 | | Clinton: Amoral?
|
|
Beaker wrote: <masterful essay, clearly delineating the key points about rule of law> Wow. Great job. Some key points I think need more amplification: - Jim feels, as I do, that the current sexual harassement laws are flawed, but that the president (...) (26 years ago, 24-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
|
|
Beaker wrote: <alot of stuff cut out for obvious reasons> (...) You have more articulately described what I was hoping that I would not have to. I don't think there was a single word I disagreed with, other than the part about your seemingly (...) (26 years ago, 24-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
|
|
A lot of people have been debating the impeachment issue here. I have an opinion, but because I am lazy, I am going to re-post something that I wrote for another discussion group. There are a couple of references to people who are members of that (...) (26 years ago, 24-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
|
|
(...) Well, I'm not sure I agree. I have read of gods that were the "cause" of the particular set of laws that apply in this universe(1), and the "cause" of their consequences. Under that analysis, (whether these gods could subsequently work (...) (26 years ago, 24-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
|
|
(...) Ken Starr's job was to dig up dirt on Clinton. In doing so, he may have changed the focus from the matter at hand to the present matter. No problem with me, I want the truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth. If the guy is a sleaze (...) (26 years ago, 24-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
|
|
Matt Hanson <"mth8358"@NO SPAMwichita.infi.net> > wrote in message ... (...) there (...) Starr (...) until (...) No, any american who listned to the press, which had already tried and convicted him, already new he did the dirty with lewinsky, and (...) (26 years ago, 24-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
|
|
(...) Thanks, I guess we feel the same on this subject. Stange, how such a small remark can be interpreted in a totally wrong way ;-) ____ |oooo| Cheers, |oooo| Wouter van Wageningen ¯¯¯¯ (26 years ago, 23-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Christian == Catholic? (Was Geez...
|
|
(...) Religion. (...) While the first statement is true, the last is garbage.... (26 years ago, 24-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
|
|
Also sprach Barry McFarland: : Part of the understanding of evolution is that it does not require an "outside : force. Thus the two are not only irreconcilable, but also irrelavent in : association. Choices are: (1) either one is true and the other (...) (26 years ago, 23-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
