Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: American Spirit who wrote (8727)	5/18/2006 7:28:06 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

I don't give Bush a pass for his dishonesty but even excluding the perjury factor I don't see him as being nearly the liar Clinton was. I understand you disagree. In fact I think I could handle both sides of the debate, I've heard it all before and been around and around and around with the same issue. And what if Bush were under oath and asked about any extra-marital affairs he's ever had? Would you support that line of questioning? Only if the affairs were relevant. The affairs where somewhat relevant in Clinton's case, and Clinton signed the law that insisted they where relevant. If Bush was in the same exact situation than yes I would support that line of questioning. I might support the law being repealed, but the person who signed it should not be immune from it. The governor (Clinton was governor when he signed the law and also when the alleged sexual harassment took place) or the president, should not be above the law, most esp. when they themselves supported and signed the law. Tim