Who the Hell Does He Think He Is?

[doubleM23]

Killing a child because the condom broke or or the woman forgot to take the pill or whatever is the cowards way out.  If people are not prepared to accept the responsibility for what might happen when they have sex then they shouldnt be having it in the first place.

Yes sir, Your Royal Dictator.

 

Perhaps we should call up the Chinese. They have great reproduction laws.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Yes sir, Your Royal Dictator.

 

Perhaps we should call up the Chinese.  They have great reproduction laws.

Oh, since I say people should take responsibility for their actions I'm no different than the Chinese huh? Why dont you go to the store and buy yourself a clue.

[Chisoxfn]

Well if Sex wasn't shunned upon in our society, teens could much easier go to the Savon or 7 Eleven and feel comfortable picking up a pack of condoms because they are going to have sex.

 

Of course too many people I know never were willing to do that because they worried too much about seeing someone they knew or getting pressed about it. Luckily none of them knocked a girl up, but it could of.

 

Me, I didn't really care, better safe then sorry and I do not think abortion is something I would do, but I give a women the right to chose. If I messed up and knocked the girl up, then that is something I would have to face, whether I am ready or not and personally, I don't think I could tell my girl to have an abortion or anything like that because it seems wrong.

 

But I'm not going to force my opinion on others who feel differently. But for partial birth abortions, I didn't have a problem with banning those, because that type of abortion should only been done in situations where the women could die due to consequences of having the child.

[doubleM23]

Oh, since I say people should take responsibility for their actions I'm no different than the Chinese huh?  Why dont you go to the store and buy yourself a clue.

Hey man. Welcome to America. I'm all for people being responsible, but you can't force it. If they want to be dumb, jag-off, pricks who never want act like an adult or be held accountable for their own actions, that's their right.

 

Hey, they could be President.

 

 

Again, my stance on the issue...

 

Don't like abortions?

 

Don't have one.

[Mathew]

Again, my stance on the issue...

 

Don't like abortions?

 

Don't have one.

Somehow I don't think he will.

 

You summed it up perfectly in both threads though.

[Spiff]

Hey man.  Welcome to America.  I'm all for people being responsible, but you can't force it.  If they want to be dumb, jag-off, pricks who never want act like an adult or be held accountable for their own actions, that's their right.

 

Hey, they could be President.

 

 

Again, my stance on the issue...

 

Don't like abortions?

 

Don't have one.

That's a retarded argument. The government forces responsibility all the time. Seat belt laws, drunk driving laws, gun permits, there's hundreds of examples.

[Texsox]

Most women I know that have been forced into that situation were there because their primary means of birth control failed.

 

http://abortionfacts.com/statistics/statistics.asp

Too often the primary method is hoping. I am dismayed at the women who have had multiple abotions. My wife is in the medical field, as part of the screening she has to ask about all pregnancies. At least once a week someone comes in who has had three or more and every day she sees people who have had two.

 

I've gradually slid towards Pro-Life over the past 20 years. It has been an accumulation of things, but not the propaganda that both sides produce to elicit emotion rather than a factual debate. I can think of no debate in the history of mankind that has seen more emotion centered debate than this.

[Queen Prawn]

Most women I know that have been forced into that situation were there because their primary means of birth control failed.

That happened to my sister. She said she thought about abortion for about a nanosecond. My nephew is 5 1/2 months old now and as healthy and happy as can be. She is having trouble making ends meet because the baby's father is worthless (yes, he is still there, but is a dead beat - why she is still with him is beyond me, but that isn't my decision to make). I realize that she is lucky in the fact that her family is supporting her through this. Then again so did both of her friend's family (they had babies at the same time) and so did my best friend's family when she was pregnant with her first.

 

I am grateful I have never had to decide between abortion, raising the child on my own or adoption. But if I had to, I know I couldn't chose to abort, but that is me and I realize that not every woman feels that way.

[Wong & Owens]

Lets see.  A man who proposes removing restrictions on faith based charities in order to try to help people or a man who has his intern on her knees shining his knob then denying it on national TV.

 

Who was the real embarassment?

To answer your (rhetorical?) question-- Bush. A guy's private life is his private life, and if Clinton chooses to cheat on his wife he may be an embarrassment to his family, but that's none of my business. As far as representing our nation goes--nobody in Europe or Asia or Antarctica gave a rat's ass that Clinton had a mistress.

 

Would you consider John F Kennedy an embarrassment, Nuke?

[Texsox]

To answer your (rhetorical?) question-- Bush.  A guy's private life is his private life, and if Clinton chooses to cheat on his wife he may be an embarrassment to his family, but that's none of my business.  As far as representing our nation goes--nobody in Europe or Asia or Antarctica gave a rat's ass that Clinton had a mistress. 

 

Would you consider John F Kennedy an embarrassment, Nuke?

GHost, don't ask Nuke if a Dem is an embarassment, we know how he will anser that. Nuke, was Nixon an embarrasement for Watergate and was Reagan an embarrasement for Iran-Contra and huge defecits?

[Queen Prawn]

To answer your (rhetorical?) question-- Bush.  A guy's private life is his private life, and if Clinton chooses to cheat on his wife he may be an embarrassment to his family, but that's none of my business.  As far as representing our nation goes--nobody in Europe or Asia or Antarctica gave a rat's ass that Clinton had a mistress. 

 

Would you consider John F Kennedy an embarrassment, Nuke?

I've never understood the crap Clinton got about that. I can be sure that if anyone at my job started asking me if I was blowing Brian, I'd either lie or tell them to mind their own damned business. The only person that has a right to be truly P.O.'d about the whole thing is Mrs. Clinton and if she isn't why in hell should I be? It's not like Clinton was a moral or religious leader or that it cost the country in life or money - it was a damned BLOWJOB not dropping the bomb on an innocent country or something (this was an example of something bad, not saying a president has done this).

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

To answer your (rhetorical?) question-- Bush.  A guy's private life is his private life, and if Clinton chooses to cheat on his wife he may be an embarrassment to his family, but that's none of my business.  As far as representing our nation goes--nobody in Europe or Asia or Antarctica gave a rat's ass that Clinton had a mistress. 

 

Would you consider John F Kennedy an embarrassment, Nuke?

BULL-s***

 

 

To be a good leader you need to set a good example for all to follow. How does it look when any President, regardless of party affiliation, cheats on his wife, lies about it on television then denies that he lied about it.

 

JFK did a lot of great things during his short time in office but he was a notorious adulterer and far worse than Clinton was. The only difference between the 2 was in Kennedy's time the media didnt have the reach and influence it does now. If Kennedy and Clinton had switched places Kennedy would be one of the most reviled presidents in our history.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

GHost, don't ask Nuke if a Dem is an embarassment, we know how he will anser that. Nuke, was Nixon an embarrasement for Watergate and was Reagan an embarrasement for Iran-Contra and huge defecits?

Nixon was a great man during his commie busting days of the 1950's but when he got to the white house he was a liar and a stooge. Watergate was so unnecessary and was a direct result of his paranoia over losing an election he had in the bag.

 

I will end the war in Vietnam (well he did end the war, about 5 years after he promised to ) , I'm not a crook, wage and price controls, soaring inflation and interest rates, being forced to turn tail & run before facing impeachment.....Yeah, I'd say Nixon was an embarassment alright.

 

 

The only thing that got me stewed about Iran Contra during the Reagan administration was that he backed off his pledge not to negotiate with terrorists. Huge defecits? I dont see how you can blame the President entirely for huge deficits when the House of Representatives writes all the spending bills and was not controlled by Republicans during Reagans time in office.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

GHost, don't ask Nuke if a Dem is an embarassment, we know how he will anser that. Nuke, was Nixon an embarrasement for Watergate and was Reagan an embarrasement for Iran-Contra and huge defecits?

Come on now, just because I'm a conservative and don't like the Democratic party as a whole doesn't mean that I hate all Democrats. I voted for Bill Lipinski every election since I could vote ( 1996 ) and voted for Glenn Poshard for Governor over that corrupt, lying, fat piece of trash George Ryan back in 1998

[Spiff]

I think the issue for the most part is the fact that he was doing all this with an intern in the oval office. Outside the White House, on his own free time maybe it wouldn't have been such a big deal (I say maybe because some people would have probably been just as enthusiastic). But in the oval office, while he was on the job; compare it to your own lives. If you got caught doing it at work and then lied about it, wouldn't you get fired?

[doubleM23]

That's a retarded argument.  The government forces responsibility all the time.  Seat belt laws, drunk driving laws, gun permits, there's hundreds of examples.

You are correct. Let me clarify what I meant.

 

And, of course, since this is the political debate forum, all of this is essentially what I think should be done to run a country smoothly. Take with a grain of salt.

 

It's not the role of the government to regulate responsibility, morality, etc. when dealing with the choices of an adult who is capable of making decisions for themselves. Obviously in cases such as murder, rape, drunk driving, etc. these need to be regulated and enforced because you have crossed the line and have infringed on the rights of someone else. But I really couldn't care less if an adult wants to snort a bag of cocaine. Hey man, it's you're body. But that is a whole 'nother can of worms.

[kapkomet]

I've never understood the crap Clinton got about that.  I can be sure that if anyone at my job started asking me if I was blowing Brian, I'd either lie or tell them to mind their own damned business.  The only person that has a right to be truly P.O.'d about the whole thing is Mrs. Clinton and if she isn't why in hell should I be?  It's not like Clinton was a moral or religious leader or that it cost the country in life or money - it was a damned BLOWJOB not dropping the bomb on an innocent country or something (this was an example of something bad, not saying a president has done this).

It's not about his conduct, it was about the LIE.

 

And lying to the press and the American people is one thing, but to lie UNDER OATH is another.

 

I don't give a rip what he did with Monica, I don't even care that he lied to us about it, all politicians lie to save their own ass.

 

But when he raised that right hand and swore that he would tell the truth, THE WHOLE TRUTH, and he LIED UNDER OATH, ****THAT**** is what I have a problem with the President of the United States doing. It's a bald face slap to everything our country stands for.

 

If he would have lied and then under oath said, yea, I was wrong, he gets off a lot easier in my book.

 

Nothing else in the whole thing matters except perjuring himself in court.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

I think the issue for the most part is the fact that he was doing all this with an intern in the oval office.  Outside the White House, on his own free time maybe it wouldn't have been such a big deal (I say maybe because some people would have probably been just as enthusiastic).  But in the oval office, while he was on the job; compare it to your own lives.  If you got caught doing it at work and then lied about it, wouldn't you get fired?

Exactly. If Bill Clinton was just another schmuck living on main street I really wouldnt give 2 s***s if he cheated on his wife, let his wife and family deal with it. But he was supposed to be a leader in his job and leaders set good examples for their people to follow. That's my whole point here.

[doubleM23]

Regardless, the biggest sin of the whole Clinton Affair was the complete and utter waste of millions of tax dollars for a personal vendetta.

 

Anyone who is looking up at politicians to be their role models is obviously detached from reality as is, but I'll take a bunch of lying, sex addicts who at least spend public funds in the interests of the public, over a bunch of God-fearing, perfect gentlemen who use public money to run their own witch hunts.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Regardless, the biggest sin of the whole Clinton Affair was the complete and utter waste of millions of tax dollars for a personal vendetta.

 

Anyone who is looking up at politicians to be their role models is obviously detached from reality as is, but I'll take a bunch of lying, sex addicts who at least spend public funds in the interests of the public, over a bunch of God-fearing, perfect gentlemen who use public money to run their own witch hunts.

Bill Clinton wasnt impeached for cheating on his wife, he was impeached for lying about it, you know, perjury. As I recall that's a felony and a very impeachable offense. But he's a liberal Democrat so I guess he gets a pass with most people around here.

[Wong & Owens]

Exactly.  If Bill Clinton was just another schmuck living on main street I really wouldnt give 2 s***s if he cheated on his wife, let his wife and family deal with it.  But he was supposed to be a leader in his job and leaders set good examples for their people to follow.  That's my whole point here.

Are you saying that by comparison, George W. (the cokehead and drunk) sets a good example for the people of the USA?

[Wong & Owens]

Bill Clinton wasnt impeached for cheating on his wife, he was impeached for lying about it, you know, perjury.  As I recall that's a felony and a very impeachable offense.  But he's a liberal Democrat so I guess he gets a pass with most people around here.

Any guy in America would lie at first when asked if he cheated on his wife. I don't care if he's the President. he's still human. The fact that he was cheating on his wife should never have been a court matter anyways--except maybe divorce court.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Are you saying that by comparison, George W. (the cokehead and drunk) sets a good example for the people of the USA?

He's not a cokehead. Maybe you should stop making wild aspersions that you cannot prove. Also he gave up drinking years ago too.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Any guy in America would lie at first when asked if he cheated on his wife.  I don't care if he's the President. he's still human.  The fact that he was cheating on his wife should never have been a court matter anyways--except maybe divorce court.

Oh, he's still human. I guess that makes it ok to lie under oath then huh? Was Nixon "only human" too for lying to save his own neck?

[Wong & Owens]

He's not a cokehead. Maybe you should stop making wild aspersions that you cannot prove.  Also he gave up drinking years ago too.

OK, then Clinton gave up adultery years ago too. That make it better?

 

You're right, I can't prove he did cocaine, but this is enough on it's own:

 

 

Convicted of Drunk Driving, and Lied to Cover It Up

George Bush now admits that he was convicted of drunk driving. On September 4, 1976, a state trooper saw Bush's car swerve onto the shoulder, then back onto the road. [The Bush camp spin that he was driving too slowly is simply a lie.] Bush failed a road sobriety test and blew a .10 blood alcohol, plead guilty, and was fined and had his driver's license suspended. His spokesman says that he had drunk "several beers" at a local bar before the arrest. Bush was 30 at the time. He now says that he stopped drinking when he turned 40 because it was a problem.

 

More troubling, Bush lied in denying such an arrest, and still won't take responsibility for his actions. His first reaction was to blame Democrats and Fox News -- the only openly conservative TV network -- for reporting the story. "Why [was this reported] now, four days before the election? I've got my suspicions." He refused to say what his suspicions are, though. Bush admits covering up the story, but seems to think he has no responsibility for the failure of his cover up.

 

In fact, just like Clinton with Monica Lewinsky, Bush has brazenly and repeatedly lied to cover up and minimize this arrest.

 

1. Bush Lied at his Press Conference, 11/3/2000

Bush said he paid a fine on the spot and never went to court. That is clearly a lie, as you can see on this court document showing his court hearing a month later. In fact, it was a man also in court for DUI the same day who revealed Bush' arrest. Here is exactly what Bush said in his press conference:

Bush: "I told the guy I had been drinking and what do I need to do? And he said, "Here's the fine." I paid the fine and did my duty...."

Reporter: "Governor, was there any legal proceeding of any kind? Or did you just -- "

Bush: "No. I pled -- you know, I said I was wrong and I ..." Reporter: "In court? "

Bush: No, there was no court. I went to the police station. I said, "I'm wrong."

 

2. Bush Lied in Court, 1978

 

Bush got a court hearing to get his driving suspension lifted early, even though he had not completed a required driver rehabilitation course. He told the hearings officer that he drank only once a month, and just had "an occasional beer." The officer granted his request. But Bush continued drinking for 8 years after that date and has said publicly that he drank too much and had a drinking problem during that time. Presumably Bush was under oath during the hearing, though we haven't been able to pin down that detail. The Bush campaign refuses to comment on this contradiction.

3. Bush Lied To "The Dallas Morning News", 1998

 

"Just after the governor's reelection in 1998, [Dallas Morning News reporter Wayne] Slater pressed Bush about whether he had ever been arrested. 'He said, 'After 1968? No.'" Dallas Morning News, 11/03/2000 [before 1968, Bush was arrested for theft and vandalism in college.]

 

4. Bush Lied On 'Meet The Press', 11/21/99

 

Tim Russert: "If someone came to you and said, 'Governor, I'm sorry, I'm going to go public with some information.' What do you do?"

Bush: "If someone was willing to go public with information that was damaging, you'd have heard about it by now. You've had heard about it now. My background has been scrutinized by all kinds of reporters. Tim, we can talk about this all morning."

 

5. Bush Lied to CBS, 1999.

 

"Bush has often acknowledged past mistakes, but CBS News Correspondent Lee Cowan reports that in a 1999 interview with CBS station WBZ in Boston, he denied there was any so-called smoking gun." CBS TV news

Bush also evaded countless questions and gave Clintonesque half-truths. For example, while struggling with how to answer charges of drug abuse, he said that he would have been able to pass FBI background checks during his father's administration. But those checks include the question "Have you ever been arrested for any crime?" So either he was directly lying, or he has some Slick explanation like "I could have explained the circumstances of the arrest and still passed the FBI check."

 

In another evasion, Bush decided to serve jury duty in 1996, during his first year as governor. On his questionairre, he simply left blank the questions about prior arrests and trials. Then he found himself on a trial for drunk driving, where every juror is eventually asked about prior convictions for drunk driving. The night before the trial, Bush's lawyer asked the defense attorney to dismiss him, because "it would be improper for a governor to sit on a criminal case in which he could later be asked to grant clemency." It's a silly argument, because that problem exists with any criminal trial and Bush had already decided to serve on a jury, but the defense attorney obliged and excused him before direct questioning of jurors began.

 

Bush now justifies covering up his arrest "to be a good role model for his daughters." How does he figure that? Lying to cover up your crimes is not what I call being a good role model. Taking responsibility for your actions, admitting fault honestly and warning people of the consequences you suffered, THAT would be a good example. But Bush prefers the Clinton route of bald-faced lying, then blaming your enemies and the press when you get caught.

 

Bush is now the first person to be elected president after being convicted of a crime.

 

Bush had several other drunken incidents, as well. In December, 1972, Bush challenged his dad (the ex-president) to a fist fight, during an argument about Bush's drunk driving. He had taken his little brother out drinking, and ran over a neighbor's garbage cans on the way home. Bush's atypical public service job, working with inner city Houston kids, appears to have been an unofficial community service stint set up by Bush, Sr. Apparently the governor didn't learn his lesson, because his drunk driving conviction occured almost four years later.

 

In another incident, he started screaming obscenities at a Wall Street Journal reporter, just because that reporter predicted that Bush's father would not be the 1988 Republican nominee. The reporter obviously was wrong, but a drunken Bush Jr. walked up to him at a restaurant and started yelling "You f***ing son of a b****. I won't forget what you said and you're going to pay a price for it."

 

In fact, Bush' running mate Dick Cheney now admits he had two drunk driving offenses in 1962 and 1963, giving the Bush -- Cheney ticket a new world record of 3 DUI's on one ticket. No wonder they seem so relaxed.

 

The conviction is bad enough, but the real question is, what other revelations are going to come later, about his drug use (which he won't deny), failing to show up for a year of his National Guard service, or sexual escapades in his swinging single days?

 

There is evidence that Bush has more to hide involving his Texas driving record. Soon after he became governor, he had a new driver's license issued with the unusual ID number of "000000005", an action that destroyed the records of his previous license. His staff could only say, weakly, that this was done for "security reasons" but there is no record of any previous Texas governor having done so. Now we have at least of hint of why Bush wanted his records obscured, and a dark foreboding that more might be lurking, still covered up.