Monday, October 24, 2005
Ethics
Haloscan is on the fritz (what else is new), so I will have to respond to repeal's post below here.
Clinton was actually guilty of a crime. DeLay probably is not, though I have no idea about Libby/Rove, but if they're guilty, punish them.
Again, if DeLay happens to be guilty, I don't care if its some technical charge - a crime is a crime. Unlike Clinton's syncophantic worshippers, I will not defend DeLay because the crime wasn't serious. That's irrelevant. But I refuse to lynch the guy for a non-commital of a crime because his actions seem somehow unethical.
Mouldfan had argued that even if DeLay was not guilty of any crime, his actions were unethical. Now, that may be, but I don't see it. The campaign finance laws are a joke. That said, no matter how I feel about those laws - if Delay broke them, I will not say a peep in his defense. My only concern is with his guilt or innocence in the eyes of the law.
Hutchinson is basically arguing that she would be upset if Rove and/or Libby were prosecuted for a "technical violation" of the law. I find this view repugnant. The law is the law. We'll see if Rove and/or Libby broke the law in the coming months, and if they did, I will support their prosecution to the fullest. That's more than I can say for Clinton and his defenders.
Clinton was actually guilty of a crime. DeLay probably is not, though I have no idea about Libby/Rove, but if they're guilty, punish them.
Again, if DeLay happens to be guilty, I don't care if its some technical charge - a crime is a crime. Unlike Clinton's syncophantic worshippers, I will not defend DeLay because the crime wasn't serious. That's irrelevant. But I refuse to lynch the guy for a non-commital of a crime because his actions seem somehow unethical.
Mouldfan had argued that even if DeLay was not guilty of any crime, his actions were unethical. Now, that may be, but I don't see it. The campaign finance laws are a joke. That said, no matter how I feel about those laws - if Delay broke them, I will not say a peep in his defense. My only concern is with his guilt or innocence in the eyes of the law.
Hutchinson is basically arguing that she would be upset if Rove and/or Libby were prosecuted for a "technical violation" of the law. I find this view repugnant. The law is the law. We'll see if Rove and/or Libby broke the law in the coming months, and if they did, I will support their prosecution to the fullest. That's more than I can say for Clinton and his defenders.
# posted by Paul Zummo : 9:41 AM
