Space Ramblings

Conversations on Gore, Bush and the Election – Part 41

>Are you now claiming that Clinton “wondered about the definition of
>sex”? That’s not actually a question he was ever asked. He was asked
>if he had had “sexual relations” with Monica Lewinsky, which is
>interesting, since “sexual relations” is a term which is generally
>used only by priests and doctors, and refers specifically to the
>reproductive act. What he was asked in court was a convoluted
>question about his _intent_, which he didn’t write himself – and since
>it was about his intent, no one can ever know whether he was lying or
>not.

He was asked a question whose meaning he knew quite well and he lied about
it, he held a televised address to the nation…AND HE LIED ABOUT IT AGAIN.
He even lied to his close advisors on the matter. But I guess that’s just
the Arkansas Project at work again.

>But you still haven’t answered my question, unless you think
>”wondering about the definition of sex” is a definition of moral
>degeneracy, in which case I think you can officially be declared a
>nitwit.

No but repeatedly whoring around while being married is a working definition
thereof.

>Nixon lied like a son of a bitch about Jerry Voorhees, about Helen
>Douglas, and about the war, just for starters. He had a very long
>history being a creep and earned every enemy he had.

A manufactured history…constructed by people who couldn’t cope with a
strong politician with an opposing point of view.

>People were physically assaulted.

Yeah the Miami hospital beds were just full of the dying and the dead (-: No
one physically stopped the counting, a few angry confrontations
notwithstanding.

>Who told you that? The only information we have is that his father
>came to America to get his son back. He had his wife and family with
>him and they could have stayed in America if they wanted to.

No he couldn’t have, he had plenty of “handlers” with him. In Cuba he was a
big shot and a party member and even if he had, the same liberal propoganda
machine that demonized Elian’s relatives would have turned on him in a
flash.

> But, you
>know, a lot of people don’t like having to leave their lives behind
>them. Cuba may not be much, but maybe he had a life there he didn’t
>want to abandon. Maybe it doesn’t have anything to do with politics.

Only to the extent that politics in a dictatorship means taking orders and
doing what you’re told by people who have total power and authority over
your life.

>I suspect that Elian may be the safest person in Cuba, and I think
>your rabid paranoia about Castro is just…well, rabid paranoia. Even
>living in a shitty country doesn’t guarantee someone a shitty life.

Yes for now he’s safe. Of course he’s living in a malnourished totalitarian
state and even assuming his celebrity protects him from those privations, it
will backfire once he’s an adult and will be kept under close watch. And of
course freedom isn’t on the agenda.

>Yeah, maybe they just should have set fire to the place like they did
>at Waco.

Unlike Waco the relatives weren’t armed and the only resistance they offered
was non-violent. To which the best response probably isn’t to send in the
Border Patrol with sufficent numbers and equipment as if they were invading
Granada.

Related posts:

Post Navigation

Custom Avatars For Comments
UA-32485431-1
%d bloggers like this: