To: mrknowitall who wrote (449 ) 9/19/1998 7:34:00 PM From: Daniel Schuh Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 567
"Facts and reason". Like Ronald Reagan said, "Facts are stupid things". You got your facts, you seem to want to precisely limit the discussion to what you want to discuss. Sounds like another cheesy high school debate trick to me. As far as the "so what" light, the only meaning I can find in any of this is in the context of other special prosecutor investigations and impeachment proceedings. In that context, the whole thing is ridiculous. Do you want to debate that? Can you point to anyone else hounding a president like Starr did? Remember all that "partial immunity" that went out in Iran/Contra, to the noble Ollie North and everybody else? That ended up making it impossible to convict him? None of that wimp business for our man Starr. They don't tell you what you want, lock'm up and let'm rot. Remember George "out of the loop" Bush? Anybody talk about perjury with him? As for what you want to pay attention to, it seems that you're perfectly happy rechanting the Republican party line, and coming up with bogus analogies. Oh, and giving little lectures about values, like this:Long-standing American values and those that held them have been systematically trashed by the President and the people he surrounds himself with. Not to mention silly red herrings like:To me, that's as fundamentally repugnant as saying all Germans were Nazis or that all white people are racists. Fertile ground, eh, Mr. Knowitall. Again, looks like cheesy high school debate tricks to me. Personally, I find the whole thing fundamentally repugnant, on all sides. Politics is a blood sport these days, all you want to talk about Carville and Clinton, your universe is pretty darn limited. But of course, I'm sure you consider yourself objective, and I'm biased. Right? Cheers, Dan.