On Tue, 19 Jun 2001, Doug Pensinger wrote:
> "John D. Giorgis" wrote:
> > Occam's Razor suggests that we take the simplest explanation for this
> > observation - the simplest explanation being that those people acted on
> > principle, just as they have argued for three years now.
> I'm sorry John, but that statement is patently ridiculous. Republican
> politicians acting on principal having caught their political rival with his
> pants down? The Republicans were out to get Clinton the day he won the first
> election any which way they could. Not only did they hate Clinton from the
> get go, they had Iran-Contra and Watergate to atone for. If they had been
> acting on principal they would have left him alone to run the country, seeing
> as they couldn't have gotten anyone from the Democratic party more amenable to
> their agenda. Hatred, vindictiveness and vengeance, those were the
> motivators, and it couldn't get any simpler.
>
> Doug
Astonishing, Doug. The only possible reason that Republicans could
disagree with you is pure malice. They could not possibly have principled
differences - your side of the political spectrum of course has a monopoly
on virtue and everyone who disagrees with you is evil. They couldn't
possibly feel that he had legitimately committed crimes which he should,
in fact, be punished for. No, it was simply a witchhunt. Amazing. I
thought you actually had to take money from the Democratic Party to be so
astonishingly self-righteous. Tell me, Doug, have you ever even
considered the possibility that someone who disagrees with you might do so
out of a genuine difference of principle, or are people like John and me
also nothing more than either tools of corporate interests or hate-filled
villains trying to cripple the good and true people in the american
government?
Gautam
