kallend 2,182 #51 October 6, 2006 Quotenot telling the truth under oath is an impeachable offence The president is under oath from the moment he is sworn in.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,182 #52 October 6, 2006 QuoteHe admitted to knowing about the same emails the Florida newspapers and FBI had. Those emails that those same papers and FBI decidided there was nothing to do but, Hastert did do something. But you don't seem to care about these facts now do you...... At least Hastert knows where "the buck stops". Pity the guy in the White House never figured it out.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #53 October 6, 2006 QuoteQuotenot telling the truth under oath is an impeachable offence The president is under oath from the moment he is sworn in. As usual, you miss the point. It is quite concerning though, that someone with your self professed smartness seems to have so much difficulty comprehending that lying while in court, during a deposition (mind you a sexual harrassment lawsuit), is not a crime. "According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,182 #54 October 6, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuotenot telling the truth under oath is an impeachable offence The president is under oath from the moment he is sworn in. As usual, you miss the point. It is quite concerning though, that someone with your self professed smartness seems to have so much difficulty comprehending that lying while in court, during a deposition (mind you a sexual harrassment lawsuit), is not a crime. How do you reach that conclusion from my post? It's logically absurd to reach that conclusion. I also consider your post to be a PERSONAL ATTACK.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,132 #55 October 6, 2006 >Several times he sent him a note saying "Cut it out, Your last warning" And that didn't stop him? It works so well here . . . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,132 #56 October 6, 2006 >He admitted to knowing about the same emails the Florida >newspapers and FBI had. Correct. And he admitted that he could have done a better job handling those emails. LEFT WINGERS - this is not an admission of guilt, nor is it proof of a coverup. It's an acknowledgement that things could have been handled differently. RIGHT WINGERS - this is a GOOD thing. He's taking responsibility for the problem, and that will go a long way towards people actually believing him about the issue. >But you don't seem to care about these facts now do you...... I think you need some new material! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
micro 0 #57 October 6, 2006 QuoteQuotejust for a moment, let's let the democrats who are calling for so much blood look back to the case of Congressman. Stud who was merely CENSORED censured. Quotein the early '80's early 70's Quotefor having coercive it was consensual Quotehomosexual sex w/ a 16 year old congressional page that went on for several years. And after the censure, Attaboy. Quotehe received THREE standing ovations from the democrats after a speech. Hey, it was a great speech. Quotewhere was their outrage then? no where. Eh. It was the 70's. Quoteand then consider the case once again of bill clinton... where was the democrats outrage at that? There was plenty of it, mostly from fathers like myself - with daughters - who recognized that he was using his position to exploit someone just barely off the jailbait list. Why didn't we go more public with it? Because from Day One the Gingrich crowd was out to destroy him personally over ideology, and we weren't going to give them the aid and comfort. How's that for candor? Quotei smell the upcoming election in the air... Breathe deep, brother. The censure didn't occur until 1983. And in the deposition, page testified that he was very uncomfortable w/ Stud's sexual advances and had expressed this to him. I don't actually call that consentual, I call that coercive... there was a power differential in play. And it doesn't matter in the least that it was the '70's and the '80's. I miss Lee. And JP. And Chris. And... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zipp0 1 #58 October 6, 2006 Nothing is funnier than watching the religious right defend a gay pedophile with vicious, venomous attacks. You guys, much like many congressional pages before you, are screwed. -------------------------- Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #59 October 6, 2006 QuoteQuotenot telling the truth under oath is an impeachable offence The president is under oath from the moment he is sworn in. Different oaths. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #60 October 6, 2006 QuoteQuoteHe admitted to knowing about the same emails the Florida newspapers and FBI had. Those emails that those same papers and FBI decidided there was nothing to do but, Hastert did do something. But you don't seem to care about these facts now do you...... At least Hastert knows where "the buck stops". Pity the guy in the White House never figured it out. I have come to realize thay you do not care what the truth really is. It is only truth if it supports your view and action line........"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
micro 0 #61 October 6, 2006 QuoteNothing is funnier than watching the religious right defend a gay pedophile with vicious, venomous attacks. You guys, much like many congressional pages before you, are screwed. Who is defending him? What I have seen is many who you paint as being "religious right" as defending the republican party that is being painted w/ a broad brush for the "sins" of ONE PERSON. I certainly don't defend this sleezebucket. And by the way, you KNOW he was a pedophile? That's new to me. (And that statement, Mr. Assumption, is not DEFENDING him but rather is going on the dictum that one should not jump to conclusions absent of facts. And given the information that the person in question was at least a late teen, that does not makes him a pedophile. Do we even know there was sexual contact? Again, more assumptions.) I miss Lee. And JP. And Chris. And... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #62 October 6, 2006 QuoteNothing is funnier than watching the religious right defend a gay pedophile with vicious, venomous attacks. You guys, much like many congressional pages before you, are screwed. Nice twist Zipp0! Nobody here is defending him. I understand how hard it is for the left leaning to see the hypocrasy of how the Foley thing is being protrayed by the left media and the dems and how they have handled all of Clintons, Stubbs and the rest over the years. Nobody is defending him. If you believe they are then post the evidence. I won't be waiting long though"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
micro 0 #63 October 6, 2006 QuoteQuoteNothing is funnier than watching the religious right defend a gay pedophile with vicious, venomous attacks. You guys, much like many congressional pages before you, are screwed. Nice twist Zipp0! Nobody here is defending him. I understand how hard it is for the left leaning to see the hypocrasy of how the Foley thing is being protrayed by the left media and the dems and how they have handled all of Clintons, Stubbs and the rest over the years. Nobody is defending him. If you believe they are then post the evidence. I won't be waiting long though And then there will be a sex scandal among the democrats... and outrage among the republicans and downplaying among the democrats. (Remember BillVon's thread about this? Anyone? Anyone?) I swear, the whole process is just silly. All of these corrupt assholes should just be swept out and better blood brought in. But, the people get who they vote for. I miss Lee. And JP. And Chris. And... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #64 October 6, 2006 Quote But, the people get who they vote for. mmmm....I'm not so sure about that Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zipp0 1 #65 October 6, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteNothing is funnier than watching the religious right defend a gay pedophile with vicious, venomous attacks. You guys, much like many congressional pages before you, are screwed. Nice twist Zipp0! Nobody here is defending him. I understand how hard it is for the left leaning to see the hypocrasy of how the Foley thing is being protrayed by the left media and the dems and how they have handled all of Clintons, Stubbs and the rest over the years. Nobody is defending him. If you believe they are then post the evidence. I won't be waiting long though And then there will be a sex scandal among the democrats... and outrage among the republicans and downplaying among the democrats. (Remember BillVon's thread about this? Anyone? Anyone?) I swear, the whole process is just silly. All of these corrupt assholes should just be swept out and better blood brought in. But, the people get who they vote for. Oh......Bwahahaa! Please don't stop. I am dying here! Both of you... keep going! Best....Friday.....ever! Bwaaahahaha And BTW, I wasn't talking about the people here defending Foley, I am talking about the likes of mAnn Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, and Hannity. Christ, Coulter sounded like Lucifer defending Mother Teresa on Fox News last night...... Bwahahaha! -------------------------- Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
micro 0 #66 October 6, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteNothing is funnier than watching the religious right defend a gay pedophile with vicious, venomous attacks. You guys, much like many congressional pages before you, are screwed. Nice twist Zipp0! Nobody here is defending him. I understand how hard it is for the left leaning to see the hypocrasy of how the Foley thing is being protrayed by the left media and the dems and how they have handled all of Clintons, Stubbs and the rest over the years. Nobody is defending him. If you believe they are then post the evidence. I won't be waiting long though And then there will be a sex scandal among the democrats... and outrage among the republicans and downplaying among the democrats. (Remember BillVon's thread about this? Anyone? Anyone?) I swear, the whole process is just silly. All of these corrupt assholes should just be swept out and better blood brought in. But, the people get who they vote for. Oh......Bwahahaa! Please don't stop. I am dying here! Both of you... keep going! Best....Friday.....ever! Bwaaahahaha And BTW, I wasn't talking about the people here defending Foley, I am talking about the likes of mAnn Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, and Hannity. Christ, Coulter sounded like Lucifer defending Mother Teresa on Fox News last night...... Bwahahaha! Well thanks for 1) being incredibly obtuse in your original post and 2) for your condescending tone here. Good day. I miss Lee. And JP. And Chris. And... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zipp0 1 #67 October 6, 2006 Quote Well thanks for 1) being incredibly obtuse in your original post and 2) for your condescending tone here. Good day. Lighten up, Francis! -------------------------- Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
micro 0 #68 October 6, 2006 QuoteQuote Well thanks for 1) being incredibly obtuse in your original post and 2) for your condescending tone here. Good day. Lighten up, Francis! ilii I miss Lee. And JP. And Chris. And... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zipp0 1 #69 October 6, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuote Well thanks for 1) being incredibly obtuse in your original post and 2) for your condescending tone here. Good day. Lighten up, Francis! ilii I didn't study latin.... Either you indicated you understood, or insulted me. Sic friatur crustum dulce -------------------------- Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
micro 0 #70 October 6, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Well thanks for 1) being incredibly obtuse in your original post and 2) for your condescending tone here. Good day. Lighten up, Francis! ilii I didn't study latin.... Either you indicated you understood, or insulted me. Sic friatur crustum dulce as you said, so crumbles the cookie... (btw, it's not latin, it's a picture ) I miss Lee. And JP. And Chris. And... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #71 October 7, 2006 QuoteWho is defending him? What I have seen is many who you paint as being "religious right" as defending the republican party that is being painted w/ a broad brush for the "sins" of ONE PERSON. No one at all is defending him...But that does not work if you are 4 anti the other party. QuoteAnd by the way, you KNOW he was a pedophile? That's new to me. (And that statement, Mr. Assumption, is not DEFENDING him but rather is going on the dictum that one should not jump to conclusions absent of facts. And given the information that the person in question was at least a late teen, that does not makes him a pedophile. Do we even know there was sexual contact? Again, more assumptions.) People want to strike while the iron is hot. In this case it makes sense to make a big deal about it rather than wait to see if it was infact illegal. But any party would do the same thing, they are only guilty of following along...Normal when it comes to either party close to an election. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
micro 0 #72 October 7, 2006 QuoteQuoteWho is defending him? What I have seen is many who you paint as being "religious right" as defending the republican party that is being painted w/ a broad brush for the "sins" of ONE PERSON. No one at all is defending him...But that does not work if you are 4 anti the other party. QuoteAnd by the way, you KNOW he was a pedophile? That's new to me. (And that statement, Mr. Assumption, is not DEFENDING him but rather is going on the dictum that one should not jump to conclusions absent of facts. And given the information that the person in question was at least a late teen, that does not makes him a pedophile. Do we even know there was sexual contact? Again, more assumptions.) People want to strike while the iron is hot. In this case it makes sense to make a big deal about it rather than wait to see if it was infact illegal. But any party would do the same thing, they are only guilty of following along...Normal when it comes to either party close to an election. very true, very true... both parties would do it. I miss Lee. And JP. And Chris. And... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zipp0 1 #73 October 7, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Well thanks for 1) being incredibly obtuse in your original post and 2) for your condescending tone here. Good day. Lighten up, Francis! ilii I didn't study latin.... Either you indicated you understood, or insulted me. Sic friatur crustum dulce as you said, so crumbles the cookie... (btw, it's not latin, it's a picture ) Oh shit, I see now. I thought it was "Intelligens lector ipse intelligit" which is something like "A smart person know what he is saying". But I may be waaaaay off. -------------------------- Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,182 #74 October 7, 2006 QuoteQuoteWho is defending him? What I have seen is many who you paint as being "religious right" as defending the republican party that is being painted w/ a broad brush for the "sins" of ONE PERSON. No one at all is defending him...But that does not work if you are 4 anti the other party. QuoteAnd by the way, you KNOW he was a pedophile? That's new to me. (And that statement, Mr. Assumption, is not DEFENDING him but rather is going on the dictum that one should not jump to conclusions absent of facts. And given the information that the person in question was at least a late teen, that does not makes him a pedophile. Do we even know there was sexual contact? Again, more assumptions.) People want to strike while the iron is hot. In this case it makes sense to make a big deal about it rather than wait to see if it was infact illegal. But any party would do the same thing, they are only guilty of following along...Normal when it comes to either party close to an election. from FOX News website: www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,217943,00.html ... Internal polling data from a prominent GOP pollster, however, shows that House Republican candidates will suffer massive losses if Hastert remains speaker until Election Day. A GOP source briefed on the polling data told FOX News that the data suggests House Republican losses could be catastrophic if Hastert's speakership continues. Still, the GOP source familiar with the polling data said that while most GOP lawmakers have stood by Hastert, pending a full airing of the facts in his handling of the Foley matter, this data now suggest that many voters have already made up their minds. "The data suggests Americans have bailed on the speaker," the source told FOX News. "And the difference could be between a 20-seat loss and a 50-seat loss. ..."... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
micro 0 #75 October 7, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteWho is defending him? What I have seen is many who you paint as being "religious right" as defending the republican party that is being painted w/ a broad brush for the "sins" of ONE PERSON. No one at all is defending him...But that does not work if you are 4 anti the other party. QuoteAnd by the way, you KNOW he was a pedophile? That's new to me. (And that statement, Mr. Assumption, is not DEFENDING him but rather is going on the dictum that one should not jump to conclusions absent of facts. And given the information that the person in question was at least a late teen, that does not makes him a pedophile. Do we even know there was sexual contact? Again, more assumptions.) People want to strike while the iron is hot. In this case it makes sense to make a big deal about it rather than wait to see if it was infact illegal. But any party would do the same thing, they are only guilty of following along...Normal when it comes to either party close to an election. from FOX News website: www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,217943,00.html ... Internal polling data from a prominent GOP pollster, however, shows that House Republican candidates will suffer massive losses if Hastert remains speaker until Election Day. A GOP source briefed on the polling data told FOX News that the data suggests House Republican losses could be catastrophic if Hastert's speakership continues. Still, the GOP source familiar with the polling data said that while most GOP lawmakers have stood by Hastert, pending a full airing of the facts in his handling of the Foley matter, this data now suggest that many voters have already made up their minds. "The data suggests Americans have bailed on the speaker," the source told FOX News. "And the difference could be between a 20-seat loss and a 50-seat loss. ..." careful john, if you spend too much time on fox news it'll taint you! I miss Lee. And JP. And Chris. And... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
