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: Daniel Schuh who wrote (13434)	11/6/1998 2:17:00 PM
From: mrknowitall	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 67261

Daniel, I can't stand another copy - I'm going to put this as nicely as possible given the level of inanity you're demonstrating. In a reading of the post from Dwight to which you endlessly refer, your interpretation is flawed. The repetitive use of it leads me to believe you know it is flawed but simply have no other viable issue to argue. The key element is Dwight's disdain for YOU for your unqualified and unending attempts to defend the indefensible through moral relativism. The eventual results of a failure to stand up for what is right and wrong are catastrophic. It leads to chaos and tyranny, and the weak suffer horribly under the boot of the strong. We live, and have survived some 200 years, as a nation that exists primarily because of the respect for laws based on fundamental moral principles that most rational people share. Some of those who flaunt their disregard for the law end up being prosecuted for their disdain. When you use your kind of fuzzy-logic to call the enforcement of law into question to support the behaviors of Bill Clinton, you're doing so, wittingly or unwittingly, in an effort to accelerate the decline. What on earth can be your motive for contributing to that? Will we all be better off with more people behaving as Bill Clinton has done, or with fewer? From your attempts to denounce anyone who defends honesty, faithfulness, honor, character, etc., we can determine that you want more of this kind of reckless abandonment of principle rather than less. Let's have more corruption; more womanizing; more perjury. You either take a stand against it or you're supporting it, Daniel. And of course, you'll disagree. You have the freedom in this country to do that because of the same code of law that you and Clinton so lightly give credence to portions thereof. Because you have nothing but a stupefyingly repetitive litany of diversionary non-defense of Bill Clinton on which to focus, you have apparently lost sight of the importance of morality in the world. Apologizing profusely for any personal offense but even Bullwinkle gets steamed once in a while. Rant off. Mr. K.