patrick.net

Dan8267 says

When that happens, you don't want to be the guy who say, "What are you talking about? I wish I had a dick that big!".

Is that the way it works in your gay porn as well?

elliemae says

According to a 2014 study, 1 in 10 Americans think HTML is a sexually-transmitted disease.

ROFLMA!

Dan8267 says

A president getting a blow job in the privacy of the Oval Office is not disrespecting the country.

I know it is hard for you libs to wrap your wits around this idea of integrity, but it IS disrespecting the country.

Dan8267 says

Lying to Congress and the American people about the NSA violating the 4th Amendment is disrespecting the country.

At the end of the day it is not all that important

Dan8267 says

Lying about Iraq being connected to 9/11 is disrespecting the country.

Agreed

Dan8267 says

Blocking a bill to pay for 9/11 responders' medical treatment thus causing those heroes to die is disrespecting the country.

Cite the references.

Dan8267 says

Sending our children into combat without proper body armor is disrespecting the country.

They are sending children to war? How bout not going to war in the first place?

Dan8267 says

Arresting adults for the responsible consumption of marijuana and taking away their right to vote is disrespecting the country.

Agreed

Dan8267 says

Passing voter ID laws who sole intent and effect is to prevent legitimate voters from voting is disrespecting the country.

Bull Shit prove it.Dan8267 says

Spreading massive lies about everything on a propaganda network masquerading as a news network is disrespecting the country.

So you mean ABC, NBC, CBS, NPR, MSNBC, Public television?

Dan8267 says

Polluting our once great natural resources is disrespecting the country.

Ambiguous, many instances of this, generally it gets cleaned up.

CaptainShuddup says

But not one Liberal can list ONE single positive damn thing the Liberals have done since Kennedy.

The Office of Congressional Ethics
The Internet and Net Neutrality
Product Labeling/Truth in Advertising Laws
Consumer Product Safety Commission
Public Broadcasting/Educational Television
Americans With Disabilities Act
Family and Medical Leave Act
Clean Air Act and ammendments
Clean Water Act
Fair Credit Billing Act
Anti-Torture backlash
Civil Rights Act of 1968
Marriage Equality
Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act
Consumer Protection Agency Has Done for You
Mortgage lenders can no longer push you into a high-priced loan when you qualify for a lower-cost one
Preventing the state from vaginally raping women who want abortions

Just to name a few things.

Just because you're a republican doesn't mean you have to believe everything Rush tells you. Palin is a sideshow and a disgrace, she abolutely needs to shut the fuck up... like yesterday. All publicity is good publicity does not apply to politics.

indigenous says

Dan8267 says

Now that's the guy who needs to be prosecuted.

Why? yea it is less than ideal but what does it really hurt? There is a shit load of stuff i care about more.

It undermines liberty and the republic. The people must know what their government is doing or their government is not one of the people, by the people, for the people.

It is an utterly ridiculous statement to make that a president getting a blow job has more impact on your life than a rogue government agency spying on your every move.

The later prevents free discussion of how to improve government and reform corrupt agencies.

And quite frankly, given your fucked up values, I don't care what you care about. Your priorities don't reflect what's important in the real world.

indigenous says

Nixon has caused as much damage to this country as LBJ or Obama or FDR

FDR did not damage this country. LBJ escalated the Vietnam War, and that was bad, but he wasn't a war criminal or a common criminal like Nixon. Obama has done more evil than Nixon, but Obama is no liberal. It's debatable whether or not LBJ was a liberal.

In any case, your backhanded attempt to appear to be criticizing Nixon while really criticizing Democratic presidents has failed.

indigenous says

Yea I think McCain did that as well, but they were not the President.

That has nothing to do with Clinton's affair being illegal or unethical. Nothing Clinton did was illegal and he did not perjure. Everything the republican politicians did were far more unethical and morally despicable than what Clinton did.

And as for presidents, the atrocities committed by the Bush administration were many orders of magnitude more grotesque and offensive than anything Clinton ever did.

No, attacks on Clinton for getting a blow job is simply conservative hypocrisy. Getting a blow job isn't even in the same ballpark as blowing up the body of a living 4-year-old girl. It doesn't even come remotely close.

Dan8267 says

The Office of Congressional Ethics

Funny Stuff, an oxymoron, name one person they did anything more than slap their wrists?

Dan8267 says

The Internet and Net Neutrality

Will take care of itself no government necessary.

Dan8267 says

Product Labeling/Truth in Advertising Laws

Ok

Dan8267 says

Consumer Product Safety Commission

So we can spend endless amounts of taxpayer money listening to redundant superfluous expensive ads. What have they actually stopped?

Dan8267 says

Americans With Disabilities Act

Which costs easily 10x more than it should

Dan8267 says

Clean Air Act and ammendments

And the last remaining jobs get offshored

Dan8267 says

Consumer Protection Agency Has Done for You

Fuck this shit, completely redundant that will be paid for by the consumer, Another Sarbanes Oxley that costs through the roof and do nothing

Dan8267 says

Mortgage lenders can no longer push you into a high-priced loan when you qualify for a lower-cost one

Yea like we need big brother to tell us how to wipe our nose. Yes lets make people complexly obsequious so the government can further enslave them.

Dan8267 says

Preventing the state from vaginally raping women who want abortions

So this was a big problem? states raping women? Is rape by sodomy ok then?

indigenous says

Bullshit, you cannot separate one aspect of a persons life from the rest.

Not only can we, but the law demands it. If a business fires a person for having an extramarital affair, that business is liable for discrimination.

Work and personal life are separate and should be that way.

And if you want to talk about morality, starting the Iraq War and using our military for political gain is way the fuck more immoral than cheating on your wife.

Killing 9/11 responders by filibustering a bill needed to save their lives is way the fuck more immoral than getting a blow job from a woman who's not your wife while you are married. It's not even the same ballpark.

Dan8267 says

It undermines liberty and the republic. The people must know what their government is doing or their government is not one of the people, by the people, for the people.

Bullshit you are making a mountain out of a mole hill...

indigenous says

Dan8267 says

When that happens, you don't want to be the guy who say, "What are you talking about? I wish I had a dick that big!".

Is that the way it works in your gay porn as well?

Exactly what is "my gay porn"? Are you trying to imply that I've been in gay porn? Sadly, they don't make a wide-angle lense that can capture my full penis.

Plus, I'm completely straight.

Not that I find your fourth grade attempt to call me gay offensive -- well, I find having someone as stupid as you being a member of my species offensive, but that's another issue -- after all, there is nothing morally or ethically wrong with being homosexual or bisexual.

I just happen not to be either. Of course, I understand why a small-minded person like you would think that I'm gay. After all, I promote the human rights of gays, and small minded conservatives just can't understand the concept of supporting the rights of persons in groups to which you do not belong. Conservatives only care about themselves and thus cannot grasp the concept of empathy and why a human being would be motivated to help out "an outsider" who belongs to a different tribe, religion, race, class, sexual orientation, or nation.

The thing is, I can't explain this behavior to you because you simply lack the compassion to understand it. You'll just have to chuck it up as a liberal thing.

Dan8267 says

FDR did not damage this country.

Sure he did the amount of hubris filled legislature that kept this country down for 10 years when it did not need to be is without compare.

Dan8267 says

LBJ escalated the Vietnam War, and that was bad,

LBJ's war spending is what pushed Nixon into taking us off of the gold standard. The other big thing he did that damaged the country was passing medicare.

Dan8267 says

Obama has done more evil than Nixon

No because taking us off of the gold standard will probably end this country.

Why don't you think O is a liberal? (modern definition)

Dan8267 says

In any case, your backhanded attempt to appear to be criticizing Nixon while really criticizing Democratic presidents has failed.

Says who?

You are extremely economically illiterate.

Dan8267 says

indigenous says

Yea I think McCain did that as well, but they were not the President.

That has nothing to do with Clinton's affair being illegal or unethical. Nothing Clinton did was illegal and he did not perjure.

Again - did you read my response to you on this specific point earlier? How do you conclude that he "did not perjure"?

Dan8267 says

Everything the republican politicians did were far more unethical and morally despicable than what Clinton did.

Name them

Dan8267 says

And as for presidents, the atrocities committed by the Bush administration were many orders of magnitude more grotesque and offensive than anything Clinton ever did.

Agreed

CDon says

Personally, I think they should have pushed the executive privilege aspect of this case so as to exclude the testimony from congressional review

Personally, I think Clinton should have used the military to execute all the Republicans trying to topple our republic. Had the Republicans not diverted time and resources away from Clinton's Middle East policy, Al Qaeda could have been weakened and 9/11 would have never had happened.

The bottom line is that these Republicans attacking Clinton on bullshit charges for their own personal political gain, alter the course of history that ultimately led to 9/11. So, it's far more reasonable to impeach those Republicans.

Dan8267 says

After all, I promote the human rights of gays, and small minded conservatives just can't understand the concept of supporting the rights of persons in groups to which you do not belong. Conservatives only care about themselves and thus cannot grasp the concept of empathy and why a human being would be motivated to help out "an outsider" who belongs to a different tribe, religion, race, class, sexual orientation, or nation.

Yet it is ok for you to say: ?

Dan8267 says

When that happens, you don't want to be the guy who say, "What are you talking about? I wish I had a dick that big!".

Well, indigenous, you are that guy.

indigenous says

I know it is hard for you libs to wrap your wits around this idea of integrity, but it IS disrespecting the country.

The lack of integrity is exactly what the Republicans demonstrated by using Congressional hearings for backhanded political manipulation and for attempting to create a sex scandal while hypocritically practicing far worse sexual acts and affairs.

Also, lying about WMDs and connections between Iraq and 9/11 shows a complete lack of integrity.

Also, undermining the Constitution for security theater shows a complete lack of integrity.

Also, polluting the Earth to increase quarterly profits shows a complete lack of integrity.

Also, shutting down the government because you didn't get your way on a health care bill shows a complete lack of integrity.

Also, sabotaging the recovery to make the president look bad shows a complete lack of integrity.

Also, trying to insult a man by calling him gay shows a complete lack of integrity.

Dan8267 says

There is nothing in that record that gives a specific definition of sexual relations or shows any kind of meeting of the minds. The record does not even use the terms "oral sex" or "fellatio", so how can the record define sexual relations to be those things?

Again, from the specific definition I sent you earlier:

"Definition of Sexual Relations" to the court: For the purposes of this deposition, a person engages in "sexual relations" when the person knowingly engages in or causes -
(1) contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person;
(2) contact between any part of the person's body or an object and the genitals or anus of another person; or
(3) contact between the genitals or anus of the person and any part of another person's body. "Contact" means intentional touching, either directly or through clothing."

Bob Bennett and the President specifically stipulated to this in prior interrogatories - the court took judicial notice of the same.

Dan8267 says

Not only can we, but the law demands it. If a business fires a person for having an extramarital affair, that business is liable for discrimination.

Real life doesn't work that way.

Dan8267 says

Killing 9/11 responders by filibustering a bill needed to save their lives is way the fuck more immoral than getting a blow job from a woman who's not your wife while you are married. It's not even the same ballpark.

What is the rest of the story?

indigenous says

Dan8267 says

Lying to Congress and the American people about the NSA violating the 4th Amendment is disrespecting the country.

At the end of the day it is not all that important

Wow, that shows a complete lack of integrity and is disrespectful to the country.

indigenous says

Dan8267 says

Blocking a bill to pay for 9/11 responders' medical treatment thus causing those heroes to die is disrespecting the country.

Cite the references.

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/i58xmo/worst-responders

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/nuwe6u/9-11-first-responders-react-to-the-senate-filibuster

And if you don't have the balls to watch these two videos, you're a scumbag. The second one interviews actual 9/11 responders who were affected by the filibuster, the real heroes.

indigenous says

Dan8267 says

Passing voter ID laws who sole intent and effect is to prevent legitimate voters from voting is disrespecting the country.

Bull Shit prove it.

I've done this many times on this site. Here's one of a hundred videos showing the truth.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/o32tF-S6K60

Dan8267 says

The lack of integrity is exactly what the Republicans demonstrated by using Congressional hearings for backhanded political manipulation and for attempting to create a sex scandal while hypocritically practicing far worse sexual acts and affairs.

So it would be better not have any rules or laws? Especially for the leader of the US?

Dan8267 says

Also, lying about WMDs and connections between Iraq and 9/11 shows a complete lack of integrity.

Getting good information in war is notoriously hard and inaccurate. Not that I'm defending more lack of integrity.

Dan8267 says

Also, undermining the Constitution for security theater shows a complete lack of integrity.

SOP in times of war

Dan8267 says

Also, polluting the Earth to increase quarterly profits shows a complete lack of integrity.

Cut the conjecture examples.

Dan8267 says

Also, shutting down the government because you didn't get your way on a health care bill shows a complete lack of integrity.

What because they didn't vote on the sequester fast enough for you, fuck off.

Dan8267 says

Also, sabotaging the recovery to make the president look bad shows a complete lack of integrity.

More conjecture examples

Dan8267 says

Also, trying to insult a man by calling him gay shows a complete lack of integrity.

That is a two street.

Gawd you are a mouth piece for the democrats. Talking to you is a Waste of time. You are completly economically illiterate, glib, and close minded. It does not matter because this country is not long for this world.

indigenous says

Dan8267 says

Spreading massive lies about everything on a propaganda network masquerading as a news network is disrespecting the country.

So you mean ABC, NBC, CBS, NPR, MSNBC, Public television?

No, I mean Fox News. None of the sources you state lie. Fox News lies every day and is caught every day lying.

Just because you don't like Sesame Street doesn't make Kermit the Frog a liar.

indigenous says

Dan8267 says

Polluting our once great natural resources is disrespecting the country.

Ambiguous, many instances of this, generally it gets cleaned up.

Another example of an actual lie told by someone who lacks integrity and that harms and disrespects our country. Oh, the hypocrisy of the political right.

varmint says

Just because you're a republican doesn't mean you have to believe everything Rush tells you.

Actually, today it does. Otherwise you get excommunicated by the Republican leadership.

Dan8267 says

I've done this many times on this site. Here's one of a hundred videos showing the truth.

That is more conjecture.

My Uncle Buck was a staunch conservative who voted Republican every year until he died that year in Chicago, since then he has voted Democrat.

indigenous says

Dan8267 says

Preventing the state from vaginally raping women who want abortions

So this was a big problem?

Pretty much sums up the Republican philosophy on women. Raping them ain't a big problem.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/OY3mWJ1Cd0Y

Yes, he really did just say that. And that's the real face of conservatives.

CDon says

Again, from the specific definition I sent you earlier:

"Definition of Sexual Relations" to the court: For the purposes of this deposition, a person engages in "sexual relations" when the person knowingly engages in or causes -

(1) contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person;

(2) contact between any part of the person's body or an object and the genitals or anus of another person; or

(3) contact between the genitals or anus of the person and any part of another person's body. "Contact" means intentional touching, either directly or through clothing."

His penis did not jump into her mouth by mistake. Obviously sexual.
That's OK Bill, I forgive you.

CDon says

Again - did you read my response to you on this specific point earlier? How do you conclude that he "did not perjure"?

When I go through the thread, I do so chronologically.

I've responded to your post that reference the testimony.

Strategist says

His penis did not jump into her mouth by mistake. Obviously sexual.

That's not the issue.

The issue is whether or not Clinton committed perjury. In order to make that case, you have to prove that Clinton's interpretation was unreasonable, i.e. no reasonable person would have interpret the term "sexual relations" as a euphemism for sexual intercourse. Otherwise, it's not perjury.

The prosecution could have easily asked a follow up question to clarify what they meant if they got a response that contradicted what they believed to be the truth. They didn't because the whole hearing was a political setup. The prosecution was not interested in criminal behavior or upholding the law. The prosecution was interested in manipulating public opinion of the president. And 9/11 is the price we paid for distracting the country during a critical time when we were making progress in the Middle East. I say prosecute all those who misused our government for personal gain.

Dan8267 says

I've responded to your post that reference the testimony.

But you did not respond to the specific agreed upon definition of "Sexual Relations" which brought about the charge of perjury. Again:

"Definition of Sexual Relations" to the court: For the purposes of this deposition, a person engages in "sexual relations" when the person knowingly engages in or causes -

(1) contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person;

(2) contact between any part of the person's body or an object and the genitals or anus of another person; or

(3) contact between the genitals or anus of the person and any part of another person's body. "Contact" means intentional touching, either directly or through clothing."

Given this agreed upon definition, how do you conclude he did not commit perjury?

Dan8267 says

And if you don't have the balls to watch these two videos, you're a scumbag. The second one interviews actual 9/11 responders who were affected by the filibuster, the real heroes.

Yea yea , like Stewart is unbiased, what the fuck is the rest of the story.
It is not like these union members are destitute with out the help.

My brother is a retired fireman. Like all good public employees they go out on disability to further enhance their retirement benefits, like not getting taxed on pensions received. Of course the disability claim is as dubious as can be.

Dan8267 says

No, I mean Fox News. None of the sources you state lie. Fox News lies every day and is caught every day lying.

Are you really that blind, gawd.

Dan8267 says

Another example of an actual lie told by someone who lacks integrity and that harms and disrespects our country. Oh, the hypocrisy of the political right.

The examples please...

Dan8267 says

That's not the issue.

The issue is whether or not Clinton committed perjury. In order to make that case, you have to prove that Clinton's interpretation was unreasonable, i.e. no reasonable person would have interpret the term "sexual relations" as a euphemism for sexual intercourse. Otherwise, it's not perjury.

And again Dan, that is just wrong. The two parties agreed upon the definition of "sexual relations", and per that agreed upon definition, he perjured himself.

Dan8267 says

indigenous says

Dan8267 says

Preventing the state from vaginally raping women who want abortions

So this was a big problem?

Pretty much sums up the Republican philosophy on women. Raping them ain't a big problem.

No dumb ass read your own comment

Dan8267 says

Strategist says

His penis did not jump into her mouth by mistake. Obviously sexual.

That's not the issue.

The issue is whether or not Clinton committed perjury. In order to make that case, you have to prove that Clinton's interpretation was unreasonable, i.e. no reasonable person would have interpret the term "sexual relations" as a euphemism for sexual intercourse. Otherwise, it's not perjury.

He did not state the "whole truth" isn't that what he was supposed to do?

Dan8267 says

The prosecution could have easily asked a follow up question to clarify what they meant if they got a response that contradicted what they believed to be the truth. They didn't because the whole hearing was a political setup. The prosecution was not interested in criminal behavior or upholding the law. The prosecution was interested in manipulating public opinion of the president.

I would even go further then that. They were only interested in humiliating a popular President with an awesome track record. They could not bear his success and decided to try and bring him down this way, but the public did not buy.

Strategist says

Dan8267 says

Strategist says

His penis did not jump into her mouth by mistake. Obviously sexual.

That's not the issue.

The issue is whether or not Clinton committed perjury. In order to make that case, you have to prove that Clinton's interpretation was unreasonable, i.e. no reasonable person would have interpret the term "sexual relations" as a euphemism for sexual intercourse. Otherwise, it's not perjury.

He did not state the "whole truth" isn't that what he was supposed to do?

More than that, he consciously and deliberately decided in that moment to lie under oath. When the question came up, Bennet screwed up by objecting, so as to cause the Judge to have the agreed upon definition handed to the President. He looked at it, and then immediately thereafter lied under oath. I was in lawschool when this was going on - and we discussed it at length in Civil Procedure.

Strategist says

I would even go further then that. They were only interested in humiliating a popular President with an awesome track record. They could not bear his success and decided to try and bring him down this way, but the public did not buy.

Agree. There are about 100 different ways you can defend Clinton and I have no problem with any of them, but please for the love of god, don't claim that he didn't perjure himself when it is even to this day a textbook example of perjury.

CDon says

Agree. There are about 100 different ways you can defend Clinton and I have no problem with any of them, but please for the love of god, don't claim that he didn't perjure himself when it is even to this day a textbook example of perjury.

I believe he was disbarred and can't practice law anymore. Was it for perjury? If so, then that settles it.

CDon says

Agree. There are about 100 different ways you can defend Clinton and I have no problem with any of them, but please for the love of god, don't claim that he didn't perjure himself when it is even to this day a textbook example of perjury.

What's odd is that Congress chose to impeach him not regarding his deposition in the Jones trial, but on the grand jury testimony. If the Jones testimony was really "textbook," you'd think they would have done the reverse (that's what she said?).