|
|
| A sad day for Republicans [message #103831] |
Sat, 24 July 2004 11:10   |
mahkra
Messages: 219
Registered: April 2004
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
| hydra1945 |
Is it that hard to understand??????
|
No, it's not hard to understand. I just don't think it matters.
So the president lied about cheating on his wife... Why should I care?
|
|
|
|
| A sad day for Republicans [message #103851] |
Sat, 24 July 2004 13:26 |
 |
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| hydra1945 |
| SuperFlyingEngi |
Tried as lying about whaat? His sexual relationships. What do his sexual relationships have to do with ANYTHING in government? Why, none at all.
|
Clinton was tried for PERJURY!!!!!!!!!!! That means LYING UNDER OATH!!!!!!!! PERJURY IS A FREAKING FELONY
Is it that hard to understand??????
|
...why was he convicted for perjury? For lying about his sexual engagements. Which have nothing to do with government. Republicans couldn't pin anything on Clinton except that he was rather naughty in the White House, which I do no agree with, but it has nothing to do with government and it's his own business.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
|
|
| A sad day for Republicans [message #103857] |
Sat, 24 July 2004 13:58 |
|
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
But his sexual relations are none of anyone's goddamn business. The fact that Republicans used it as their main attack point showed how wicked they had become.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| A sad day for Republicans [message #103863] |
Sat, 24 July 2004 14:06 |
|
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
I would not care if the pope was jacking off in the Vatican.
But if Clinton was such a "bad president" who didn't do anything right, why did Republicans concentrate on Monica Lewinsky, and then have to make things up like Whitewater?
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
|
|
| A sad day for Republicans [message #103865] |
Sat, 24 July 2004 14:08 |
|
SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
WHITEWATER!!! THEY MADE UP WHITEWATER!
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)
"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)
The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| A sad day for Republicans [message #105467] |
Sun, 01 August 2004 05:42 |
AlostSOul
Messages: 101
Registered: August 2004
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
Everyone agrees with me when I say that Micheal Moore is the next Micheal Jackson, but instead of melestering little boys, he will rape politicians.
(not to be taken seriously.)
the only thing I can say is this: ROFL!!!!
|
|
|
|
| A sad day for Republicans [message #114434] |
Mon, 13 September 2004 16:48 |
 |
Crimson
Messages: 7429
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
| SuperFlyingEngi |
| Crimson |
That's funny, I prefer someone who relates to me and others, not someone who acts like they're better than everyone else.
|
Clinton showing that he is very intelligent is not him telling you that you're too stupid to be bothered with. It's him being an educated person. Unllike George Bush. So, having someone without the capacity for higher language skills is preferable to someone with, at least in your mind?
|
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=106&ncid=742&e=3&u=/nypost/20040913/cm_nypost/cuomokerryiscommatose
Yes, I'm bumping a really old thread, but a Democrat agrees with me.
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
| A sad day for Republicans [message #114602] |
Tue, 14 September 2004 11:11 |
 |
Aircraftkiller
Messages: 8213
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars) |
|
|
| SuperFlyingEngi |
I would not care if the pope was jacking off in the Vatican.
But if Clinton was such a "bad president" who didn't do anything right, why did Republicans concentrate on Monica Lewinsky, and then have to make things up like Whitewater?
|
You know, we elected Clinton to be President of the United States... I don't remember anyone electing him to have sex while on duty.
|
|
|
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
