<p>“The worst, hands down.”</p>
<p>See. Nothing to argue.</p>
<p>
FF - are you completely unaware of how offensive this statement is?</p>
<p>In George Bush’s own words…</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKtEqVVlVZs&mode=related&search=[/url]”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKtEqVVlVZs&mode=related&search=</a></p>
<p>Clinton wasn’t worse, just different. Both war criminals - one who intentionally and knowingly singled out civilians, and especially children, for death in order to accomplish his political ends, the other violating the sovereignty of a nation that never attacked him and posed no imminent danger.</p>
<p>In a just world, they should have been sharing cells with Noriega and Idi Amin (though Noriega would be a petty criminal compared with GW, and Clinton’s actions resulted in far more deaths in a much shorter period of time than Amin’s.)</p>
<p>Speaking of offensive, it’s time to revisit this:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Beyond the other issues, that I think have been addressed, why is “dem” acceptable, but “fundie” not?</p>
<p>I think it creates huge problems when any segment of society takes the position that they are entitled to courtesies and respect that they deem others to be unworthy of.</p>
<p>“I would just accept my offer to call it “water over the dam” and quit while you’re ahead. <g>”</g></p>
<p>But ID, just think how boring it would be for you to have no one to talk to!</p>
<p>“Giuliani is a conservative in some ways, and definitely not so conservative in others. I think that’s what might make his appeal fairly broad.”</p>
<p>As a NYC conservative, one thing I find interesting is how often liberals have decided that conservatives won’t elect Rudy. I never (personally) hear conservatives say that, but liberals have it all figured out.</p>
<p>“I’m talking about Monica Lewinsky. It was none of the government’s business. So when did he perjure himself?”</p>
<p>THe lawsuit had nothing to do with the government. An American citizen had a triable cause of action against Mr. Clinton and he perjured himself, thus denying her the right to a fair hearing in a court of law.</p>
<p>“The only questions that should have been asked about Monica Lewinsky were did you sexually harass her or force yourself on her.”</p>
<p>That was for the judge to decide, not you and not Willie.</p>
<p>" look at the damage done to the country by Bill Clinton and the damage done to the country by GW Bush and it’s not even close, Bush by a landslide."</p>
<p>And how do you quantify that in terms of the big picture? Where do you draw the line between Clinton’s inaction and 9/11 (not talking Iraq here, ok?)?</p>
<p>“So he was convicted of perjury when?”</p>
<p>Did you really miss that entire chapter of American history?</p>
<p>
– So, you’re able to convince yourself that a statement like this is actually “true”, as opposed to “truthy”?</p>
<p>I guess that explains how we got the kind of government we’ve “enjoyed” for the past 6 years…</p>
<p>So Kluge, you think a defendant has the right to decide which questions he will answer truthfully and which he won’t?</p>
<p>–Advantage Clinton.</p>
<p>Not because he was a better man, or better Cheif-Executive–Philanderer-in-Chief (by nature, liars to the last–so don’t act surprised); but rather, because as a crippled president in the Executive branch of Government his big-thinking was stymied by a stingy divided government and almost neutered by a feisty group of Cigar smoking Republicans in congress and, more to the point, a cigar slinging Monica.</p>
<p>Less government wins…so what happens next? Can the Dems have the same affect? There is good reason to doubt it, but here’s hoping.</p>
<p>“Did you really miss that entire chapter of American history?”</p>
<p>It was none of my business who he slept with. Tell me how having consensual sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky means he sexually harassed Paula Jones?</p>
<p>Tell me how anybody having consensual sex with anybody means he is likely to have sexually harassed somebody else.</p>
<p>You left out “lily-livered Republicans”–henceforth to be referred to as “lily-livered reps” just to make you happy. :)</p>
<p>“Tell me how anybody having consensual sex with anybody means he is likely to have sexually harassed somebody else.”</p>
<p>That’s already been answered for you: pattern of behavior. The JUDGE had the right to exclude that line of questioning, but didn’t.</p>
<p>“That’s already been answered for you: pattern of behavior. The JUDGE had the right to exclude that line of questioning, but didn’t.”</p>
<p>The judge was wrong.</p>
<p>You don’t see the difference between having an affair and sexual harassment? </p>
<p>I’m saying there is a difference and the court should not have the right to know the former and has the right to know the latter.</p>
<p>He was found in contempt on the former.</p>
<p>“The judge was wrong.”</p>
<p>Says you. Are you a judge also?</p>
<p>"You don’t see the difference between having an affair and sexual harassment? "</p>
<p>Do you know what actually happened in both cases? Of course you don’t because Clinton lied. However, the ultimate resolution of his case was fair and he took his punishment like a man. For which I give him a great deal of credit and respect.</p>
<p>The real issue with Clinton for me, is that he lied under oath. That failure supercedes any sexual indiscretion, and is why he was disbarred. If the President can’t be honest under oath, what can be expected of ordinary citizens?</p>