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.

Pastimes : Impeachment=" Insult to all Voters" -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jim kelley who wrote (1314)	1/6/1999 11:57:00 AM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 2390

What definition in the PJ case limited sexual relations to sexual intercourse? Point to it. (You can't. It ain't there.) Your argument: when Clinton talks to the American people, it doesn't matter what their definition is, or what the commonly accepted definition is, it only matters what HIS definition is. This is linguistic relativism at its absolute! There are no fixed meanings to words; words mean whatever the user wants them to. By that argument, NO politician EVER lies. He or she just uses his or her own definitions. In fact, all you have to do is define "lie" as "something said by me at least 1,000 times in one hour which has not and never possibly could have been at any time in the past and could never at any time in the future possibly be true" and I would bet that NOBODY has EVER lied in the entire course of human history. Gosh, what an honest people you perceive the human race to be! But then, as a Clinton defender you are inevitably thrust into such absurdities.