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 : Clinton's Scandals: Is this corruption the worst ever? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greenspirit who wrote (8389)	10/16/1998 1:01:00 PM
From: jbe	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13994

Michael, I considered Pat Robertson a potentially dangerous dork (pardon the expression),long before I had even heard of Bill Clinton. Robertson has been around a long time (remember his 1988 bid for the GOP Presidential nomination?), as have most of the other leaders of the Religious Right. What has "blind Democratic love" (for Clinton) got to do with my personal antipathy to the man? Nothing at all. Fear, yes, I'll grant that. In fact, along with others, I have often stressed here that some of Clinton's enemies are in effect his best friends: otherwise put, widespread public distrust of their motives translates into (sometimes reluctant) support for Clinton (NOT the other way around). It does, in the end, boil down to the tolerance issue. The point is that most Americans, I think, do prize tolerance. That means they recognize the right of the other guy to hold his own views (however kooky or repellent), as long as the other guy recognizes theirs. For example, I think UFO enthusiasts are pretty much off-the-wall. But I wouldn't think of stoning them to death, as Pat Robertson has advocated doing: ifas.org And I must say that I have always had trouble with what I see as Robertson's distorted view of the world (and of his own place in it), as demonstrated by statements like the following (published in 1991, in the pre-Clinton era): There will never be world peace until God's house and God's people are given their rightful place of leadership at the top of the world. How can there be peace when drunkards, drug dealers, communists, atheists, New Age worshipers of Satan, secular humanists, oppressive dictators, greedy moneychangers,revolutionary assassins, adulterers, and homosexuals are on top? (Pat Robertson:The New World Order, p. 227, Word Publishing, 1991.) So, pardon me, Michael, but I regard your question about "blood and saliva" as somehow beside the real point.. Joan P.S. Michael, I have "searched around the net," and can tell you that although I found sites where there is an article denouncing Ken Starr as the "embodiment of evil," I did not find a single one exclusively devoted to denouncing Starr. In other words, although there are an astonishing number of sites devoted to Getting Clinton, I could not find a single one devoted to Defending Clinton. (I posted about this earlier; right now don't have time to hunt down the citation.)