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: j g cordes who wrote (8501)	10/18/1998 3:09:00 PM
From: mrknowitall	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

j g - interesting "take" on Bork's comments, but I don't think he had just the Vietnam war in mind - more that the slide toward moral relativism given us by the radical activists "leaked" into more and more of strata the non-involved in that era. As food for thought, do you think there was some effect of the radicals on the willingness to commit to winning the war? Don't you believe that Johnson and especially Nixon would have been widely condemned by the more-and-more empowered left for ordering the actions that would have (note I did not say "could" have) won the war? As for "He accuses a nation of failing morals and who is showing collapsing restraint. Both Clinton and Bork are wagging their finger at us!" The only thing Clinton is wagging . . . well, never mind. I'll be more civil. Clinton isn't complaining at all about moral decline; his dishonesty simply fosters an environment where it is Ok. He can always count on the moral relativists to ride out the storm of his behavior problems with the convenient "everybody does it" kind of diversionary "non-defense defense." The march toward "anything goes" continues, and Bill is at the head of the marching band. BTW - you don't suppose those FBI files have the Republican's favorite video lists, do you? Mr. K.

To: j g cordes who wrote (8501)	10/18/1998 3:13:00 PM
From: Zoltan!	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13994

>>Bork is like easy listening radio.. its easy to forget the original tune. You can listen, but you obviously don't comprehend. >>There are few today who believe the war in Vietnam was a just war. Oh yeah? >>Those who had the courage and moral superiority to withstand ridicule and abuse stood up and protested the war.. they, not Bork, showed they stood for truth and decent behavior. Wrong. Most who were protesters stood up for their self-interest and like Clinton, had others die in their place. Clinton is especially despicable because of the way he had lied about his cowardice, making him a coward's coward as he is a liar's liar. What especially grates is that he lied his way into office and has since caused the deaths of many under his command. No one who did what Clinton did should be allowed to order others into combat and death. >>Where does he stand on privacy, where has Bork stood up to complain against special prosecutors opening the private lives of any citizen to public scrutiny? Remember who complained so vehemently at his privacy being invaded over video rental records.. which led to the 1988 Video Privacy Protection Act (Bork Bill). You are clueless! Bork had no such bill. Bork has maintained for decades that the Constitution contains no right to privacy. Get it? Get it? Get it? Most legal scholars now agree that the SC under Warren and later Burger made up that right to achieve a desired result: the right to abortion and contraception. Bork has always maintained that privacy is a matter for the legislature - at least until the Constitution was amended to contain the right. (Bork never argued against having a right to privacy, just that it wasn't there.) >>He accuses a nation of failing morals and who is showing collapsing restraint. Clinton certainly, Bork not at all. You seem to like to argue about things you clearly have no understanding of or capacity to understand. Your lack of knowledge makes argument very difficult for those of us who do have the knowledge because it's like arguing with a five year old.