[A.J.Armitage]

I dare say, that any government, no matter how sound or properly laid out, with all the liberty and freedom you could desire, will always be damaged by evil men.

Which is why we must always be on our guard.

Clinton was an evil man. A man that raped both a defenseless woman and a trusting Nation. I'm sure you know that, so I can only assume that this piece was intended to place President Bush in the same light...how sad.

The point is to put the domestic legislation Bush pushed through on in the same light it would be in if Clinton pushed it through. Bush himself doesn't have to be evil to have extremely bad policies. Be honest: if Clinton had done this, would you be against it?

[Southack]

On the one hand you claim that it doesn't matter if only machines are reading internet messages, but then on the other hand you claim to have an issue with machines reading internet messages.

You just can't admit when you're wrong, much less when you contradict yourself.

[Registered]

Be honest: if Clinton had done this, would you be against it?

Of course. I'd be against ANYTHING the man did. But the premise of your question is grounded in absurdity. BECAUSE CLINTON WAS EVIL. Get it? The actions of an honorable man and the actions of an evil one, though they be similar in nature, will always end at two very different destinations. But frankly A.J., after following your discussions over the past few days I know that your opinions apparently cannot be impacted or changed. In other words, I think I'll save my breath.