OH MY GAWD. Bill Clinton is really doing it...

[CallMeJoe]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Spin it any way you want, TLC. The real difference between Clinton and Bush is that Billy-bob delivered what he promised, for the most part, even with a hostile congress, and that Georgie didn't, even with congress in the palm of his hand...
In the wake of 9/11, Bushco exploited the politics of Bullying and Fear adroitly, for sure. Problem is, it leaves a bitter and persistent aftertaste...
For a guy you claim is politically savvy, approval ratings hovering around 30% tell a different story. Clinton's never fell so low...

Consider that perhaps President Clinton may have delivered because of a Republican Congress holding him in check. How different do you think things would have turned out if W had faced a strong Democratic Congress for 8 years, rather than the Republican enablers he had?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Bush actually does have some political savvy. No more or less than Clinton. His public speaking skills suck though. That's the only real difference.

rofl. You're dumb as a stump if you truly believe this.

Nah. Pople like you and Jhhnn are just transfixed by someone who can put a few words together. It's no secret that you guys, and a few others in here, drink the rhtetoric like it's Jim Jones serrving Kool-Aid. When someone like Obama comes along you are totally transfixed. Thankfully you are minority representatives of his support because the moderates like me will be voting for him in addition to you two.

 

[lupi]

I heard a lot about William Jeferson Clinton (hmm, I wonder why it was ok for him to be introduced by his full name, odd), Hillary, and just enough about the current campaign to remember why he was speaking.

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Bush actually does have some political savvy. No more or less than Clinton. His public speaking skills suck though. That's the only real difference.

rofl. You're dumb as a stump if you truly believe this.

Nah. Pople like you and Jhhnn are just transfixed by someone who can put a few words together. It's no secret that you guys, and a few others in here, drink the rhtetoric like it's Jim Jones serrving Kool-Aid. When someone like Obama comes along you are totally transfixed. Thankfully you are minority representatives of his support because the moderates like me will be voting for him in addition to you two.

There's a difference between being transfixed (as you use the word) and being inspired. For at least 2500 years our civilization has been inspired to do great things by great men and women making great speeches. Apparently the last 8 years have made us forget much of who we are.

 

[fallout man]

Originally posted by: lupi
I heard a lot about William Jeferson Clinton (hmm, I wonder why it was ok for him to be introduced by his full name, odd), Hillary, and just enough about the current campaign to remember why he was speaking.

Yeah, he was like... a two-term democrat president. I think that presidents usually get the middle-name treatment out of respect.

Your home-boy George Bush might get confused for his somewhat reasonable and smart dad if his middle initial was left out of the conversation.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Bush actually does have some political savvy. No more or less than Clinton. His public speaking skills suck though. That's the only real difference.

rofl. You're dumb as a stump if you truly believe this.

Nah. Pople like you and Jhhnn are just transfixed by someone who can put a few words together. It's no secret that you guys, and a few others in here, drink the rhtetoric like it's Jim Jones serrving Kool-Aid. When someone like Obama comes along you are totally transfixed. Thankfully you are minority representatives of his support because the moderates like me will be voting for him in addition to you two.

Don't be too hard on them, more than half the country has spent the last two elections transfixed by someone who CAN'T put a few words together. I realize it might seem pretty mundane, but I can see the appeal of a candidate who can speak in complete sentences.

 

[lupi]

Originally posted by: fallout man

Originally posted by: lupi
I heard a lot about William Jeferson Clinton (hmm, I wonder why it was ok for him to be introduced by his full name, odd), Hillary, and just enough about the current campaign to remember why he was speaking.

Yeah, he was like... a two-term democrat president. I think that presidents usually get the middle-name treatment out of respect.

Your home-boy George Bush might get confused for his somewhat reasonable and smart dad if his middle initial was left out of the conversation.

It makes me smile every time the idiots on those boards advertise them self.

 

[fallout man]

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: fallout man

Originally posted by: lupi
I heard a lot about William Jeferson Clinton (hmm, I wonder why it was ok for him to be introduced by his full name, odd), Hillary, and just enough about the current campaign to remember why he was speaking.

Yeah, he was like... a two-term democrat president. I think that presidents usually get the middle-name treatment out of respect.

Your home-boy George Bush might get confused for his somewhat reasonable and smart dad if his middle initial was left out of the conversation.

It makes me smile every time the idiots on those boards advertise them self.

Yeah, it's a wicked pisser when the idiots care to make themselves heard.

Do you care to elaborate why it gives you such a thrill up your leg? I'm just curious.

 

[Infohawk]

Good speech. Bill is my kind of of Democrat: moderate.

He pointed out the worst thing about McCain which is McCain's willingness to follow the disastrous Neocon ideology.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

Yup TLC really has nothing to stand on anymore and is being exposed for the Republican shill that he is. Thank God we're getting rid of your ilk this election.

I saw the speech live and was damn impressed at how flawlessly he executed that speech. Not one gaffe, perfect the whole way through. It's not hard to see why he was so damn popular despite his moral shortcomings.

 

[Corbett]

What you didnt see was the 20 year old intern on her knees behind the podium during Clinton's speech tonight.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: OneOfTheseDays
Yup TLC really has nothing to stand on anymore and is being exposed for the Republican shill that he is. Thank God we're getting rid of your ilk this election.

I saw the speech live and was damn impressed at how flawlessly he executed that speech. Not one gaffe, perfect the whole way through. It's not hard to see why he was so damn popular despite his moral shortcomings.

Everyone has moral shortcomings. 50% of marriages end in divorce; the fact that the Clintons held it together speaks volumes toward their character IMO. The man had consensual sex and was impeached on a technicality and an interpretation of what he said. What's interesting is how he was crucified and GWB was not; IMO there are more grounds to impeach Bush than there ever were to impeach Clinton.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Bush actually does have some political savvy. No more or less than Clinton. His public speaking skills suck though. That's the only real difference.

rofl. You're dumb as a stump if you truly believe this.

Why is it so hard to believe??

Bush the idiot won as many national elections as Clinton.

And let's not forget the fact that Bush has literally beat the hell out of the Democrats for most of the last 7 years. He got nearly EVERYTHING he has ever asked for, even after the Democrat take over.

Go back and look at the early 2007 thread about the Iraq war funding. The Democrat and anti-war folks were so sure they they would stand up to Bush and win thus forcing an end to the war. When it was all said and done though Bush not only got his funding, but he got a surge in troops into Iraq.

I believe Social Security reform is the only major political defeat that Bush has had since taking office.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Everyone has moral shortcomings. 50% of marriages end in divorce; the fact that the Clintons held it together speaks volumes toward their character IMO. The man had consensual sex and was impeached on a technicality and an interpretation of what he said. What's interesting is how he was crucified and GWB was not; IMO there are more grounds to impeach Bush than there ever were to impeach Clinton.

Bill Clinton broke the law, Bush has not.

Simple enough for you?

 

[fallout man]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Everyone has moral shortcomings. 50% of marriages end in divorce; the fact that the Clintons held it together speaks volumes toward their character IMO. The man had consensual sex and was impeached on a technicality and an interpretation of what he said. What's interesting is how he was crucified and GWB was not; IMO there are more grounds to impeach Bush than there ever were to impeach Clinton.

Bill Clinton broke the law, Bush has not.

Simple enough for you?

PJ, I just came. Post some more, while I've got a good thing going here.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Everyone has moral shortcomings. 50% of marriages end in divorce; the fact that the Clintons held it together speaks volumes toward their character IMO. The man had consensual sex and was impeached on a technicality and an interpretation of what he said. What's interesting is how he was crucified and GWB was not; IMO there are more grounds to impeach Bush than there ever were to impeach Clinton.

Bill Clinton broke the law, Bush has not.

Simple enough for you?

Actually, Bill Clinton was found not guilty in the Senate, but nice try.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Everyone has moral shortcomings. 50% of marriages end in divorce; the fact that the Clintons held it together speaks volumes toward their character IMO. The man had consensual sex and was impeached on a technicality and an interpretation of what he said. What's interesting is how he was crucified and GWB was not; IMO there are more grounds to impeach Bush than there ever were to impeach Clinton.

Bill Clinton broke the law, Bush has not.

Simple enough for you?

Actually, Bill Clinton was found not guilty in the Senate, but nice try.

The Senate is not a criminal court. It was a court of impeachment whose job was not to decide whether Clinton broke the law but to decide if Clinton should be removed from office.

In the real courts Clinton admitted to wrong doing and paid the price, a very small one, but he still paid a price.

 

[crisscross]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Bush actually does have some political savvy. No more or less than Clinton. His public speaking skills suck though. That's the only real difference.

rofl. You're dumb as a stump if you truly believe this.

Why is it so hard to believe??

Bush the idiot won as many national elections as Clinton.

Yeah? put them both up for re-election see who wins.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Bill Clinton broke the law, Bush has not.

Simple enough for you?

It's not that simple. If Congress had the willpower, Bush could be found guilty of high crimes. The reason he hasn't been is political, just like Clinton's BJ lie impeachment was political.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Everyone has moral shortcomings. 50% of marriages end in divorce; the fact that the Clintons held it together speaks volumes toward their character IMO. The man had consensual sex and was impeached on a technicality and an interpretation of what he said. What's interesting is how he was crucified and GWB was not; IMO there are more grounds to impeach Bush than there ever were to impeach Clinton.

Bill Clinton broke the law, Bush has not.

Simple enough for you?

Actually, Bill Clinton was found not guilty in the Senate, but nice try.

The Senate is not a criminal court. It was a court of impeachment whose job was not to decide whether Clinton broke the law but to decide if Clinton should be removed from office.

In the real courts Clinton admitted to wrong doing and paid the price, a very small one, but he still paid a price.

Actually, you are wrong. In the case of impeachment of the POTUS, the Senate IS a criminal court. A President can only be impeached if he has broken the law.
Article 2 Section 4 of the Constitution specifically states "Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other High crimes and misdemeanors."

 

[fallout man]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Bill Clinton broke the law, Bush has not.

Simple enough for you?

It's not that simple. If Congress had the willpower, Bush could be found guilty of high crimes. The reason he hasn't been is political, just like Clinton's BJ lie impeachment was political.

BUT SWEET JESUS LORD HAVE MERCY--THE MAN GOT A BLESSED HUMMER!!!

WHEN WILL THE LORD PULL THE SCALES FROM YOUR EYES, AND MAKE YOU UNDERSTAND THE SERIOUS BUSINESS!!!

VOTE WITH YOUR SOUL, LEST YOU BE CONDEMNED TO ETERNAL SEXY HELLFIRE FULL OF LATE-TERM-ABORTED FETUSES!!! 11

IF YOU PRAISE THE LORD IN HEAVEN, AND YOU WANT TO HELP OTHERS REACH SALVATION, COPY AND PASTE THIS INTO ALL YOUR EMAILS.

 

[bctbct]

"People the world over have always been more impressed by the power of our example rather than the example of our power"

Clinton can deliver a speech

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: fallout man

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Bill Clinton broke the law, Bush has not.

Simple enough for you?

It's not that simple. If Congress had the willpower, Bush could be found guilty of high crimes. The reason he hasn't been is political, just like Clinton's BJ lie impeachment was political.

BUT SWEET JESUS LORD HAVE MERCY--THE MAN GOT A BLESSED HUMMER!!!

WHEN WILL THE LORD PULL THE SCALES FROM YOUR EYES, AND MAKE YOU UNDERSTAND THE SERIOUS BUSINESS!!!

VOTE WITH YOUR SOUL, LEST YOU BE CONDEMNED TO ETERNAL SEXY HELLFIRE FULL OF LATE-TERM-ABORTED FETUSES!!! 11

IF YOU PRAISE THE LORD IN HEAVEN, AND YOU WANT TO HELP OTHERS REACH SALVATION, COPY AND PASTE THIS INTO ALL YOUR EMAILS.

Sigh.... yaknow, it's sad for me. It really is. I have always defended Christianity on these forums, not because of any personal faith, and not just because of my conviction in freedom of belief, but because I have always seen something beautiful in Christianity's roots as (what we would call today) a political movement (and victory) by oppressed peoples against Roman brutality (the 1st law Constantine passed after being converted was to stop the practice of crucifixion). And at the heart of Christianity is the message that God was one of us, and we killed Him. It is THE call to humanity to better ourselves without violence and hate, and yet it has been so horribly corrupted through the centuries.

 

[QED]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Everyone has moral shortcomings. 50% of marriages end in divorce; the fact that the Clintons held it together speaks volumes toward their character IMO. The man had consensual sex and was impeached on a technicality and an interpretation of what he said. What's interesting is how he was crucified and GWB was not; IMO there are more grounds to impeach Bush than there ever were to impeach Clinton.

Bill Clinton broke the law, Bush has not.

Simple enough for you?

Actually, Bill Clinton was found not guilty in the Senate, but nice try.

The Senate is not a criminal court. It was a court of impeachment whose job was not to decide whether Clinton broke the law but to decide if Clinton should be removed from office.

In the real courts Clinton admitted to wrong doing and paid the price, a very small one, but he still paid a price.

Actually, you are wrong. In the case of impeachment of the POTUS, the Senate IS a criminal court. A President can only be impeached if he has broken the law.
Article 2 Section 4 of the Constitution specifically states "Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other High crimes and misdemeanors."

This might all arguments over semantics, but you are wrong.

An impeachment hearing is not a criminal trial. The Senators do not vote "Guilty" or "Not Guilty", as jurors would in a criminal trial-- and the arguments at the hearing are more often about what constitutes a serious enough offense to warrant impeachment than they are over any factual evidence indicating a level of guilt for a particular alleged crime.

To say the Clinton was found "not guilty" by the Senate in his impeachment trial is laughable at best, and displays an apparent ignorance about what impeachment actually is and why it is used.

 

[GenHoth]

Originally posted by: bctbct
"People the world over have always been more impressed by the power of our example rather than the example of our power"

Clinton can deliver a speech

I would love to see a return to the speak softly and carry a big stick method. This whine, cry and shout while swinging at anything that moves is annoying.