternative.

America has been very fortunate, indeed, that it has survived the six-year Clinton presidency relatively intact. Given his collectivist goals, his ruthlessness, his cunning, his Teflon-like appeal, it could have been much worse. With the world approaching what is at worst, disaster, and at best, an excuse for governmental mischief on a grand scale, how much longer can America afford to risk its luck?


Some very good points, I think...

-- Nabi Davidson (, December 24, 1998


If y'all cruise on over to the now, you might catch a mayhem-in-white-house bit o slug sludge. Not that it's true, who knows? but doesn't exactly inspire confidence in our imploded govt. Doesn't feel like Christmas yet ...

xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxx

-- Leska (, December 24, 1998.

What are our options? Would Al Gore be any better? If something happened to him, the next prez would be the Speaker of The House. There's a scary thought!

I vote for the newsmedia, the "we the people" and freedom of digital speech on the internet. Unless Washington and Clinton have been waiting for more significant "events" in January, it's up the each individual to pay Y2K attention and wake up our communities.

Support your local investigative journalist with e-mail links to important Y2K information surfacing daily. Get to know their Y2K interests and help them help all of us!


-- Diane J. Squire (, December 24, 1998.

Had hopes about Gore until read the Vanity Fair article. *shudder* Newt as Prez? Didn't he resign? Who *is* third in line now, anybody know? Can anybody think of a scandal-free, clean-living, upright, principled American who could make a good prez?

xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxx

-- Leska (, December 24, 1998.


No, I can't.

-- Kevin (, December 24, 1998.

-- Leska

>>Can anybody think of a scandal-free, clean-living, upright, principled American who could make a good prez? xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxx<<

-- Leska



-- sweetolebob (La) (, December 24, 1998.

Sorry, S.O.B.

You've been posting here. In some echelons, that's scandalous enough.

Kevin & Leska, maybe Santa Claus? The rest of the options are too human. How about Zoe Lofgren (-1 sp)?


-- Diane J. Squire (, December 24, 1998.

Santa works one day per year. Might appeal to the less is more factions. But his girth, as you've already pointed out today, will prejudice many. When I was a kid, Morris Udall would stop in my district and actually talk to the regular folks, then go and implement the sensible ideas. So he was well-liked. Long ago, far away, he just died, don't even know anything else about him. Can't think of anybody, but then again we're hermits, not interested in polyticks, don't get around much, don't watch the tube except for weather or disaster info, or "history," the past weeks' misnomer.

Steve Jobs for Semi-Interim USA CEO long enough to resurrect a reality-based economy? Although someone pointed out his flaws; heard he's improved in the managerial/people-respecting dept. But he'd never do it; is having too much fun with "immortal" movies. :)

S.O.B. , what would you do your first year?

xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx

-- Leska (, December 24, 1998.

Voters have discovered the new breed of leader! Our future, ladies & gentlemen:


12/24/98 -- 3:34 PM

Ventura Action Figures Expected To Hit Store Shelves By Spring

BLOOMINGTON, Minn. (AP) - For those of you who loved the action figures of Jesse Ventura, the wrestler, be on the lookout for action figures of Jesse Ventura, the well-dressed governor.

The ham-fisted dolls didn't arrive in time for Christmas, but their makers said to expect them in stores in April. The figure sports Ventura's now-famous bald head and appears ready to burst from its dark suit, white shirt and tie. It's expected to sell for $19 to $24. The miniature doll made its debut in TV ads during Ventura's campaign for Minnesota governor. One showed two boys playing with a Ventura doll banging his fist on a desk and dismissing Evil Special Interest Man.

The doll became so popular that four Minnesota companies have signed licenses to produce official Ventura merchandise, including the dolls. Ventura says most profits will go to charity, but he is not ruling out using some money for future campaigns. In addition to the action figures, other Ventura paraphernalia will include sweat shirts, T-shirts and hats, some featuring Ventura's bald pate and the words ``Head of State.''

Ventura seemed to be pleased that his new incarnation as an action figure may be headed for commercial success.

``They were the novel item of the campaign,'' Ventura said. ``People seemed to enjoy them.''

He certainly was a hit the last time around. Ventura has said a doll from his pro-wrestling days paid for his first Porsche.

xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxx

-- Leska (, December 24, 1998.

Logic talking here:

Clinton's an admitted liar.

A liar.

When can you ever believe he's telling the truth?

About anything.

If he'll lie about sex to cover his own embarrasment, won't he lie to us about Y2K to cover his embarrasment due to lack of stewardship on that issue?

WHEN can we believe him? How do you know when he's telling the truth?

Many believed him last January - during the famous "wag the finger" denial of sex with "that woman". He's a convincing liar.

This is why he should resign. IMMEDIATELY.

He's not the leader we need.

-- INVAR (, December 24, 1998.

Someone on this forum recently asked what "that mouse" was under Clinton's eye.

Well now, apparently, we can be told.

One phrase springs to mind - "The lunatics are in charge of the asylum......."


THU DEC 24, 1998 16:08:55 UTC


Hillary Clinton has finally snapped! The NATIONAL ENQUIRER is set to report in its January 5, 1999 edition: The First Lady has physically attacked the President, hitting him so hard she left a visible mark on his face -- and Secret Service agents had to separate them.

The DRUDGE REPORT trusts the account to be accurate and non-libelous because the NATIONAL ENQUIRER and President Bill Clinton use the same law firm, Williams & Connolly! In fact, Clinton's private lawyer, David Kendall, has directly done work for the tabloid through the years.

"Keep that bitch away from me!" Bill Clinton told one Secret Service agent.

One inside source tells the ENQUIRER that the White House became a battleground since the impeachment controversy moved into overdrive.

"The verbal fights between Bill and Hillary have been escalating and now the President has been physically assaulted."

"Hillary just snapped. She lost it and smacked the President upside the head. He was stunned. The hit was so hard it left a visible bruise, and he put on makeup for several days to cover the red spot."

The DRUDGE REPORT has learned that the ENQUIRER is planning to run the account in a Cover Page Screamer.

"Secret Service agents had to physically separate them to keep the apart. Hillary went off to another room. At one point the President old an agent, 'Keep that bitch away from me. I don't want to do anything that'll get me in more trouble."

The ENQUIRER reveals that just hours before the couple walked out of the White House holding hands after the impeachment vote on December 19, there was an explosion in the Presidential quarters -- the First Lady was doing most of the screaming.

The tabloid also claims that Bill Clinton is back on the fast food train!

"The President is a mess. He's been gorging on fast foods again," an insider tells the ENQUIRER in the special report.

Impacting on newsstands next monday."

-- Andy (, December 24, 1998.


Who in Washington IS telling the truth? I sure can't tell. I am NOT a Clinton fan. But what are our choices? I have a funny gut feeling if Gore stepped in, he wouldn't last long, because some extremist would want to see a very conservative Republican in office. Have those guys been warning us about Y2K? Not a chance.

Circumvent all of 'em, I say, until they publicly stand up for Y2K awareness and preparations.


-- Diane J. Squire (, December 24, 1998.

Clinton's Latest Assault On The Constitution - EXECUTIVE ORDER 13107

By Joseph Farah

Editor -


From where do our rights descend? The Bill of Rights? No. The Constitution? No. The Federal government? No. The United Nations? Certainly not. But, apparently, that's what Bill Clinton thinks. For earlier this month, Dec. 10 to be exact, he issued another one of his infamous executive orders -- this time on "the implementation of human rights treaties." In Executive Order 13107, Clinton sets up a new federal bureaucracy for the purpose of implementing U.N. treaties, whether ratified by the U.S. Senate or not. And that federal bureaucracy will implement the treaties on the U.N.'s terms.

Sound like a deal? It gets worse.

Though President Clinton said he issued the order to further his goal of promoting human rights around the world, it's important to understand exactly how the U.N. defines "human rights."

That definition is offered in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which talks about the right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion, opinion, and expression. All good stuff, until you realize whom the ultimate authority is. Who is the sovereign that imparts such blessings upon the populace of the world?

The answer to that question is stated unequivocally in article 29 of the U.N. document, which states: "These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations."

That pretty much explains who the "massa" is and where the plantation boundaries end. What a stark contrast between the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights, and the founding documents of the United States of America. The Declaration of Independence and Constitution both make it clear that basic human rights are inalienable, meaning they descend from the ultimate Sovereign, the Creator, God. Therefore, no human authority, no government, no criminal, no individual can abrogate or abridge those rights.

Remember, any right government can bestow upon a people, it can just as easily take away. This is a profound principle Americans have forgotten. The day they accept the principle that rights descend from government authority is the day they lose their freedoms. It's as simple as that.

In effect, that is what Executive Order 13107 decrees. It's an attempt by Bill Clinton to persuade Americans that human rights descend not from God but from worldly government authorities -- with the ultimate authority represented by the United Nations.

In other words, the U.N. believes people have the right to dissent, unless it's a dissent against the United Nations. It reminds me of the old Soviet model. There it was even more bluntly stated: "There can be no place for freedom of speech, press, and so on for the foes of socialism." Basically, the U.N. has rewritten that maxim: "There can be no place for freedom of speech, press, and so on for the foes of the United Nations."

The U.N. practices what it preaches, too. In Bosnia, the U.N. forces have seized control of radio and TV stations broadcasting pro-Serbian news and propaganda. In fact, U.S. troops participated in those raids. How does one justify such actions under the U.S. Constitution, which explicitly recognizes the rights of all people -- not just Americans -- to speak their minds and express themselves freely?

Welcome to the Brave New World of U.N. doublespeak. And President Clinton is dragging the U.S. deeper into this quagmire than has any other president in history.

Not only does Executive Order 13107 promote an unworthy and dangerous goal, but the road to that objective, namely the executive order itself the way Bill Clinton has employed it, is a corrupt and unconstitutional process.

Executive orders are supposed to be a presidential tool for running the executive branch of government. Clinton has used them freely during his terms in office to make policy affecting other branches of government, the states, and individuals. Now, with 13107, he's attempting to implement international treaties! Executive orders were never intended to be used as imperial orders.

Once again, though, the only people with the authority to curb the misuse of executive orders are the members of Congress, who have 30 days from the issuance of an order to reject it by majority vote. Trouble is, they seldom bother to read them. And the press seldom bothers to cover them -- even when they represent sweeping new interpretations of human rights and compromises of U.S. national sovereignty.

It's time for Congress not only to reject Executive Order 13107, but also to review, in the context of the ongoing impeachment process, all of President Clinton's more than 200 executive orders. In both substance and in intent, they represent one of the worst abuses of power in an administration characterized by abuse of power.

When it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck, it spells martial law, with more goodies down the pipeline.

-- Andy (, December 24, 1998.

Is Clinton the leader we need now? Probably not. However, he is the one we've got, like him or not.

I wouldn't worry about the UN. They have no teeth, and everyone ignores their pronouncements whenever convienent. The only time to worry about the UN will be if nations start handing their military forces over to the UN as a permanent measure, or hand the UN control over nuclear weapons. Then WORRY!!!!!!

-- Paul Davis (, December 25, 1998. html?s=v/nm/19981224/ts/scandal_299.html

Thursday December 24 12:33 PM ET
Gore: Clinton More Likely To Be Hit By Meteor Than Quit

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Clinton is more likely to be hit by a meteor than to resign, Vice President Al Gore said in a CNN interview released Thursday.

Gore, speaking on CNN's ``Both Sides with Jesse Jackson'' program that will air Sunday, said anyone who thinks Clinton will resign following his impeachment by the U.S. House of Representatives Saturday does not understand the man.

``He will definitely not resign,'' the vice president said according to a transcript provided by CNN. ``He is more likely to be hit by a meteor than he is to make a decision to resign.

``If he was going to make a decision like that, he would have given up a long time ago -- earlier in his life, with all of the hardship that he had: His father died before he was born, he grew up in poverty, he overcame the odds to be elected,'' Gore added. ``He is not going to resign.''
xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xx

-- Leska (, December 25, 1998.

Y2K is that meteor ....

xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx

-- Leska (, December 25, 1998.

TRUTHS! Every politician lies--it's a job qualification. Married men who cheat on their wives lie. JFK, Roosevelt, Eisenhower, etc. almost all of our past presidents were lucky enough to live in a time where the media and the public had enough class not to ask the QUESTION at all. The President was too important in those days to have to testify in unimportant lawsuits. Most all of our past presidents cheated and I believe they all would have lied. So were all of our past presidents unfit? Who can say, and really who cares. Why distract ourselves with these political questions? Time to get ready for survival. Let's deal with important issues.

-- Phyllis Collins (, December 26, 1998.

Yo, Phyllis, the President issue is NOT as important as y2k, lets get on with 'important' issues? I personally feel it IS a VERY important issue. Who runs the country during y2k is of utmost importance. Hey ANDY, (all know i have a sick sense of humor) is it really true or are you playing? She should of 'smacked' the slutpuppy out of him ALONG time ago....I'm laughing so hard I'm crying. If not true, you have a most humorous imagination. I'd love to be a 'fast fly' on the White House wall, slow flies die. LOL.

-- consumer (, December 26, 1998.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ