Romney NOT Running

[Redfish]

Nixon lied about his party breaking into the office of the dem party in the watergate hotel. He did not lie under oath, and it was an insignificant event that had no impact on the "foundations of the nation" What a stupid thing to say.

There was a lot more to it than that. There was the spying on Americans, the abuse of power, the payoffs to witnesses, all of which Nixon was dumb enough to tape himself doing.

Clinton lied under oath about having sex in the oval office with a girl young enough to be his daughter. He defiled the oval office and then lied about under oath.

First, he never had sex IN the Oval Office. Other rooms, yes.

Second, I doubt he was the first or last president who had sex with a woman other than his wife.

Third, having sex with a woman other than your wife isn't against the law.

Fourth, lying about it in court might be a crime, but most of us would lie in court about that.

I don't know about you, but I would not lie under oath about anything, nor should the president of the USA.

 

[JoeB131]

his EO on amnesty is a violation of law.

NO, it isn't. It's a judicious use of his executive authority. the reality is, Congress hasn't allocated the resources to round up 20 million illegals, even if we could get their home countries to agree to take them all back. So all Obama did was say, "Okay, we aren't going after people who were brought here as children who speak English as their first language and did not knowingly break our laws."

his killing by drone is a violation of law.

Right. So now you don't wnat to kill terrorists. Actually he is commander in cheif of the armed forces and congress has repeatedly authorized military action against terrorist groups. So that one won't fly.

his targeting of american citizens via the IRS is a violation of law.

Except there's no proof that happened. The only thing we proved was that the IRS didn't follow proper procedure when trying to root out Tea Party Tax Fraud. Like a group that calls itself "Taxed Enough Already" wouldn't try to commit tax fraud or anything.

operating without a federal budget for 6 years is a violation of law.

which one? Besides, doesn't congress set budgets?

his ethnicity does not bother me at all. I would oppose him if he was a pasty faced irishman with curly red hair.

its you lefties who are obsessed with race, thats why I made the comment

Oh, but you do admit you made the comment. and that you aren't the least upset about his race even when he does the same things Bush did.

 

[JoeB131]

I don't know about you, but I would not lie under oath about anything, nor should the president of the USA.

Obviously, you've never been in a court.

The one time I had to sue someone, my lawyer gave me a LONG talk about what I should and should not say. Turns out I didn't have to say anything, because the other party settled.

 

[Redfish]

I don't know about you, but I would not lie under oath about anything, nor should the president of the USA.

Obviously, you've never been in a court.

The one time I had to sue someone, my lawyer gave me a LONG talk about what I should and should not say. Turns out I didn't have to say anything, because the other party settled.

I have spent many hours in court rooms. as a plaintiff, as a defendent, as a witness, and as an expert witness.

there is a difference between lying (as you said you would do) and being silent. Being silent is smart, lying is a criminal offence.

 

[Redfish]

his EO on amnesty is a violation of law.

NO, it isn't. It's a judicious use of his executive authority. the reality is, Congress hasn't allocated the resources to round up 20 million illegals, even if we could get their home countries to agree to take them all back. So all Obama did was say, "Okay, we aren't going after people who were brought here as children who speak English as their first language and did not knowingly break our laws."

his killing by drone is a violation of law.

Right. So now you don't wnat to kill terrorists. Actually he is commander in cheif of the armed forces and congress has repeatedly authorized military action against terrorist groups. So that one won't fly.

his targeting of american citizens via the IRS is a violation of law.

Except there's no proof that happened. The only thing we proved was that the IRS didn't follow proper procedure when trying to root out Tea Party Tax Fraud. Like a group that calls itself "Taxed Enough Already" wouldn't try to commit tax fraud or anything.

operating without a federal budget for 6 years is a violation of law.

which one? Besides, doesn't congress set budgets?

his ethnicity does not bother me at all. I would oppose him if he was a pasty faced irishman with curly red hair.

its you lefties who are obsessed with race, thats why I made the comment

Oh, but you do admit you made the comment. and that you aren't the least upset about his race even when he does the same things Bush did.

see, thats where you lefties always get off track. You assume that we approve of everything that Bush did----------------news flash, we don't.

Then you rationalize obama's illegal acts by saying "well, bush did it" Do you see how stupid that makes you look?

 

[JoeB131]

I have spent many hours in court rooms. as a plaintiff, as a defendent, as a witness, and as an expert witness.

there is a difference between lying (as you said you would do) and being silent. Being silent is smart, lying is a criminal offence.

So everyone you talked to told the absolute truth and you always told the absolute truth, or you just told the parts that were favorable to your side?

Because if we get back to Clinton, he was asked if he had sex, and he said he didn't because he doesn't consider Oral to be actual sex. Neither do a lot of men.

 

[JoeB131]

see, thats where you lefties always get off track. You assume that we approve of everything that Bush did----------------news flash, we don't.

Then you rationalize obama's illegal acts by saying "well, bush did it" Do you see how stupid that makes you look?

If Bush did it and nobody said anything at the time, then there was an agreement that was a perfectly acceptable use of executive power. Until the Black guy did it.

 

[Redfish]

I have spent many hours in court rooms. as a plaintiff, as a defendent, as a witness, and as an expert witness.

there is a difference between lying (as you said you would do) and being silent. Being silent is smart, lying is a criminal offence.

So everyone you talked to told the absolute truth and you always told the absolute truth, or you just told the parts that were favorable to your side?

Because if we get back to Clinton, he was asked if he had sex, and he said he didn't because he doesn't consider Oral to be actual sex. Neither do a lot of men.

I answered every question truthfully in all cases. Not volunteering information is not lying. Clinton lied. I would bet that Monica considered BJs and cigars up her vagina as sex, and I suspect that Hillary did as well. I know my wife would consider those acts as sex if I did them with another woman, how about your wife?

 

[Redfish]

see, thats where you lefties always get off track. You assume that we approve of everything that Bush did----------------news flash, we don't.

Then you rationalize obama's illegal acts by saying "well, bush did it" Do you see how stupid that makes you look?

If Bush did it and nobody said anything at the time, then there was an agreement that was a perfectly acceptable use of executive power. Until the Black guy did it.

Nope, it was wrong when Bush did it and its wrong when obama does it. no double standard here.

 

[JakeStarkey]

That is exactly what I am (a Gerald Ford Republican). Anybody to your left begins with Genghis Khan, Kosh. You are a simple train wreck.

Gerald Ford was an idiot. Why would you even admit to that?

Ford was a good man placed in a bad situation. He was far from an idiot.

I am glad we agree on this. Gerald was a fine man.

 

[JakeStarkey]

sounds like an excuse....maybe Bush should have convinced people WHY they should vote for him....so why didnt he?....

Clinton got 41% of the vote. Why couldn't he get half of the american voters to support him. This is not about why Bush 41 ran a crappy campaign, its about how a third party gets us the worst result.

fish look.....if Bush could not convince me to vote for him,if Clinton could not convince me to vote for him....but Perot managed too convince me he is the guy....then thats on Clinton and Bush....not me....they all have the same amount of time....

I agree, what point are you trying to make? The fact that Perot was in the race is the reason Clinton won. Do you dispute that?

I don't think you can prove that, Redfish, quantitatively.

No, of course not. But the post election polls said that more Perot voters would have voted for Bush if Perot was not in the race. The logical conclusion of that is that Perot voters helped elect Clinton.

I think I read that it was Clinton who lost more voters to Perot. But I can't prove it either.

I would have had no trouble if George the Elder had won.

 

[Redfish]

Clinton got 41% of the vote. Why couldn't he get half of the american voters to support him. This is not about why Bush 41 ran a crappy campaign, its about how a third party gets us the worst result.

fish look.....if Bush could not convince me to vote for him,if Clinton could not convince me to vote for him....but Perot managed too convince me he is the guy....then thats on Clinton and Bush....not me....they all have the same amount of time....

I agree, what point are you trying to make? The fact that Perot was in the race is the reason Clinton won. Do you dispute that?

I don't think you can prove that, Redfish, quantitatively.

No, of course not. But the post election polls said that more Perot voters would have voted for Bush if Perot was not in the race. The logical conclusion of that is that Perot voters helped elect Clinton.

I think I read that it was Clinton who lost more voters to Perot. But I can't prove it either.

I would have had no trouble if George the Elder had won.

Hmmm, agreement on two points today. Scary.

 

[JoeB131]

I answered every question truthfully in all cases. Not volunteering information is not lying. Clinton lied. I would bet that Monica considered BJs and cigars up her vagina as sex, and I suspect that Hillary did as well. I know my wife would consider those acts as sex if I did them with another woman, how about your wife?

It doesn't matter what anyone thinks except for Clinton.

US teenagers think oral sex isn t real sex

A study of nearly 600 young California teenagers indicates that, having been told to be abstinent and warned of dangers of sex such as pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, they have decided that oral sex is the safest choice (Pediatrics 2005;115:845-51).

Previous studies indicated that many young people choose to have oral sex and don't consider it "real sex." In 1999 a study in the journal of the American Medical Association showed that US university students didn't think oral sex was real sex (JAMA 1999:281;275-7).

 

[Redfish]

I answered every question truthfully in all cases. Not volunteering information is not lying. Clinton lied. I would bet that Monica considered BJs and cigars up her vagina as sex, and I suspect that Hillary did as well. I know my wife would consider those acts as sex if I did them with another woman, how about your wife?

It doesn't matter what anyone thinks except for Clinton.

US teenagers think oral sex isn t real sex

A study of nearly 600 young California teenagers indicates that, having been told to be abstinent and warned of dangers of sex such as pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, they have decided that oral sex is the safest choice (Pediatrics 2005;115:845-51).

Previous studies indicated that many young people choose to have oral sex and don't consider it "real sex." In 1999 a study in the journal of the American Medical Association showed that US university students didn't think oral sex was real sex (JAMA 1999:281;275-7).

I'm sorry, but when I was a teenager and got my dick in a girls mouth or vagina I considered that I was having sex. If my tongue was on her clit we both considered it a sex act. if today's kids don't, then they need a refresher course in biology.

To your earlier point, what clinton thinks means nothing, its what the american people, his wife, and Monica think that matters.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

You can't name one thing about the Regan that would not appeal to today's GOP.

Really?

How about granting Amnesty to 3 million illegal aliens?
Appointing pro-choice moderates O'Conner and Kennedy to SCOTUS
Tripling the National Debt
Negotiated with Terrorists and traded arms for hostages.
Raised Taxes after cutting them.
Compromised with the Democratic Majority to expand social security.
Reached agreements with America's adversaries.
Rarely went to church and believed in Astrology

• Cut and ran from Lebanon.
• Didn't respond to Soviet shoot-down of commercial flight.
• Funded the Contras in direct defiance of Congress.
• Reagan CIA flooded California with cocaine and crack as another of William Casey's schemes to fund the Contras.

Reagan was a weak leader who refused to stand up to foreign aggression.

• Funny how you love to have it both ways. Bush was castigated for 'not getting out of Iraq and Afghanistan.'
• Meh
• Obama is doing one executive order after another in direct defiance of Congress; and he's your hero.
  
• LOL

 

[Harry Dresden]

That is exactly what I am (a Gerald Ford Republican). Anybody to your left begins with Genghis Khan, Kosh. You are a simple train wreck.

Wrong again far left drone that voted for Obama and supports his illegal wars..

Kosh, you are the neo-con; you are the one who supported Bush from the get go; you are the one who would let the hungry and the ill die rather than help his fellow American.

Even Edward Baiamonte is more moral than you.

More far left propaganda to cover the fact that this far left drone will not come out of the closet..

hey i like how you answered those allegations against you kosh....brilliant....

And proves my comments!

it does?....oh wait....you are in your own little world,ok that explains that comment....

 

[Kosh]

Wrong again far left drone that voted for Obama and supports his illegal wars..

Kosh, you are the neo-con; you are the one who supported Bush from the get go; you are the one who would let the hungry and the ill die rather than help his fellow American.

Even Edward Baiamonte is more moral than you.

More far left propaganda to cover the fact that this far left drone will not come out of the closet..

hey i like how you answered those allegations against you kosh....brilliant....

And proves my comments!

it does?....oh wait....you are in your own little world,ok that explains that comment....

Your actions prove my comments without a doubt...

 

[Harry Dresden]

if Bush and Dole could not convince people that they are who you should vote for....thats on them,not the people who voted for Perot....

the facts remain. Perot elected Clinton. Twist all you like, that is what happened.

sounds like an excuse....maybe Bush should have convinced people WHY they should vote for him....so why didnt he?....

Clinton got 41% of the vote. Why couldn't he get half of the american voters to support him. This is not about why Bush 41 ran a crappy campaign, its about how a third party gets us the worst result.

fish look.....if Bush could not convince me to vote for him,if Clinton could not convince me to vote for him....but Perot managed too convince me he is the guy....then thats on Clinton and Bush....not me....they all have the same amount of time....

I agree, what point are you trying to make? The fact that Perot was in the race is the reason Clinton won. Do you dispute that?

no....i am disputing people saying Bush lost because of those voting for Perot.....Bush lost because of Bush....

 

[Kosh]

Clinton got 41% of the vote. Why couldn't he get half of the american voters to support him. This is not about why Bush 41 ran a crappy campaign, its about how a third party gets us the worst result.

fish look.....if Bush could not convince me to vote for him,if Clinton could not convince me to vote for him....but Perot managed too convince me he is the guy....then thats on Clinton and Bush....not me....they all have the same amount of time....

I agree, what point are you trying to make? The fact that Perot was in the race is the reason Clinton won. Do you dispute that?

I don't think you can prove that, Redfish, quantitatively.

No, of course not. But the post election polls said that more Perot voters would have voted for Bush if Perot was not in the race. The logical conclusion of that is that Perot voters helped elect Clinton.

I think I read that it was Clinton who lost more voters to Perot. But I can't prove it either.

I would have had no trouble if George the Elder had won.

Wrong! Since you voted for Clinton..

 

[Kosh]

the facts remain. Perot elected Clinton. Twist all you like, that is what happened.

sounds like an excuse....maybe Bush should have convinced people WHY they should vote for him....so why didnt he?....

Clinton got 41% of the vote. Why couldn't he get half of the american voters to support him. This is not about why Bush 41 ran a crappy campaign, its about how a third party gets us the worst result.

fish look.....if Bush could not convince me to vote for him,if Clinton could not convince me to vote for him....but Perot managed too convince me he is the guy....then thats on Clinton and Bush....not me....they all have the same amount of time....

I agree, what point are you trying to make? The fact that Perot was in the race is the reason Clinton won. Do you dispute that?

no....i am disputing people saying Bush lost because of those voting for Perot.....Bush lost because of Bush....

Exit polls also showed that Ross Perot drew 38% of his vote from Bush, and 38% of his vote from Clinton, while the rest of his voters would have stayed home had he not been on the ballot.

THE 1992 ELECTIONS - DISAPPOINTMENT -- NEWS ANALYSIS An Eccentric but No Joke - Perot s Strong Showing Raises Questions On What Might Have Been and Might Be - NYTimes.com