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: Peter O'Brien who wrote (12949)	11/4/1998 8:05:00 PM
From: zax	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

OK, I'll take a shot. I had to go back and look at the question. I was just being fresh... sorry. I simply would like to know if you think it's a good thing that we currently have such laws on the books, and whether you also think it's important to enforce them. Here is my answer for you. Without laws, there is no lawlessness. Laws create lawlessness. Laws remove from people the fundamental liberty to "do whatever they would", but serve to prevent and protect us from general anarchy and the excesses, waste and hurt towards others that lawless states can allow for. Laws are not clearly definable in any absolute sense. This is why we have the court system, and every man has the right to a fair trial. You have already convicted president Clinton in your own mind, without even a trial. Hence, you are coming from no different a position than Mr. Starr... pure hate and zeal. Mr. Starr, after taking months and millions of dollars of taxpayer money was only able to manufacture false charges against the president and set traps to get the president to lie. He began an inquisition in the private interpersonal relationship between two consenting adults after months of fruitless grand jury testimony on other cropped up charges that produced no indictments. He could not even get a jury to indict Clinton for perjury on any other of dozens of trumped up charges, so he ended up dumping reams of illegally obtained innuendo on the congress doorstep in a last ditch effort to save face. The only lawlessness here, Mr. O'brien, is a prosecutorial system gone amuck. Mr. Clinton is innocent of all charges. And you, dear sir, are a hateful, conspiratorial minded, rumor mongering politically motivated anti-Clintonite. Does that answer your question?