If Hilary wins who will be umm..the first lady ?

[Gunny]

The only evicence you need is what libs say and do

When I point those actions out it bugs alot of people - including you

It doesn't bug me. I reject it as a legitimate response/argument because it is not. You address no facts backed by evidence, nor do you provide any fact and/or evidence to support your statements.

Simple as THAT.

 

[red states rule]

It doesn't bug me. I reject it as a legitimate response/argument because it is not. You address no facts backed by evidence, nor do you provide any fact and/or evidence to support your statements.

Simple as THAT.

Yea ignore such trivial things as what libs say and what they want

 

[Gunny]

Yea ignore such trivial things as what libs say and what they want

When you can't back up "what libs say and what they want" with some evidence and/or facts, you leave your own arguments to be ignored. Anybody can post baseless accusations.

 

[red states rule]

When you can't back up "what libs say and what they want" with some evidence and/or facts, you leave your own arguments to be ignored. Anybody can post baseless accusations.

Yea, MM does a good job of that - you made one valid point tonight

 

[Gunny]

Yea, MM does a good job of that - you made one valid point tonight

I back my statements with facts, evidence, logic and common sense. You back yours with bullshit, extremist accusations.

As far as Maineman's accusations about your lack of debating skills is concerned, he is 100% correct. You come to the gunfight with an uloaded weapon.

 

[red states rule]

I back my statements with facts, evidence, logic and common sense. You back yours with bullshit, extremist accusations.

As far as Maineman's accusations about your lack of debating skills is concerned, he is 100% correct. You come to the gunfight with an uloaded weapon.

With a MM, he can be beaten with a cold stare

He has his head shoved up his party's ass so far he could check for polyps

 

[bush lover]

Her bull-dyke girlfriend will the First Bitch. Well, Bill will be the First Jerk.

 

[red states rule]

bill clinton would be the first pimp. Monica lewinsky would be the first hoe.

Bill deserves his own memorial in trubute of his biggest accomplishment

 

[red states rule]

no, no, no RSR, if it becomes Hillary against Rudy, then the Religious Right will sit out on the election because they "think" that both Rudy and Hillary and her husband, are immoral people.

They would never accept voting for Rudy with his personal baggage imho...3 mariages, cross dressing for fun, and opinion on the right to choose, and who could blame them? Nor Hillary's baggage... so imo, the RR will sit OUT, and if they do, IF Hillary is the candidate, she MAY very well WIN....

So, I think it needs to be someone else, other than Rudy, in order to win against Hillary...not sure who yet.

But THAT is if Hillary EVEN gets the nomination and it ain't over till the fat lady sings, as the story goes....

Care

Hillary singing? It would sound like someone is strangling a cat

 

[red states rule]

but I still think that the RR will "Sit out" if it is Rudy verses Hillary....and that's a hunk of votes.

Hillary's first problem is trying to pass the buck on her war vote

Hillary Can't Hide Her War Vote
By Kathleen Parker

ORANGEBURG, S.C. -- Of all the words spilled during the recent Democratic presidential debate, the most interesting were 27 of Hillary Clinton's in response to a question about the candidates' biggest mistakes.

Clinton began self-effacingly, saying that her mistakes were too numerous to list, but offered a couple: that whole health care thing. "And, you know, believing the president when he said he would go to the United Nations and put inspectors into Iraq to determine whether they had WMD.''

Say what? While we're pulling deflections out of the memory hole, what about believing the international community that Saddam Hussein had chemical and biological weapons?

Or, to bring it closer to home, what about believing her husband, who told Larry King on July 22, 2003, that "it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons''?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/05/hillary_cant_hide_her_war_vote.html

 

[Care4all]

Actually, I believe the Studds incident took place in 1973, it came out and he was censured in 1980, so it's been 27 years. I use the Studds incident to demonstrate the disparity in they way the two (Foley/Studds) incidents were handled.

Think about it. Studds had a sexual affair with a 17 year old kid, not illegal in DC based on the age of consent, but certainly unseemly, especially when you consider the kid was a page. Not illegal, but some would say it was inappropriate. Studds was censured, refused to resign, and recieved a standing ovation on the floor of the Senate, then he was re-elected. This was 27 years ago.

Foley, on the other hand, had no known sexual relations (though I'm sure he had hopes), sent distasteful e-mails filled with sexual innuendo to a 16 year old page, again, the age of consent in DC (something I find disturbing and may be a topic of discussion for another time) and not illegal. Definately inappropriate. Foley was forced to resign. By members of his own party as well as by Democrats. He was disgraced and fled DC.

What's the difference? Twenty seven plus years, one year in age, and penetration?

Would Foley have been better of if he had had sex with the page? Would he still have his job? Mind you I am not defending Foley nor am I condemning Studds, as far as I'm concerned anything under the age of 18 should be off limits everywhere. My issue is with the way the incidents were handled and their respective outcomes.

Is it just because Foley is a Republican that he was forced to resign? Because many Republicans try to claim the high moral ground he had to go?

ok, i'll buy that...

but the real issue WAS THE COVERUP by the republican party just to keep the florida seat in the election... and the finger pointing on the republican side was amusing also....not in a ''pretty'' way either!

the handling of the republican leadership for the years they kept it in the closet and the CHOICE to keep foley to run him in the next election, if they could only keep foley's inappropriate behavior under the rug....

the other VERY IMPORTANT POINT, is that Foley was the HEAD of the committe HANDLING sexual abuse of children and passed laws that very well could indict him/ and convict him.

also, 16 was NOT the legal age of consent in some of the home states of the pages he tried to seduce via email....foley is still being investigated and very well still could be charged with something!

care

 

[no1tovote4]

the other VERY IMPORTANT POINT, is that Foley was the HEAD of the committe HANDLING sexual abuse of children and passed laws that very well could indict him/ and convict him.

Which, IMO, would be a bonus irony.

 

[red states rule]

Which, IMO, would be a bonus irony.

That is like putting Ted Kennedy as head of the Transportation Safety Board