To: sea_biscuit who wrote (15558 ) 11/22/1998 4:47:00 PM From: Johannes Pilch Read Replies (5) | Respond to of 67261
>More Metamucil at work, eh?< Apparently so. See a doctor, and then, while you're at it, see a shrink, then try and learn a few things from your parents about integrity. On second thought, avoid your parents like the plague, as they have obviously done a despicable job. >Get this into your head, dude -- the people don't expect politicians to be saints!< Here we see the typical liberal regurgitation that is spewed anytime one demands simple decency in a liberal government official. A sane individual demands decency from Bill Clinton, and the liberals begin spraying irrelevant vomit as if a conductor had given them a cue. I never once even insinuated that "the people" expected politicians to be "saints". Indeed if anything, I have said "the people's" moral standards are ostensibly so low they will accept nearly any sort of garbage for high office so long as it makes the plant appear nicely run. Perhaps "the people" should not expect a "saint", but they should expect a fundamentally decent human being-- one who refuses to lie flagrantly and repeatedly to their faces and one who refuses to lie flagrantly and repeatedly to their courts. This is basic decency, and that your parents obviously did not teach you to honor it reveals those of the DIPY line to be beneath contempt. Liberal trash. >Besides, if they have to get rid of Clinton, the alternatives are even more obnoxious -- Gingrich, Lott, Barr, Gramm... (bleh!)< This is stupid, and thus very liberal. It no longer seems Gingrich is much of a possible alternative, and Lott, Barr, Gramm have what no doubt to you is the dubious distinction of having never lied flagrantly and repeatedly to our courts. Moreover were Clinton dispatched, the men you've listed would not, as you imply, be the only alternatives. In fact Vice President Gore would take the presidency and he at this juncture would be a more fitting president than Bill Clinton (though he is quite an unattractive choice of a leader by any reasonable standard). >And that is without counting their sanctimonious airhead spokesmen like Bennett, Limbaugh and the like.< What lunacy. Bennett and Limbaugh are no spokesmen for these politicians. The former is an author and former bureaucrat and the latter (why am I wasting time with this nitwit? Doesn't he have brains to know what these men do?) is an author and radio entertainer, one whom I have neither read nor heard. >GOT IT?! Well, I don't think you will.< Will what? Hopefully you now see here that the only reasoned thought you have ever had was conveyed stupidly. >If it has taken you so long and you still don't get it, you probably never will!< Sir, you haven't the moral decency and brains to reject a chronic baldfaced liar and sexual predator. Indeed you gloat and cheer at that fiend's success. So obviously I won't "get it" if it comes from you. No thinking man would "get" anything from you. It is so excellent that at the very worst I will encounter your presence only here on this forum because I hardly think my sinuses could long endure the stench were we to meet in person.