What are you, Neocon, the cavalry?
You know you place me in a tenuous position having to defend against intelligence while I beg dolts for a single rational response.
A.) You are assuming that he is not to blame for his initial indiscretions, but is the victim of his past;
A. You use 'victim' for the emotional buzz word effect. In speaking of a man, the blended components are nature, nurture, self. In evaluating character, or self, mention of nature and nurture is not out of place. And in gauging character, some starting place for growth or decay must be established. Blame is not my concern, only direction up or down. What effect does you mentioning blame have on character?
I am assuming the worst allegations are true for Bill's picadilloes, as per Darrell's wild postings.
C.) He obviously did not leave his adultery, since he had some kind of affair with Monica, at a minimum;
C. Another use of an emotional buzz word. I do not dismiss your 'adultery, as you do mine, but my use of adultery is perfectly valid, and more precise than yours. What, precisely, does SOME kind of your adultery entail? The actions, sans label, toward G. Flowers were not the same as the actions, sans label, toward Monica.
D.) Again, given the actions alleged by Kathleen Willey, we cannot say positively that he has stopped his gross come- ons, only that few have come to light;
D. His gross come-on differs between Paula and Wiley, as my post said. Paula was a stranger. Wiley represented herself a friend. There is growth even here. I make no grand claims, just a continuing better direction.
B.) If his lunge on Kathleen Willey occurred, he may not have left his raping ways behind, he may only have held back in that instance because there was too much danger;
B. He may be an alien, but that, too, is not collaborated by any facts. The fact is, is that no similar incident has been described to this very day.
E.) Since we do not know whether or not we should credit Clinton with having changed much, and since even sexual offenders are capable of controlling themselves for periods of time when self- preservation is an issue, there is little need to invoke "character". The President lives under constant scrutiny, and with very little privacy, and yet he put his fate in the hands of an immature girl who was a pretty obvious blabbermouth while in the midst of the discovery phase of the Paula Jones litigation.
E'. ) This shows horrible judgment and lack of character...
In B, D, and E, you point out an assumption that Clinton COULD be continuing his evil ways. In E, you imply the counter assertion that he lives under great scrutiny and without privacy, and could NOT be undiscovered, by press, court, or public. Holding mutually exclusive sides of an argument is logically absurd. That you seek to place that on me is not surprising since my argument is sound and fact based. Another way we could look at your argument is to say we can know nothing for certain, since more evidence could arrive. That is certainly true, but does not support decisions needed to live. Given imperfect knowledge, and a framework of time to decide, we must rely on the 'odds'. The odds say all incidents in Clinton's sex life in recent xx number of years, have been identified. Were we to use our limited knowledge, of so exposed a situation as this, as a reason to not <invoke> character, what could we possibly include in any invocation of character? Nothing. Except for rare occasions, this is my personal belief; one can never know didly of another's character, or even his own. But the long distance characterization of someone we have never met, by people we don't know, and who are not confidants to the man, is the height of false pride and falsehood.
E'. ) This shows horrible judgment and lack of character...
E'. Lack of judgement has no more to do with character than politeness, intelligence, beauty, political thought, or... ad nauseum. You should know better than to confuse the issues. But a made up bad slant, and lots of little issues and allegations have been the anti-clinton group's stock in trade from the beginning.
One thing the bad judgement, you mention, does show is that his oversex remains, though he has moderated his behavior. What do we call long-term modified behavior for the better, against contrary biology? Character. |
