Got this email - Need feedback.

[red states rule]

I didn't say I thought he committed perjury. Personally I don't care what he did in private. Would I want to be married to the guy? No.

Now let's see you acknowledge Bush's flaws...and it can't be on the issue of undocumented aliens

As a lawyer one would think you would know about the law.

Clinton lied under oath - that is called perjury

If Bush "lied" so did alot of Dems

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002

"Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction." -- Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002

"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration’s policy towards Iraq, I don’t think there can be any question about Saddam’s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002

 

[Abbey Normal]

Patricia Ireland, Eleanor Smeal, Anita Hill, call your office. The most important sexual harassment case in U.S. history is unfolding in Washington, and the leaders of the National Organization for Women, the Feminist Majority and the National Women's Political Caucus are nowhere to be found. Monica Lewinsky, who has accused President Clinton of engaging her in a year-and-a-half long exploitive and demeaning sexual relationship, is very much in need of some sisterly support. But the paragons of feminist solidarity have remained mum. How different is their response this time than their quick embrace of Anita Hill, Paula Coughlin, the Navy lieutenant who blew the whistle on improper goings-on at the Tailgate convention, the 29 women who claimed former Sen. Bob Packwood tried to kiss or fondle them, and virtually every other group of women who ever accused a powerful boss of taking advantage of them?

But do Lewinsky's allegations point to sexual harassment? She hasn't suggested so to date, but she -- and other White House employees, too -- may well have a case if Lewinsky actually engaged in any sexual activity while she worked in the executive branch, even if the activity was consensual. The courts have consistently ruled that sexual harassment can occur even if the victim was not forced to participate in sexual activity against her will.

Many people think sexual harassment happens only when an employer tries to solicit sex in return for a job, a promotion or other favors in the workplace. But only 5 percent of all complaints filed with the Equal Opportunity Commission involve this type of quid pro quo sexual harassment. The other 95 percent of cases involve a so-called "hostile work environment," which can affect not only the female (or, as is increasingly the case, male) employee alleging unwanted sexual advances from a boss or co-worker but other employees who may be aware of sexual activity between a supervisor and his (or her) subordinate.

Let's look at what reportedly happened between Monica Lewinsky and the president: Lewinsky was a 21-year-old White House intern when she began visiting the Oval Office and, at some point, allegedly engaging in intimate sex acts with the president. During this period, she received a promotion to a paid position. If the president in any way hinted that Lewinsky's sexual favors would enhance her prospects of receiving a paid job, staying on at the White House or continuing to receive favored treatment, Lewinsky could claim sexual harassment.

Lewinsky also allegedly complained to her friend and co-worker Linda Tripp that the president was losing interest in her and may have been involved in sexual liaisons with other White House staffers after Lewinsky was transferred to the Pentagon. If she felt that her only way to get back into the White House was to continue to engage in sex acts with the president, she may now be able to claim harassment.

And Lewinsky isn't the only person who could allege sexual harassment in this case. Linda Tripp has already suggested she began taping her conversations with Lewinsky after the president's bellicose attorney, Robert Bennett, called Tripp a liar on national television when she reported having seen another woman, Kathleen E. Willey, emerge from the Oval Office with smeared lipstick and disheveled clothes. Tripp could argue that both this incident and the stories Lewinsky told her created a hostile work environment as well, both at the White House and as a Pentagon employee. She might also be able to show that she was moved out of her White House job in retaliation for what she knew about the Willey incident, which would constitute an even more serious sex discrimination offense than the harassment itself.

And what about those other interns who worked with Lewinsky -- or indeed anyone who worked at the White House when these alleged sexual acts took place? An intern or employee who was not given a job or promotion could claim that this sexualized environment substantially interfered with his or her own work performance, creating an intimidating or hostile work situation. Similar complaints, alleging far less egregious behavior, are filed all the time, leading to disciplinary action against the offender.

Early polls suggest that a substantial portion of the American public believe it's no one's business if the president had a sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky. They seem to be forgetting that Bill Clinton is an employer, Monica Lewinsky was his employee and the alleged sexual activity occurred in the workplace.

Surely, the point hasn't escaped Ireland, Smeal and other feminists, however. You'd think they'd be lining up White House plaintiffs by the score. If Bill Clinton were a CEO, an Army drill sergeant or an assembly line foreman, the feminists would be out for blood. With everyone else in the nation talking about little else, feminist leaders' silence on this issue speaks volumes about their willingness to put politics before principle.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/chavez012898.html

 

[Emmett]

This chick has been watching too much CNN. A press dependancy program would be applicable here I think. Naturally we the taxpayers will pick up the tab.

What a space cadet!

 

[Mr.Conley]

Tell her that she doesn't have an argument. She has to prove her statements. All she does is say, "Impeach Bush," over and over again. Parrots can do better then that. Afterall, they can repeat multiple phrases over and over. She appears to be capable of only one.

 

[sitarro]

As far as I can tell it is only sexual harassment if she felt she was being harassed.

And Bill lied/perjured himself, but why it got that far is what is so laughable...

So if you have a wife that is performing an oral "happy ending" on the President of the United States, is it sex and do you care. How about your daughter, performing unprotected, unreciprocated, ego destroying, knee bruising, sexual favors for the President during company time in the people of the United States' house.........would that bother you at all? What if it was Ken Lay instead of the President of the United States, or the CEO of Halliburton, any problems then?
Try doing the opposite of Bill....tell the truth.

 

[red states rule]

So if you have a wife that is performing an oral "happy ending" on the President of the United States, is it sex and do you care. How about your daughter, performing unprotected, unreciprocated, ego destroying, knee bruising, sexual favors for the President during company time in the people of the United States' house.........would that bother you at all? What if it was Ken Lay instead of the President of the United States, or the CEO of Halliburton, any problems then?
Try doing the opposite of Bill....tell the truth.

Would this be called "The Clinton Legacy"?

 

[Abbey Normal]

Would this be called "The Clinton Legacy"?

Here's a large part of the Clinton legacy:
As some of our board members love to tell, today's teens believe that oral sex isn't really sex.

The other huge part is: Pardon any criminals who supported you financially.

 

[sitarro]

Would this be called "The Clinton Legacy"?

Yea, it used to be an honor that a young lady would get a letter from the U.S. government stating that she had been picked to serve as an intern at the Whitehouse......not anymore.

 

[jillian]

So if you have a wife that is performing an oral "happy ending" on the President of the United States, is it sex and do you care. How about your daughter, performing unprotected, unreciprocated, ego destroying, knee bruising, sexual favors for the President during company time in the people of the United States' house.........would that bother you at all? What if it was Ken Lay instead of the President of the United States, or the CEO of Halliburton, any problems then?
Try doing the opposite of Bill....tell the truth.

Which has what to do with the fact that it wasn't Monica who was complainig?

 

[red states rule]

Which has what to do with the fact that it wasn't Monica who was complainig?

Bob Packwood is run out of town yet Clinton get a pass (and gives them to any women within reach)

Meanwhile the Dems have the likes of Ted Kennedy telling the rest of us how to treat women

Libs are a walking and talking version of the Twilight Zone

 

[Annie]

Bob Packwood is run out of town yet Clinton get a pass (and gives them to any women within reach)

Meanwhile the Dems have the likes of Ted Kennedy telling the rest of us how to treat women

Libs are a walking and talking version of the Twilight Zone

Drown them, (Kopeckne) or turn them into alchies, (Joan).

 

[red states rule]

Drown them, (Kopeckne) or turn them into alchies, (Joan).

When Clinton heard about the 77 virgins when the terrorists die, Clinton said he would have to rethink his position on Islam

Monica then changed her position as well

 

[Mr. P]

Drown them, (Kopeckne) or turn them into alchies, (Joan).

Don’t forget the claimed rape at the Palm Beach compound.
Who was that, Patrick? I forget. I think it was a nephew.

 

[red states rule]

Don’t forget the claimed rape at the Palm Beach compound.
Who was that, Patrick? I forget. I think it was a nephew.

Just a usual night at the Kennedy ranch

 

[Abbey Normal]

Don’t forget the claimed rape at the Palm Beach compound.
Who was that, Patrick? I forget. I think it was a nephew.

William Kennedy Smith.

 

[Mr. P]

William Kennedy Smith.

That's it, thanks Abbey.