SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Pastimes : Ask God -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: mark silvers who wrote (21297)10/24/1998 9:35:00 AM
From: PROLIFE  Respond to of 39621
 
I agree with you Mark, at least on the point that we should hold them all accountable, not in the spiritual sense, cause we all sin and fall short of the Glory of God, but in the sense that their deeds do have consequence.

dan



To: mark silvers who wrote (21297)10/24/1998 11:47:00 AM
From: Alan Markoff  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 39621
 
Hi Mark,
There is a major difference in the position that Clarence Thomas had and the Presidency. The level of responsibility is my concern. For me the other issues like the campaign frued had already increased my distrust in him and this was only the icing on the cake. If he can not take the accountability of the Office he should step down gracefully and save some integrity. So you are now in conversations about religion and politics! Oy!
Have a great weekend,
Nancy



To: mark silvers who wrote (21297)10/24/1998 6:00:00 PM
From: Barnabus  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 39621
 
The proof of the 'puddin is the feminists lambasted Thomas & have excused Clinton.
It's all politics, my friend.
With Clinton there was all kinds of proof.
With Thomas, absolutely no proof.
Someday God will set the record straight and we'll both know for sure then.
Also for the record, Thomas was accused of inappropriate words, Clinton of inappropriate action.

Have a sensational Saturday.

Barney