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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: dougjn who wrote (3670)	9/18/1998 4:52:00 PM
From: Johannes Pilch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

>I think you are so motivated by so strong a desire for unblemished moral leadership in our President (for someone who is no mere performance machine, as you put it, but a shining moral example in all respects)that you give scant weight to the standards for impeachment set forth by our founding fathers...< The Founding Fathers did not and would not approve of allowing a president to live like a monarch. Indeed, that is why the Federalist Papers were written. The Founding Fathers would not have approved of allowing a President to warp the legal system by use of repeated and cynical lies, this, to deny justice to other Americans. It is not that I want leadership that has no moral blemish. I want leadership that is willing to admit the truth when faced with the very law it has vowed to uphold. This is the bare minimum we should expect of our leaders. But you apparently will accept just any sort of rubbish, so long as it effectively puts toilet paper in our nation's bathrooms. I do not respect such machines as great men, and herein lies the great divide between you and I. You cast your respect to that which to me is detestable. Had Clinton acknowledged the truth, and repented, willingly allowing himself to undergo the consequences of his actions, he would have acted honorably, and I would be free not to focus my condemnations of his behavior. I would be free to trust our secular religion, the law, to deal with the matter. But he has not done this, and so I am compelled to reject him for the schemer that he is. You make such a false dichotomy here between religious folk and secular ones. Many non-religious folk reject Clinton for the same reasons I do. Even without religion they see the utter insanity of merely winking at repeated, and cynically presented lies and cheating. You ain' gotta be no saint to see dis. It is a matter of simple decency and reason.