 | | Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
|
|
(...) That's really a pity. I think that if somebody has an affair, they should be punished, according to the oath they took at the altar. (or wherever) But if you enjoy living in a country where one's word means nothing, I guess that's your (...) (26 years ago, 28-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
|
|
Also sprach Mike Stanley: : So you either can accept that he's breaking his vows to his wife and : she doesn't mind, which makes sense, because if she doesn't mind why : should you? Or you're saying that you condone the violating of one : person's (...) (26 years ago, 28-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
|
|
Matt Marshall wrote in message ... (...) oops heres the footnotes (1) Absolutely no offense to any Chinese person out there, just communism in general(4) (2)Diplomacy is best backed by a large arsenal of weapons (3)Yes even Jesus has lied (...) (26 years ago, 27-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
|
|
Mike Stanley wrote in message ... <snip> (...) Lying is probaly the most important part of leading a country I mean, you have to look the Chinese whatever in the eyes and say "No the American People want to trade with you, we don't think your a (...) (26 years ago, 27-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
|
|
(...) You know, if Bill & Hillary have an understanding that it is "ok" for each of them them to sleep around, then I could understand what you're saying. If, however, they have the kind of marriage that the vast majority of people enter into, one (...) (26 years ago, 27-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
|
|
Also sprach Matt Hanson: : 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 condoning discreet extramarital : (...) (26 years ago, 27-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Clinton: Amoral?
|
|
Also sprach Larry Pieniazek: : Wow. Great job. <blush> ... thanks:) / _ _ / _ _ It's lonely at the top, but you eat better. ()(-(//((-/ ===...=== Jim Baker -- Weather Weasel Extraordinaire ===...=== (26 years ago, 25-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
|
|
(...) There was a brilliant advertising campaign here in the UK shortly after all of this became known. It was by Sketchley's, a big dry-cleaning company. It was a full page ad, with a picture of a dejected looking Clinton in the centre. Text (...) (26 years ago, 24-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Christian == Catholic? (Was Geez...
|
|
(...) Religion. (...) I do believe there are also slight similarities to Zoroastrianism, which I believe was the first monotheistic religion from that region... (26 years ago, 24-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Christian == Catholic? (Was Geez...
|
|
(...) The Islamic faith recognises Christ as a prophet, though not a saviour. Not quite as highly revered as Mohammed, but quite high up there....... (26 years ago, 24-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
