THERE'LL BE SOME CHANGES IN THE WEATHER AND SOME CHANGES IN YOU. THIS COULD BE THE START OF SOMETHING NEW! WELCOME TO 1999 AND ISSUE #19 OF THE SANDBOX! January 1, 1999 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Arthur Roberts (??), Ray Wells, (54), Tony Sharpe (63), cami Riddell (85), Jim Doyle (49), Barb Barron (50), Robert McCullough (65), Vince Bartram (62) Norma Loescher (53) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ To share your Ideas, Your Opinions, Your Inspirations, And Your Retorts with other Richland Bombers Around The World: ReplyTo: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com SEND US YOUR PREDICTIONS FOR 1999! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Regarding the (non binding) poll indicating whether you favor a constitutional amendment to require the castration of future United States Presidents prior to taking the Oath of Office: The survey results at the moment are running at just about a 70% approval rating in favor of future Presidents retaining their virility. (Quite similar to the current approval rating of the President's performance now.) Is this synchronicity, or what? No further reports are planned regarding this survey unless significant changes occur in current trends. The margin for error in this survey is calculated at plus or minus 99%. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Arthur Roberts, firstname.lastname@example.org, writes: I predict the following headline will appear in 1999: HILLARY PUSHES CLINTON INTO OCEAN NEAR HILTON HEAD. On the following day, Clinton will call a press conference and proclaim: "SHE WAS TRYING TO SAVE ME FROM A SWARM OF KILLER BEES." 75% Of the country will believe him. -Arthur Roberts ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Snappy Answers to Stupid Democrat Sound-Bytes From: email@example.com (Ray Wells) (54) Are you tired of the lame answers offered by your favorite Republican when Democrats make impassioned pleas for Bill Clinton's right to harass women and break laws? Here is a handy guide of snappy answers to use when the Democrats bring up those twisted sound bytes that are supposed to persuade us to let Bill Clinton off the hook. (1) This is just about a president having a private affair. This is about the right of a president to molest innocent American women, attack her with taxpayer-paid attorneys if she dares to complain, and lie under oath when she finally gets her day in court. Those are the rights Democrats are fighting for. (2) This is just about sex. Rape is just about sex, robbery is just about money, murder is just a misunderstanding. (3) Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinski testified that they didn't have sex and nobody told her to lie. So, if they both lie, that makes it the truth? (4) According to his personal definition of sex, he doesn't think he lied. So therefore, he didn't lie. You mean a criminal now has the right to re-define his crime? What a novel legal concept! "I didn't steal the money, I borrowed it. I didn't rape her, I borrowed her. I didn't kill him, your honor, his head hit my baseball bat." (5) He may have committed perjury, but he shouldn't be impeached. Tell me, what crime can a president commit? (6) Does this rise to the level of impeachment? Gee, let's see, perjury, obstruction of justice, witness tampering, abuse of power. Impeachment? This rises to the level of jail. (7) The economy is doing great. So, the better the economy, the more crimes he can commit? If we get 5% growth, do we allow a president to knock off a liquor store? (8) We need his leadership. It's impossible to lead the country when you can't follow the laws of the land. (9) A panel of historians say he should stay in office. A panel of liberal historians from liberal colleges who love liberal presidents. (10) Distinguished professors say he shouldn't be impeached. The only thing distinguishable about them is their blind love of the Democratic party...and Karl Marx. (11) We should forgive Clinton... I can forgive the bus driver who goes over the cliff with a busload of kids. But I'll take away his license. (12) This will put the country through hell. When a president breaks the law, the country goes through hell. (13) This will damage the nation. Oh, so just let the president keep breaking the law. That's better? (14) The Republicans caused this. Bill Clinton caused this. (15) Republicans are just being partisan. Democrats are defending a law-breaking president from their own party. Who is being partisan? (16) This is part of a Great Right-Wing Conspiracy. The Republicans couldn't organize a barbecue. (17) The Rodino hearings were fair. Rodino was canned because he was blatantly partisan. Fortunately, the 1970's Republicans were willing to punish a law-breaking president from their own party. The 1990's Democrats are defending a law-breaking president from their own party. (18) Hillary has shown what a strong woman she is. If Hillary were a strong woman, she'd have left him. She is a horrible role model for young women. (19) Other nations are laughing at us. Other nations don't take baths. Other nations let their leaders rape women. Other nations kill citizens who dissent. Other nations suck. America is the greatest nation on earth because we all obey the same laws. (20) The polls show most of the nation wants him to stay in office. The polls didn't support the civil rights laws, either. Should we revoke them? (21) Last election, the people spoke and told us they don't want impeachment. Bill Clinton wasn't running in the last election. And if anyone paid attention, there was a 13% swing of women voting towards Republicans. (22) Republicans shouldn't impeach while our troops are in harms way. Bow Wow Wow. (23) Instead of impeachment, we should censure. Censure? For Bill Clinton, that's a checkered flag! Censuring a president isn't even in the Constitution. But since when does a Democrat read the Constitution? (24) Maybe something a little tougher than censure... A little tougher than censure? OK. We'll make him stand in the corner during recess. That's tougher than censure. (25) A president shouldn't be above the law, but he shouldn't be below the law. OK. Then give him the same punishment all Americans get when they commit perjury, sixteen months in jail. (26) 40 million dollars and all we have is this? If Clinton told the truth, this investigation would have cost a couple hundred bucks and box of pizza. Besides, that 40 million dollars also got 16 indictments and 5 convictions for Whitewater. (27) He's sorry. He's sorry he got caught. (28) He apologized. He hasn't admitted his crime. (29) He is a popularly elected president. So was Nixon. There are your snappy answers to stupid liberal soundbytes. Use them well. Use them often. But above all, use them. --Ray Wells ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Reason and Logic vs Emotion From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Tony Sharpe) To: Ron Richards ('63) and Marc Franco ('66) Nice comments Ron, I just wanted to know that you were reading these wonderful editorials. I like it when my team is up 2-0. Guess that makes me a Republican, not quite the same son of a Hanford Construction, blue collar, Democrat family of the 1960's. Of course the Democratic Party of today sadly bears no resemblance to what the party stood for then. Marc, please excuse me for implying that you were a "closet Demo" since you seemed to be defending Mr. Clinton by pointing the finger at other Republicans. I guess what I fail to understand is what Ollie North, Fawn Hall and Iran-Contra have to do with the Impeachment of Wm Clinton for lying under oath and obstruction of justice. Did I misunderstand your independent analysis of the facts regarding our President's misconduct, and after looking at those facts with reason and logic, you agree that he should have been impeached? With regard to whether a Republican President would have resigned under similar circumstances, the record is clear. Richard Nixon resigned just before the articles of impeachment were voted by a Democrat majority on the Judiciary Committee, and at the urging of many of his fellow Republicans. If Republicans were hypocrites, Bob Livingston would still be speaker of the house I suppose. If I were a Democrat, I wouldn't be proud to have Larry Flint as the poster boy of my party offering a MIL to anyone who could dig up dirt on any Republican Congressman. Maybe Steve Forbes, a magazine publisher and Republican, should offer 2 MIL to see how many more Ted Kennedys there are on the Demo side of the aisle. By the way, there is absolutely no evidence that Ronald Reagan was "guilty" in the Iran-Contra affair. Oliver North was hailed as a hero because he refused to allow the Democrats who were driving the inquiry to implicate the President in that affair and thus smear his presidency. Marc, I sincerely hope you are an Independent who votes for both Democrats and Republicans in equal numbers, since neither party truly represents your ideals and you find "equal' fault with both sides. My problem is that, on balance, there is no one in the Democratic party that reflects my Ideals for our Republic, and therefore I call myself a Republican Tony Sharpe ('63) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Different Views OK. - Demeaning Not. From: Cami Riddell Addkisson (85) I have been reading many of the opinions here on the President. I would like to tell Mike Cook that I completely agree with what he said. I think about all the money and time that has been spent on this and then I think about the homeless children and those at Christmas dinner who had nothing to eat..... To John Northover I would like to say that I have written to my Senator and Congress Representative. By the way John, I have a Master's degree and do happen to read quite a lot thank you. You are welcome to your opinions, but please do not demean others who happen to have a different view than you. Is this the type of example you were talking about setting for our children and grandchildren? Cami ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Some people may be turned off... From: Jim Doyle (49) and Barb Barron Doyle (50) Mail: Elyodmij@aol.com Some people may be turned off by the political discussions. I wonder how many of them are in the 70% Clinton approval group. I'd like to see you take that poll. We keep up on everything going on. We read all the East Coast newspapers and magazines on the net. Those that are canceling The Sandbox because of the "boring" political discussions probably fall within the 70% national poll of Clinton supporters. I find these polls questionable. New York City and Los Angeles doesn't represent the nation and I'm convinced these are the only places polled. --Jim & Barb Doyle ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: Robert McCullough (65) Mail To: email@example.com Subject: Business of the Nation A lurker here coming out into the open.. Have enjoyed reading the thoughts and opinions on here. Now I have got something to say. There has been talk about putting this Clinton thing behind us and moving on to the business of the nation.. Ummmmm..... I was under the opinion that following the constitution was the business of the nation. If I am not mistaken, the business of impeachment is a part of the constitution. Thus, beings the full House has passed two Articles of Impeachment on to the Senate, it is the business of the Country being taken care of. I am of the feeling that what is taking place is very important business (of our Country). This is what is known as checks and balances of our three parts of government. This is the system that was wisely set up by the framers of the constitution. It is in the constitution to keep all branches of the government in check. What foresight the had when writing this. The other thought I keep having running threw my mind is why would a person that claims that he did not do something wrong that is impeachable ask for a censure? Why would he have all his people out asking for a censure? Wouldn't you think that if you knew you were right and that you felt that there was not enough votes to convict you by the jury (Senate) that you would demand that the trial take place. Seems a little weird to me that if one felt innocent that you would ask for some sort lesser punishment if you could not be convicted. Well there are my rambling thoughts. Rob McCullough ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: What Is Being Missed? From: "Vince Bartram"
To those that wonder what they are missing. How about objective evidence (sometimes known as the facts)? --Vince Bartram 62 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subject: Susan McDougal From: Norma Boswell (53) Reply to: firstname.lastname@example.org Regarding #9 on Ray Well's list against President Clinton: I watched Susan McDougal as she was interviewed by Geraldo Rivera a few days ago after she was released from prison. Her attitude toward Ken Starr was hostile, but for President Clinton she declared steadfast loyalty and support. That lady looks like she fears NO ONE! If I understood her correctly, she said she was offered everything short of a trip to Hawaii to testify against President Clinton. When she refused, she was given solitary confinement in a 5 x 7 jail cell. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Subj: Makes Monica Look Like Small Potatoes Date: 12/30/98 5:06:17 PM PST From: email@example.com (Ray Wells) To: THE_SANDBOX@hotmail.com FYI, from Ray Wells (54) In an Article written by Will Lester © Copyright 1998 The Associated Press Wednesday, December 30, 1998; 2:08 p.m. EST House Says China Deal Harmed U.S To quote the article in part: WASHINGTON (AP) -- United States technology deals with China, including some with military significance, harmed national security, a House committee concluded unanimously today. "These transfers are not limited to missile satellite technology, but cover militarily significant technology," said Rep. Christopher Cox, chairman of a special House committee investigating military and commercial deals with China." [Note: Because this is a copyrighted article we will not be able to quote the entire article here, but the article did go on to reveal that this committee's investigation was conducted in a bipartisan manner to find whether national security was compromised, and whether decisions to transfer technology were influenced by campaign contributions. Further, this copyrighted Associate Press Article stated that the congressional committee is making 38 recommendations for legislation and executive action to remedy a situation that it found has hurt national security. It is planned that more details and unclassified portions of the report should be made public as soon as possible.] [The article discusses the concerns of many that valuable military technology allegedly flowed to China as part of commercial satellite deals in which U.S.- built communications satellites were put into orbit on low-cost Chinese rockets.] All quotes and references are from article referred to: © Copyright 1998 The Associated Press ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ That's it for this issue of THE SANDBOX, folks. Share your opinions, Your Feelings, Your Ideas and News About YOU with all of us! Please include your class year in all contributions. Thanks! -19-