United States Presidential Election 2008

[suchuwato]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/us_ele...008/7704636.stm

[Kash]

Probably faked, but amusing.

 

 

Turns out it was true. Palin's campaign issued a statement in response:

Governor Palin was mildly amused to learn that she had joined the ranks of heads of state, including President Sarkozy and other celebrities, in being targeted by these pranksters. C'est la vie," she said.

[ExRoadie]

This post was absolutely fantastic. Completely misses the point of my post and goes off on a cuckoo tangent, but fantastic nevertheless

 

When did I say the President getting a blowjob by an intern was OK? I didn't. What I said was that it wasn't "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors," which in case you've forgotten, is the basis for impeachment as laid out in Article II Section 4 of the Constitution (remember that piece of paper?). So the whole lead up to the investigation was nothing more than a witch hunt. If it weren't for the Republicans throwing everything at Clinton in the hopes that something would stick, he wouldn't have been put in the compromising position of lying to federal investigators. My point was that Republicans claimed to be morally superior when they went after Clinton for such a petty thing, when in reality they are not only just as bad, but worse than the Democrats.

 

Why do I say worse? Because the Democrats aren't hypocrites in that they don't claim to be morally upright like the Republicans claim themselves to be. They pander to the religious right, saying that they're God fearing politicians who will do God's work, but then they get caught molesting a child or sexually harassing a member of the same .. So not only are they sexual deviants, they're a bunch of fags too, which I'm pretty sure is a bigger sin among the religious right (and don't get me started on the hypocrisy of the religious right, it sickens me that people like that exist in this country).

 

The bulk of your post was in vain, I never said the Democrats were saints in comparison to the Republicans. But you want to know why the Republicans get more press when they get caught in a scandal? It's not some vast media conspiracy, but it's because the American people love watching hypocrites fall. They love seeing the downfall of those who make claims of being good people and who accuse the other side of being corrupt. The media companies are only interested in their bottom line, so when a Republican scandal makes for good TV, you know they're gonna cover it.

 

Also, what I don't understand is this obsession with the "drive-by media" and the "liberal media." People watch news outlets whose bias they agree with, and so the companies sell what the people want. Look at Fox, it panders to the right because that's what its viewership wants. So when the rest of the country is watching the more left leaning media, doesn't that just mean the people are left leaning as well?

So I go off on a "cuckoo tangent" by simply refuting the statements in your post. I guess I shouldn't expect any better response after all this time.

 

Your post completely contradicts your original statement but I'll just leave that to the forum readers to judge for themselves.

 

Lying to Federal Investigators is a Felony. A Felony falls under the "high crimes and misdemeanors" section.

 

Constitution at Art. II Sec. 4, "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors". The origin of the phrase "high crimes and misdemeanors" refers to those punishable offenses that only apply to high persons, such as, public officials who, because of their official status, might not be subject to such laws.

 

And yes, I confirmed my findings on the subject by running it past a practicing lawyer before posting.

 

I understand why you would have the feeling that Republicans have a superiority complex since you only get your news from biased sources that portray Republicans as Racist, Bigoted, Homophobes every chance they get.

 

If you actually knew a "Conservative" that happens to be a Republican, you would see that we're not any different than everyone else. We've been demonized in the drive-by-media for over 30 years because we don't support the Liberal policies that the Liberal Elite push through their partners.

 

I'm old enough to remember when you could get the actual news on the "big three networks". I remember when Walter Cronkite was THE source for information. Then Mr. Cronkite decided that the Vietnam War was a bad idea so he started injecting his bias into his reporting.

 

It's a crying shame that there are so few unbiased sources of news these days that it takes me hours to sift through the noise to get to the facts that matter.

 

The drive-by-media has led us to this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6ikOxi9yYk

[suchuwato]

We've been demonized in the drive-by-media for over 30 years because we don't support the Liberal policies that the Liberal Elite push through their partners.

 

That is just too funny lmao

[ExRoadie]

First off, my sincere condolences to the Obama family for the loss of his Grandmother. May she rest in Peace.

 

Well guys, in approximately 24 hours(barring a repeat of 2000) we'll have a new President.

 

So which will it be? Honestly, it doesn't matter as much as I thought it would. After talking with many friends and neighbors over the weekend, I know we'll be OK!

 

We're Americans!

[Kash]

So I go off on a "cuckoo tangent" by simply refuting the statements in your post. I guess I shouldn't expect any better response after all this time.

 

Your post completely contradicts your original statement but I'll just leave that to the forum readers to judge for themselves.

 

Lying to Federal Investigators is a Felony. A Felony falls under the "high crimes and misdemeanors" section.

 

Constitution at Art. II Sec. 4, "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors". The origin of the phrase "high crimes and misdemeanors" refers to those punishable offenses that only apply to high persons, such as, public officials who, because of their official status, might not be subject to such laws.

 

And yes, I confirmed my findings on the subject by running it past a practicing lawyer before posting.

 

I understand why you would have the feeling that Republicans have a superiority complex since you only get your news from biased sources that portray Republicans as Racist, Bigoted, Homophobes every chance they get.

 

This is the second time you've misunderstood my post. You fail to realize that I'm not focusing on the actions of Clinton, but rather the actions of the Republicans that were the catalyst for his actions. If you don't get that, then there's really not much more I can say to make my point any clearer.

 

And we're not going to have a new President in 24 hours, we're going to have a President-elect. We don't get a new President till noon on January 20, 2009. But I'm sure you already knew that

[94Camaro]

That is just too funny lmao

The truly funny part, or rather the part that makes me cringe, is that a few pages back, you claimed a source was too conservatively biased. But now, Roadie makes a comment about another segment of media to the contrary, and you seemingly find it absurd.

 

 

 

 

And Kash, are you seriously trying to blame Clinton's lies under oath on someone other than himself? He's not responsible for those actions? The Republicans made him do it? As long as someone is out to get you, it's ok to lie under oath?

[Kash]

And Kash, are you seriously trying to blame Clinton's lies under oath on someone other than himself? He's not responsible for those actions? The Republicans made him do it? As long as someone is out to get you, it's ok to lie under oath?

 

Looks like people still aren't understanding my point. I'm not excusing Clinton's actions, what I'm doing is questioning the legitimacy of the circumstances under which they materialized. You're seriously telling me that the Republicans didn't go on a witch hunt? You're seriously telling me that a blowjob is valid grounds for investigating a President? The lying didn't happen till after the investigation was well underway.

[ExRoadie]

Looks like people still aren't understanding my point. I'm not excusing Clinton's actions, what I'm doing is questioning the legitimacy of the circumstances under which they materialized. You're seriously telling me that the Republicans didn't go on a witch hunt? You're seriously telling me that a blowjob is valid grounds for investigating a President? The lying didn't happen till after the investigation was well underway.

Quite the contrary Kash, we clearly understand what you're saying.

 

It wasn't the fact that the President was having sexual relations with an Intern in the Oval Office of the Whitehouse that was the problem. It was the mean ol' Republicans that will stop at nothing to bring down a Presidency and ruin the standing of America in the eyes of the world that was the problem.

 

Well sorry but it doesn't work that way. Certainly, the Republicans don't own the only Book of Dirty Political Tricks in Washington.

 

President Clinton compromised not only his self-respect but the office of the President when he began having clandestine meetings with Monica Lewinsky in the Oval Office. He lied to his staff and as we now know, was in full "cover-up" mode when he used his contacts to get her a job in New York well before the investigation started.

 

It wasn't "just a blowjob" that got him in trouble. It was the fact that he was using the Oval Office as a dating service.

 

As I've seen with my own eyes, the actions he took with the intern in the Oval Office would get him fired if he were the CEO of a large company. Period.

 

The Democrats should have fought just as hard as the Republicans to investigate President Clinton if they had any sense of decency and respect for the Office and citizens of this country.

[Kash]

Using the office as a dating service? Really, that's a high crime and misdemeanor? You guys have some silly standards.

[94Camaro]

Using the office as a dating service? Really, that's a high crime and misdemeanor? You guys have some silly standards.

Ok seriously, how many times do you have to be told the high crime was perjury? It's not that his "fooling around" was necessarily illegal, but that it was inappropriate for a person in such a position. Then, he chose to lie under oath. Hence, the high crime.

 

Maybe it was a witch hunt, maybe it wasn't. ExRoadie is right though -- the same situation in the corporate world would have landed him in the street.

[Kash]

Ok, looks like Roadie has perhaps understood what I was getting at, but Camaro, you clearly have completely missed my point.