-Caveat Lector-
In a message dated 1/13/99 5:53:12 AM Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
> In a message dated 1/12/99 5:18:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
>
> << Sorry to hear that he wasn't given air time. Mustn't upset the right-
> wing
> freaks by exposing their hypocrisy. On the local TV news, it was stated
> that
> Bob "family values" Barr was accused with shacking up with his third wife
> while he was still married to his second wife. There was also some he
> said/she said regarding the abortion. Regarding another self righteous
but
> unnamed Republican, it was said that he routinely visited the brothels
> along
> the Mexican border. One hopes he doesn't have too many STDs. Let's hope,
> the
> elites are not able to continue the news block. >>
>
> If I'm remembering correctly, Libby Dole's marriage to Bob was also
> pressaged
> by similar behavior. No one seems to mind if you're a Republican. Pudy
>
Gang,
Couple of things that have been conviently forgotten.
What was actually reported is that Barr and the other woman refused
to answer questions on the stand during a divorce proceeding.
So Barr and this other woman never lied under oath because they never
actually answered the question put to them...apparently he claimed the
5th or something like that. But claiming the 5th must be ok because
notable Democrats such as Carville, Lanny Davis and others have done
it during various "under oath" sessions during lawsuits and grand jury.
The difference between Barr and Clinton is Clinton answered the question(s)
and lied under oath. Had Clinton fessed up to getting oral sex from Monica
in and around the oval office in January of 1998 when the scandel first blew
up, it would have never led to impeachment...although the Paula Jones case
may have still been on going..which is why Clinton lied in the first place.
Which brings me to the next point. The liberals/Democrats et all
define morality as 'being true (supporting) to the political issues' i.e.
abortion, welfare, and such, with your private life not being a factor
in your morals.
Under the Democrat/Liberal principle and definition being advanced a
dedicated member of the militia/KKK/NAZI's or whom ever would be
defined as "moral men" as long as they remained true to their political
issues during the day. After all what they do at night or after hours
doesn't matter under that definition. Likewise if a loyal Democrat (or any
party) person was true to the issues during the day,
but molested children at night, then he too would be considered a
moral man.
Under the liberal/Democrat definition of morality it would be ok to fool
around
on your husband or wife...as long as you were 'true to the political
issues' while you were serving.
So if Liberals and Democrats are true to the principles and
definitions advanced by their leaders nothing Bob Barr/Livingston or any
other Republican did could even be remotely considered to be
immoral.
The proof of this principle is what the head of the Democratic party and
the President of the US did when Livingston resigned over his
philandering. The President called for Bob Livingston to NOT resign over
sex issues. Interestingly it was all the Democrats who were calling for
Livingston not to resign while the Republicans said nothing.
It is because of the above mentioned point (about the Democrat/Liberal
definition of morality) is the exact reason why the White
House/Democrats/Liberals/Feminists are now embracing Larry Flynt. Even to
the
point of White House press secretary calling Hustler a "news magazine."
We see that even though Larry Flynt has exploited women and promoted child
molesting, what he does is OK because Flynt is true to the politcal issues.
I am curious. Do you think the liberal left would mind some conservative
dude
said he would put up 1 million dollars for information about the Democrats and
their sex lives? The answer is a resounding YES. The liberals and the left
would
squall their heads off. We would hear weeks of tales and stories about how
the right
has gone off the deep end blah blah blah. Naturally the liberal left
doesn't mind
when its pointed to the right.
As for "family values" we should remember that Clinton/Gore who
got on the "family values" platform in 1992 and 1996 when they were reelected.
If you sincerely believe the notion is that
*anybody* that claims family values, but yet goes out and has sex out
of marriage, is a hyprocrit, then you must also believe that besides the
Republicans, the leader of your party and the President of the US falls
in that catagory.
I suspect that the liberals/democrats/left will continue to support anything
connected
to "their man" just like some foolish people in the Republican
party/Conservatives
supported Richard Nixon in 1974...because he was "their man."
Remember one final thought. IF Clinton gets removed from office (I don't
think he will) it will be becauss 15 members of the Democratic party supported
that removal from office. So at that point, no matter what you personally
think/say
or believe, you will have to say "Well it was the party I loved and supported
which
caused the President I love and support to be removed from office.
According to Democrats, they want Clinton to be removed from office..
after Jan 21st so Gore can become President, then run for two more terms.
Byrd, Monihan, Dashulte, and other Democrats have advocated this notion
to their inner circle. The Democrats who are against this notion are those
that are planning to run for the Democratic nomination. Why? Because
whom ever the sitting President is would get the party nomination no matter
what.
Interestingly it is Republicans who want a wounded Clinton still in office
in 2000.
Supposedly a sitting President Al Gore is politically more dangerous to the
Republicans in the 2000 elections then a sitting President who has
"moral(s) problems" being in office. Interesting isn't it.
Cheers,
Robert
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
