Replies

Your problem is the lack of moral courage and conviction. You are perfectly willing to condemn Mr. Clinton for conversations reported to be on tape but unwilling to do so for someone you otherwise consider to be your home team.

I abhor hypocrisy.

Mr. Graham's behavior with Mr. Nixon is inexcusable. He was supposed to be a minister of the LORD, in case you have forgotten which team he thought he was on. He should be rebuked for moral cowardice in not standing up to Mr. Nixon.

Let's try this again: Do you believe all that you read, especially the first time, in a press that is, by even their own admission, anti-religion anyway? You haven't listened to the tape in the context of the time, place, setting or in its entirety. OTOH, we DO KNOW the public words and actions of the man for 40 or 50 years ongoing. You cannot point to a single instance of anti-Semitic behavior or rhetoric. Yet you find this one instance as an incredible window into a man's attitude about an entire race of people.

That isn't only illogical, it is idiocy. When you have a pattern of behavior (see: Bill Clinton), one might make an argument. You don't have that with Reverend Graham. You've got one instance of one conversation on one tape in an 83-year lifetime...and you haven't even got the context in which that conversation occurred?

The vast stupidity of inferring one is anti-Semite from that miniscule shred of evidence boggles the mind.

Let me review your life and pick out an instance or two where you put your foot in your mouth and condemn you for it. Oh, but wait...that would be taking it out of context, wouldn't it?

For one who wants to emphasize "the LORD" so much, it would behoove you to remember the importance of context in exegesis.

From The Jewish Bulletin of Northern California:

June 14, 1996

Clinton, Dole backers debate: Who's best for Jews?

NATALIE WEINSTEIN

Bulletin Staff

In surveys, 15 percent of Jews classify themselves as conservative, 40 percent as moderate and 45 percent as liberal. But when Jews answer specific questions, Field said, they generally come out as "reasonably conservative" on economic issues and liberal on social issues.

"It's the social issues that are driving them more than economic issues," added Field, who is Jewish.

I abhor hypocrisy.

Mr. Graham's behavior with Mr. Nixon is inexcusable. He was supposed to be a minister of the LORD, in case you have forgotten which team he thought he was on. He should be rebuked for moral cowardice in not standing up to Mr. Nixon.

Then I am sure you will equally concur with this statement:

Mr. Jackson's behavior with Mr. Clinton is inexcusable. He was supposed to be a minister of the LORD, in case you have forgotten which team he thought he was on. He should be rebuked for moral cowardice in not standing up to Mr. Clinton.

I abhor hypocrisy.