Posted on 12/24/2003 4:20:01 AM PST by suspects
A NOTE TO MY FELLOW CONSERVATIVES:
Your silence regarding Rush Limbaugh is excruciating.
I like Rush, too, and given that he and I have the same employer, I'm not exactly improving my career prospects by being consistent. It's a bad habit I picked up after years of listening to, and admiring, Rush Limbaugh.
And if we learned the lessons of Limbaugh (individual responsibility and the rule of law), how can we now agree to "Clintonize" ourselves defending him? A drug addiction is one thing, but blackmail? He's allowed himself to be blackmailed for years--the same years he was rightly pounding the stuffing out of the Clintons? And now he claims he's the victim of a politically-motivated prosecution?
What's next: "The b**** set me up?"
Of all the disappointing decisions Rush has made, these last two are the most disheartening. Consider for a moment what blackmail is: An admission that you know what you're doing is wrong.
The decision to fork over the cash is just that--a decision. It can't be any less difficult to make that decision than to decide to, say, go to your lawyer, spill your guts and spend a month in detox at Charter. So why not choose to do the RIGHT thing?
But that's not what Rush chose to do. He chose instead to continue, for years, to do the wrong thing and then--after he was caught--blame the consequences on the vast, left-wing conspiracy. As Rush himself said very wisely and correctly when Jim Carville made the same argument defending President O.J., "It doesn't matter what Ken Starr's politics are if you're innocent."
Bill Clinton wasn't an innocent victim of political vendettas. He was a perjurer and obstructer of justice who blamed others for his own lack of character and its consequences.
Which means, my fellow conservatives, that Rush Limbaugh is....?
I'm sorry, I can't seem to hear you. It must be that deafening silence again.
Wrong. Jesus said that loving your neighbor is the whole of the Law--and he was right. You've confused mere unconstitutional despotic statutes with the Law.
In a free republic, cops, prosecuters, judges, and jurors are sworn to uphold justice, not unconstitutional despotic statutes.
Every physician he contacted for prescriptions after her was addicted he lied to. If he wasn't trying to obstruct justice and save his behind why would he pay blackmail
Um...don't look now, but your desperation is showing. Statements made to a physician are not sworn testimony, so it's not perjury. And in case you haven't read up on case law recently, the person getting blackmailed is a victim of extortion.
Dang...wasn't even a very good try you made. Better luck next time.
Actually, their responsibility is to uphold "the law", not your idea of what justice should be.
If your ability to reason were not also obliterated, you could read the US Constitution and learn that the executive branch is not bound to legislative statutes:
Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:--"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
...the law of the land, mentioned in Magna Carta, was the common, ancient, fundamental law of the land, which the kings were bound by oath to observe; and that it did not include any statutes or laws enacted by the king himself, the legislative power of the nation.--Lysander Spooner from Trial by Jury
But the only hope Americans like yourself have of ever learning to love your neighbors as yourselves, is if you are scared into it, the same way you were frightened into trading a free republic for the false security of an authoritarian socialist police state where you think you have to obey every dictate of every two bit legislator. Perhaps your thoughtless emotions will save you then, when a libertarian evangelist addresses your basic instincts of fear and greed, and causes you to repent for your crimes against your neighbors--even if only to save your own behind from eternal physical torment.
You're as much an evangelist as Jesse Jackson.
Libertarian UTOPIA, is " LORD OF THE FLIES " ;nothing more and nothing less. GOD ( you remember HIM, don't you ? ) ordered mankind, through HIS laws to behave, else they would be punished. GOD doesn't see mankind as inherently good and neither do I. They MUST be " coerced " and even then, they don't behave correctly.
Caesar claimed to be a God. This is a violation of the Jews' 1st commandment. His image on the coin was a graven image--a violation of the Jews' 2nd commandment. So what part of "Give a false god what he has coming to him" are you confused about?
Unto Ceasar I hold accountable all who Violate Ceasar's laws. Unless and until they come into conflict with God's laws.
It was these conflicts of the imperial Roman occupiers' laws with Jesus' Golden Rule that is the main theme of the gospels' account of the life of Jesus!
Loving your neighbor as Jesus commanded us to, has nothing at all to do with Man's physical Law.
As you pointed out above, it has everything to do with it when there is a conflict. Just as the operators of the Underground Railroad were not bound to tell the U.S. Fugitive Slave marshalls where the escaped slaves were hiding, Clinton was not bound to incriminate himself in front of the sex police (even if he had pushed for the draconian laws himself a few years earlier--just as Rush is not bound to obey the unconstitutional drug laws that he pushed for years earlier).
Got an early Christmas pressy ... a laptop, so I'm trying it out. :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.