CH> (Aside:  How many people who demand an absolute separation of church
 CH> and state recognize the fact that Clinton and Gore routinely raise
 CH> campaign funds at black churches and Buddhist temples?)
DH> Not too many, probably.
JS>They conveniently ignore it perhaps because they share their political 
JS>views? Do you think?
JS>The word I'm searching for is Hypocrites. Yeah. That's it. Hypocrites. 
 
     I, for one, favor a strong policy of separation of church and
state and I am quite disturbed about the campaign funds Democrats
collected at the Buddhist Temple in the last election cycle.
     I do not, however, feel that it is inappropiate for any religious
sect to lend an endorsement to a candidate if it desires to do so, nor
for a candidate to appeal to religious organizations for support.  To
oppose such would be to oppose the freedoms of these organizations to
express themselves which is something that would fundamentally
compromise their constitutional rights.
     In the case of the Buddhist Temple, however, it appears that funds
wer provided by wealthy foreign supporters of the Clintons and Gores
who could not legally contribute to their campaigns and funneled though
others, illegally, to give a thinly veiled impression of legality. 
Charges have just been released against Mr. Wong, one of Clinton's
campaign finance chairpersons, in association with these and other
fraudlent practices during Clinton's last campaign.  Of course Mr. Wong
has left the country and made himself unavailable for prosecution by
fleeing to Red China, but I still believe the money trail to Clinton
and Gore themselves is being followed by Judge Starr.  At the very
least I would like to know exactly how much money, and how much
influence, is involved between Red China and the Clinton
administration. 
 
                                       /\/\ike
--- RBBSMail/386 v0.997
---------------