Clinton returns to normal

[Lynn7]

Clinton launches withering attack on Bush on Iraq, Katrina, budget Sun Sep 18, 4:03 PM ET



WASHINGTON (AFP) - Former US president Bill Clinton sharply criticised George W. Bush for the Iraq War and the handling of Hurricane Katrina, and voiced alarm at the swelling US budget deficit.


Breaking with tradition under which US presidents mute criticisms of their successors, Clinton said the Bush administration had decided to invade Iraq "virtually alone and before UN inspections were completed, with no real urgency, no evidence that there were weapons of mass destruction."

The Iraq war diverted US attention from the war on terrorism "and undermined the support that we might have had," Bush said in an interview with an ABC's "This Week" programme.

Clinton said there had been a "heroic but so far unsuccessful" effort to put together an constitution that would be universally supported in Iraq.

The US strategy of trying to develop the Iraqi military and police so that they can cope without US support "I think is the best strategy. The problem is we may not have, in the short run, enough troops to do that," said Clinton.

On Hurricane Katrina, Clinton faulted the authorities' failure to evacuate New Orleans ahead of the storm's strike on August 29.

People with cars were able to heed the evacuation order, but many of those who were poor, disabled or elderly were left behind.

"If we really wanted to do it right, we would have had lots of buses lined up to take them out," Clinton.

He agreed that some responsibility for this lay with the local and state authorities, but pointed the finger, without naming him, at the former director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

FEMA boss Michael Brown quit in response to criticism of his handling of the Katrina disaster. He was viewed as a political appointee with no experience of disaster management or dealing with government officials.

"When James Lee Witt ran FEMA, because he had been both a local official and a federal official, he was always there early, and we always thought about that," Clinton said, referring to FEMA's head during his 1993-2001 presidency.

"But both of us came out of environments with a disproportionate number of poor people."

On the US budget, Clinton warned that the federal deficit may be coming untenable, driven by foreign wars, the post-hurricane recovery programme and tax cuts that benefitted just the richest one percent of the US population, himself included.

"What Americans need to understand is that ... every single day of the year, our government goes into the market and borrows money from other countries to finance Iraq, Afghanistan, Katrina, and our tax cuts," he said.

"We have never done this before. Never in the history of our republic have we ever financed a conflict, military conflict, by borrowing money from somewhere else."

Clinton added: "We depend on Japan, China, the United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, and Korea primarily to basically loan us money every day of the year to cover my tax cut and these conflicts and Katrina. I don't think it makes any sense."

__________________________________________________ __-

President Bush, being the nice Christian man that he is, reached back for Clinton and helped elevate him from the lowly position is history he had. Clinton had left office under the cloud of inappropraite pardons and many questionable things that he did yet Bush was gracious enought to always find good things to say about him and enlisted him to work next to his father during the tsunami aftermath and now Katerina.

I did not agree with Bush rehabing this guy. The way he treated women was reprehensible and there were all those divisive speeches he gave that divided the county. Bush's mother was even calling Clinton son at one point. Well, now they know who he is. He is a real creep. As if bush does not have enough bashers Clinton has to jump on board.Fro what purpose except to say that he would've handled everything better- yeah right!

He does not even really support his own wife. When they speak of her becoming president he damns her with faint praise.

In all my life I can hardly think of anyone I have disliked more than Clinton and that is not as a president but as a person. He is narcissistic, divisive and sociopathic but of course that is just my very own opinion.But I am glad that he has revealed again who he really is so that history will not forget.

[MacReady]

Originally posted by Lynn7
President Bush, being the nice Christian man that he is, reached back for Clinton and helped elevate him from the lowly position is history he had. Clinton had left office under the cloud of inappropraite pardons and many questionable things that he did yet Bush was gracious enought to always find good things to say about him and enlisted him to work next to his father during the tsunami aftermath and now Katerina.

I did not agree with Bush rehabing this guy. The way he treated women was reprehensible and there were all those divisive speeches he gave that divided the county. Bush's mother was even calling Clinton son at one point. Well, now they know who he is. He is a real creep. As if bush does not have enough bashers Clinton has to jump on board.Fro what purpose except to say that he would've handled everything better- yeah right!

He does not even really support his own wife. When they speak of her becoming president he damns her with faint praise.

In all my life I can hardly think of anyone I have disliked more than Clinton and that is not as a president but as a person. He is narcissistic, divisive and sociopathic but of course that is just my very own opinion.But I am glad that he has revealed again who he really is so that history will not forget.

Good. It's too bad Bush will be remembered as the asshole the world hated (and judging by the looks of it, he might pull off a Gorbachev by the end of his reign of terror).

Now let's hope he can end his legacy on a high note:

http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/usa/r-budd-dwyer/199799.1.jpg

[Thrizzle]

Clinton is right.
Clinton has it all right.

Our debt is mainly foreign, which means that in the long run we'll have money pouring out of our country and into others (if it were debt held from within, it would just get re-circulated). This has never happened before on such a large scale, and its very, very dangerous.

*Sigh* I wish Clinton were still president.

[outsyder]

And at the end of the day, Bush will still have been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize, if you can believe it.

[TheDeadWalk]

Lynn, weren't you also suggesting that busses should have been lined up to evac people?


:eek:

And what is this "Damns her with faint praise". Also the treating of women is a good one, too. I mean it's not like the women weren't demoralizing themselves when they got down on their knees.

I agree with Macready. I would rather be remembered for those things that Clinton did(a lot of which I disagreed with), than to be the asshole the rest of the world hates, like George W. Bush.

[MacReady]

Originally posted by outsyder
And at the end of the day, Bush will still have been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize, if you can believe it.

You didn't get that from this newsource, did you? (http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1035353.htm)

[outsyder]

Originally posted by MacReady
You didn't get that from this newsource, did you? (http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1035353.htm)


Why?


And I remember it being for a 2002 one, if I recall correctly.

[MacReady]

Originally posted by outsyder
Why?


And I remember it being for a 2002 one, if I recall correctly.

Because the source is a parody.

Why on earth would anybody ever nominate Bush? I mean, I know this was before the war and all but I don't see how he's healed any wounds or anything.

[outsyder]

Originally posted by MacReady
Because the source is a parody.

Why on earth would anybody ever nominate Bush? I mean, I know this was before the war and all but I don't see how he's healed any wounds or anything.


Maybe kicking the Taliban out of Afghanistan?

I don't know.

[someguy]

Originally posted by MacReady
Why on earth would anybody ever nominate Bush? I mean, I know this was before the war and all but I don't see how he's healed any wounds or anything.

Because he's a stand up guy who takes criticism and always takes insults well!

YOU SEE, HE CAN BE THE SHITTIEST PRESIDENT EVER AND DO A TERRIBLE FUCKING JOB BUT IF HE'S NICE ABOUT IT I WILL LIKE HIM

oh caps lock, how i love your raged look

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by outsyder
Maybe kicking the Taliban out of Afghanistan?

I don't know.


Yeah, after he kicked all the Taliban out of Afghanistan, he really got our hopes up that he would use his super powers to stop Katrina. Personally, I was waging on him using his super breath, and blowing it into Mexico where we could use the displaced population to strengthen our economy. Unfortunately, he was at his Ranch of Solitude that weekend.

http://www.suprmchaos.com/0408-md-superbush.gif



(ps - "Superbush" yeilds some pretty hot image results!)

[Lynn7]

Originally posted by TheDeadWalk
[B
And what is this "Damns her with faint praise". Also the treating of women is a good one, too. I mean it's not like the women weren't demoralizing themselves when they got down on their knees.

[/B]

Well, there were a lot of women who did not get down on their knees for that fool like Jones and Willey. but at least he had the sexual satisfaction of grinding their reputations to shreds.

It's all about character- Clinton's character is pathetic. Who was the comedian who said that he was at a dinner and sat next to Clinton and he was amazed at how much Clinton knew about so many things but when ti came time for this guy to share some of his knowledge, Clinton was disinterested and didn't pay attention.(This was from a Clinto supporter) Clinton does not discuss, he likes to talk AT people. You can have all the brains in the world but if you don't listen and you dont form connections with people, what is it all for?

When all the dust settles, Clinton will go down in history as one of our lowest presidents who didnt accomplish much of anything exceot to make himself rich and that he had to resort to getting BJS from a 21 year old intern- couldn't he have betrayed his wife and daughter with someone who was more mature? And even though LEwisnski was a willing participant, she even says that her life has been negatively affected- her name has become a euphamism for the BJ-thanks to Bill!

[electriclite]

Originally posted by outsyder
And at the end of the day, Bush will still have been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize, if you can believe it.


And after that you realize that anyone can be nominated for a Nobel Prize, winning one is whole other story.

[electriclite]

Originally posted by Lynn7
Well, there were a lot of women who did not get down on their knees for that fool like Jones and Willey. but at least he had the sexual satisfaction of grinding their reputations to shreds.

It's all about character- Clinton's character is pathetic. Who was the comedian who said that he was at a dinner and sat next to Clinton and he was amazed at how much Clinton knew about so many things but when ti came time for this guy to share some of his knowledge, Clinton was disinterested and didn't pay attention.(This was from a Clinto supporter) Clinton does not discuss, he likes to talk AT people. You can have all the brains in the world but if you don't listen and you dont form connections with people, what is it all for?

When all the dust settles, Clinton will go down in history as one of our lowest presidents who didnt accomplish much of anything exceot to make himself rich and that he had to resort to getting BJS from a 21 year old intern- couldn't he have betrayed his wife and daughter with someone who was more mature? And even though LEwisnski was a willing participant, she even says that her life has been negatively affected- her name has become a euphamism for the BJ-thanks to Bill!


Oh come on! Trying to denounce tha actions of one politician over another is just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Clinton got rich? Name me a politician in the exceutive branch who hasn't ? After the end of this administration I'm sure Dick Cheney, Condi Rice, Donald Rumsfeld, etc will be what? On the welfare line? Little bit of info for ya: this is the richest adminstration in the history of the US. I'm ot saying that's bad thing, you apparently are.

Personally, I feel that the pictures from Abu Ghraib are right on par with with the Starr Report. I've gotten JUST AS MUCH SEX FROM BOTH.
And as far as history goes I feel they're both pretty much on par with each other. The Jesus fan club, and the Republicans with axes to grind will always knock Clinton for the bj's and pretty much the rest of world will remember how 9/11 turned one Texan into a psycho cowboy.

And btw, I'm sure this country will forget this in the next 30 years, but NO MORE PRESIDENTS FROM TEXAS. They tend to show a presidential style on par with a bad westerns. I give Bush credit for one thing, at least he didn't flash his dick to his cabinet.

And this isn't a "defense of Clinton", he fucked up his legacy on his own, plain and simple. He could have ended his presidency on a pretty damn decent note, but the man had a problem. like some men do: He was born to undo himself. And he could have spared himself the full spectacle of the whole scandal by just admitting right off the bat that he had an affair. But he didn't cause he thought he could get past it, he thought he could be slick.

Bush, has almost the same problem, except he thinks he's got some sort of endless creditline from God and/or the public ( the public that agrees with him) that gives him free reign to do whatever the hell he wants. Screw whatever real experts say. And the man has done something that many presidents have complained about the presidency: isolated himself on purpose. In fact I do recall you complaining about him not addressing the public more often. Well that's why. Now before you make the argument for him, let me remind you, there is a fine line between going with a strong internal vision and being Dr. Strangelove locked in the war room. I'm not saying he's the latter, hurricane Katrina has actually forced him (and the righteously pissed public, i.e. 40% approval rating) to realize things ain't rosy.

[The Postmaster General]

I think Bush is a better politician than Clinton - When Bush gets the hard questions he goes psycho or plays dumb. More people can relate to that.

Clinton -- "What's the definition of 'it'" and "I didn't inhale" -- He went into lawyer mode, and very few can relate to that. He was being slick - exactly. IMO, it was kind of cute, and it's cute when Bush does it too. However, at the end of the day, Bush wins out because he speaks to more people. Just look at what is said by his supporters.

[Thrizzle]

Originally posted by Lynn7
[B]It's all about character- Clinton's character is pathetic. Who was the comedian who said that he was at a dinner and sat next to Clinton and he was amazed at how much Clinton knew about so many things but when ti came time for this guy to share some of his knowledge, Clinton was disinterested and didn't pay attention.(This was from a Clinto supporter) Clinton does not discuss, he likes to talk AT people. You can have all the brains in the world but if you don't listen and you dont form connections with people, what is it all for?

I saw the same thing and thats not what i got out of it at all. I thought he was saying that Clinton was extremely knowledgeable in every subject, and it made what he had to say so insignificant by comparison(it was what he thought of his comments, not what Clinton thought).


And even though LEwisnski was a willing participant, she even says that her life has been negatively affected- her name has become a euphamism for the BJ-thanks to Bill!

Technically its because of the Republican party.

[TheDeadWalk]

Originally posted by Lynn7
Well, there were a lot of women who did not get down on their knees for that fool like Jones and Willey.

It's all about character- Clinton's character is pathetic. You can have all the brains in the world but if you don't listen and you dont form connections with people, what is it all for?

When all the dust settles, Clinton will go down in history as one of our lowest presidents who didnt accomplish much of anything exceot to make himself rich and that he had to resort to getting BJS from a 21 year old intern- couldn't he have betrayed his wife and daughter with someone who was more mature? And even though LEwisnski was a willing participant, she even says that her life has been negatively affected- her name has become a euphamism for the BJ-thanks to Bill!

I don't understand your first comment. Are you putting Paula Jones in the positive light? THE Paula Jones who reaped the benefits of a quasi-celeb status from the scandal and even posed in Penthouse magazine?

Clinton's character is the same as Bush's. The same as Kerry's, and even the same as Dick Cheney's. When you're asked a straight question, you give a roundabout answer on things and move the topic along. That's what ANY good politician does. If you start to show opinion and give straight answers, you either open yourself up to failure or a display of ignorance, or if it's an election year, you can even lose voters by saying your favorite letter in the alphabet is "A".

Clinton wouldn't even give a straightforward answer about who he thought was going to win the superbowl. "Y'know, I've been hearing things about the Philadelphia defense and how it's improved. But if it hasn't then things could really be on the upside for the Patriots." (paraphrase pre-kickoff for last year's superbowl)

Look at George W. Bush in any interview where he's asked about WMD's in Iraq. He changes the topic to about how we went in there because Saddam was a 'bad man' thing. He says all of this in a roundabout way to change focus on the topic at hand and to give a shady answer. Same as Clinton.

Clinton won't go down in history all that bad, he's definately not now. There have been Presidents much worse than him. Overall, I think he will be very insignificant, and twenty years from now his sex scandal will just be one multiple choice question on a college history exam.

I love how you say 'couldn't Clinton cheat on his wife with someone more mature?' (paraphrase) That's kind of pointless and very irrelevant to the fact that he was a president who was busted on company time cheating on his wife.

Lewinsky's life was negatively affected, thanks to BILL?!?!?! Pardon?! How can it be 'thanks to Bill'?! As stated by me, and retorted in your first paragraph, we basically got the gist that it took two to tango. And I'm not sticking up for the fiasco or Bill by this, but she's just as bad and if her life has been ruined, it's her fault as much as it is his. And like Paula Jones, it was all fine and dandy when she wanted to capitalize off of her quasi-celebrity status by making handbags, appearing on the Tom Green show, or even that wonderful interview with whats-her-British-face on ABC.

But now that the fad's been blown over and she's just remembered for being a cheap trick, it's time to cry rivers and blame Bill. Excuse me while I go find the smallest violin in the world and play it for Ms. Monica Lewinsky.

[The Postmaster General]

I love how you say 'couldn't Clinton cheat on his wife with someone more mature?' (paraphrase) That's kind of pointless and very irrelevant to the fact that he was a president who was busted on company time cheating on his wife.


I especially love hatred toward Clinton for disgracing Lewinsky, but not being able to put the woman's name in a sentance without throwing in a roundabout put down. i

[Lynn7]

Originally posted by Thrizzle
I saw the same thing and thats not what i got out of it at all. I thought he was saying that Clinton was extremely knowledgeable in every subject, and it made what he had to say so insignificant by comparison(it was what he thought of his comments, not what Clinton thought).



Technically its because of the Republican party.

Who was the comedian- I just cna't remember? Or was it an actor? Anyway, you are right that the person was humble saying he didn't know very much but that at one point the talk turned to somehting he knew about and and when he went to share it Clinton was not interested in hearing what he had to say. He again was humble saying why would Clinton want to hear it anyway.But in my opinion, a great man will humble himself to take the time to make others feel good and that includes letting them talk in conversations and then listen to them.

[Lynn7]

Originally posted by TheDeadWalk
I don't understand your first comment. Are you putting Paula Jones in the positive light? THE Paula Jones who reaped the benefits of a quasi-celeb status from the scandal and even posed in Penthouse magazine?




Paula Jones was dragged into allof this.She was an innocent woman who was summoned by Clinton to go see him upstairswhere Clinton asked her for a Lewinski :D The whole reason Clinton wanted Monica to lie so badly is becasue if she said that she was servicing him it would have made him vulnerable in the Jones case (as it should have!) And then the pressure was on when Monica passed on threats to Tripp that if Tripp didn't lie too her job could be in danger. Clinton is a louse plain and simple. He manipulates others lives to further his own pleasure.and then of course the Kathleen Willey thing where she was at her lowest point and she asked him for a job and he started making out with her, knowing she was in a vulnerable position. And the next day her husband committed suicide, emphasizing how bad their situation really was.

If Jones ended up posing for Penthouse it just shows how low he brought her from what she was. she figured that she had been dragged through the mud so she might as well capitalize on the offer of money and use it for her kids college. I disagree with her and think she only ruined herself but I blame Billy for all the dirt he has brougjht to so many lives.

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by Lynn7
If Jones ended up posing for Penthouse it just shows how low he brought her from what she was. she figured that she had been dragged through the mud so she might as well capitalize on the offer of money and use it for her kids college.


Most people would just write a book, or go on talk shows.

It sounds to me like she's not really a "thinking person."

Rape victims, war veterns, terrorist victims, people who were kidnapped, battered... and your excuse for her is that Clinton's victimization dragged her down enough that she HAD to pose in Penthouse?

This is good; I'm writting this down.

[The Heart Collector]

I just find it funny that Lynn is saying Clinton's character is pathetic, considering George W Bush is a loser ex-cokehead with not a single honest, hardworking bone in his body.

[EVILxxx]

Bush really has no one to blame but himself for Clinton's comments. He allowed Clinton to head many charities and other functions with his blessing to appear to be more bi-partisan. Clinton simply has no class. Now that Clinton is back in the spotlight he is criticizing the shit out of Bush(an act almost unheard among ex-presidents) and setting up his wife for the new White House seat.

[outsyder]

Originally posted by The Heart Collector
I just find it funny that Lynn is saying Clinton's character is pathetic, considering George W Bush is a loser ex-cokehead with not a single honest, hardworking bone in his body.

Come on, how many presidents WEREN'T coke fiends at one point or another?

[electriclite]

Originally posted by outsyder
Come on, how many presidents WEREN'T coke fiends at one point or another?

Well actually, when you look at the timeline, our presidents are just now catching up to the harder narcotics. Unless of course Woodrow Wilson drank a lot of Coca Cola, then maybe that's an exception. But other than that, if you think about it, as time passes, we'll eventually have a president who did X at some point in his life.


Just a little info for ya to contemplate.

[MacReady]

Originally posted by outsyder
Come on, how many presidents WEREN'T coke fiends at one point or another?

That's not how your political affiliates viewed it when it came to attention that Clinton puffed on a little MJ in college.

[outsyder]

Originally posted by MacReady
That's not how your political affiliates viewed it when it came to attention that Clinton puffed on a little MJ in college.


And just who would my "political affiliates" be?


Just because I am conservative by nature does not mean I'm associated with Republicans. I'm not registered to any one party, nor do I agree with all the policies of any one party. Would one of your affiliates be Stalin? I don't think so.


Frankly, I don't care if he did a little MJ in college. While in Office be would another story though.

[The Postmaster General]

I don't think Clinton's puffing was made as a big of a deal as his "I did no inhale" line.

It was the early 90s, a rap CD called The Chronic was on its way to being the top of the charts. No one cared about that too much.

Clinton, when on The Arsenio Hall Show directly commented on saying "I did not inhale." --- He stood by that too, saying he took a drag, and when it got in his mouth he couldn't draw it into his lungs. He basically admited that he dorked up the smoking circle.

Man, I miss those times. I miss Clinton. There is a big difference between the things he looked foolish for and the things our current president looks foolish for.

[TheDeadWalk]

Originally posted by Lynn7
If Jones ended up posing for Penthouse it just shows how low he brought her from what she was. she figured that she had been dragged through the mud so she might as well capitalize on the offer of money and use it for her kids college. I disagree with her and think she only ruined herself but I blame Billy for all the dirt he has brougjht to so many lives.

I'm going to agree with Bubba on this one... Most people write a book. You can paint Paula Jones as an innocent human being ruined by Bill Clinton all you want, but she hasn't gone through an ounce of terror as some of the rest of our society has, that hasn't done nudie magazines.

I highly doubt that the fat star wars kid is going to get so depressed and ruined from everyone laughing at him that he dives into the realms of gay porn.

It's really weird how many folks in the Conservative realm view sex and usage of non-violent immorality and call it a ruining of lives, and respond with great harshness and crticism. Yet we can have an unnecessary war, reaping with thousands of dead over some bad intelligence, and have the public at large believing it is for our own safety.

So murder in the name of bad intelligence = for our own good

Lewinskies in the oval office = Awful, tragic, life ruining consequences.

And don't get me wrong, I am TOTALLY against what Clinton did with Monica Lewinsky. (We would all be fired if we did what he did in our at work office) But just because he's a man of power doesn't mean that she wasn't just as much at fault, and accepting to any and all benefits of said courses of action. Same with Paula Jones, I wouldn't buy your innocent person that was tarnished by Slick Willy speech for a wooden nickel.

[Thrizzle]

Originally posted by EVILxxx
Now that Clinton is back in the spotlight he is criticizing the shit out of Bush(an act almost unheard among ex-presidents) and setting up his wife for the new White House seat.

Bush Sr. criticized Clinton on more than several occasions.

[outsyder]

Originally posted by Thrizzle
Bush Sr. criticized Clinton on more than several occasions.


But now they're best buddies, so it doesn't count.;)

[EVILxxx]

Originally posted by Thrizzle
Bush Sr. criticized Clinton on more than several occasions.

Then I don't think that was appropriate either. It is a sign of respect typically that ex-presidents keep there mouth shut when they leave office. One, because it is common courtesy and two all presidents fuck up major every now and again, and every mistake is easy to criticize in hindsite.

[MacReady]

Originally posted by outsyder
And just who would my "political affiliates" be?


Just because I am conservative by nature does not mean I'm associated with Republicans. I'm not registered to any one party, nor do I agree with all the policies of any one party. Would one of your affiliates be Stalin? I don't think so.


Frankly, I don't care if he did a little MJ in college. While in Office be would another story though.

I meant other conservatives, not republicans.

And I ain't a communist, just a liberal. Don't insuniate that I'm a Stalinist.

I shuoldn't have said "affiliates", but I was reminded of Coulter and other people who made a big deal about him taking that stuff in college. Isn't a bit hypocritical that these people now support a man who did a harder drug when he was younger.

[outsyder]

Originally posted by MacReady
I meant other conservatives, not republicans.

And I ain't a communist, just a liberal. Don't insuniate that I'm a Stalinist.

I shuoldn't have said "affiliates", but I was reminded of Coulter and other people who made a big deal about him taking that stuff in college. Isn't a bit hypocritical that these people now support a man who did a harder drug when he was younger.


My apologies for the communist remark, but I honestly remember you mentioning that you were at one point. Either that or I was intoxicated.

[JohnTheHenchman]

Who honestly cares what drug someone did 40 years ago?

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
Who honestly cares what drug someone did 40 years ago?


Yeah, a rhetorical question. Good point.

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by outsyder
But now they're best buddies, so it doesn't count.;)


I don't know about that. I'm pretty sure they are aliens posing as the ex-presidents, and they are always seen together because they are transfering protein strands.


I gotta stop watching TV, man....

[JohnTheHenchman]

I mean granted, republicans are gonna get on a democrat for it and vice versa.

All it is is mudslinging. Anyone who says "Well clinton got shit for it so bush should too" just isn't acting correctly. It's one of many reasons why both sides are frigging stupid.

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
All it is is mudslinging. Anyone who says "Well clinton got shit for it so bush should too" just isn't acting correctly. It's one of many reasons why both sides are frigging stupid.


Agreed - once again.

It drives me batty to see Clinton getting shit for dragging Lewinsky through the mud, then look at how Lewinsky is refered to by these same people.

And yeah - I do think Bush doing cocaine is a bit 'bigger a deal' than Clinton smoking reefer -- but that's just because I know the difference. To most people drugs are drugs and they are coming from the viewpoint. So, throw out the entire criticism -- Hey, people who like to party have a good shot a being president. If that's a big deal, we should be more focused on why they are getting voted into power than focusing on who shot up what while someone was doing a line with a joint behind their ear.



I mean to comment on this earlier, and this is purely off-topic, but electriclite mentioned that it was feasable to one day have a president who did ecstacy.

What I think about more, and what actually freaks me out, is imagining 80 year olds wearing stylized clothes and carrying glow sticks around. Weird, I tell ya' -- At the State Fair last month I saw an elderly punk rocker -- no shit - wrinkled as hell, but with a dyed mohawk. Fight the system, gramps! LoL. No offense on the old guy, it was a pretty cool thing to see. You're never too old for personal style.

[MacReady]

Originally posted by outsyder
My apologies for the communist remark, but I honestly remember you mentioning that you were at one point. Either that or I was intoxicated.

Understandable. I'm still rather mixed on communism and awhile ago I was sympathethic towards it but now I've re-thought it and it lost some of it's appeal. I think it might be the best kind of government, but now I too fear what will happen when China becomes all powerful, along with the fact that it can be very lethal and opressive. And it needs to re-shape itself to better accommodate to it's society (socially it should be like The Netherlands).

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
Who honestly cares what drug someone did 40 years ago?

Bubba said "goo point" and he was right.

I (and others) may call him a cocke head, it's more of a name-calling thing. In all honesty it's not like somebody can take that stuff when their young and not be a good president (something Bush isn't, but that's besides the point).

[Lynn7]

Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
Most people would just write a book, or go on talk shows.

It sounds to me like she's not really a "thinking person."

Rape victims, war veterns, terrorist victims, people who were kidnapped, battered... and your excuse for her is that Clinton's victimization dragged her down enough that she HAD to pose in Penthouse?

This is good; I'm writting this down.

Do you know that a lot of women who work inthe sex industry have been sexually victimized by men in their lives? It's probably a way that they confront their feelings about sex- they dehumanize is so it can't hurt them.

[Lynn7]

Originally posted by The Heart Collector
I just find it funny that Lynn is saying Clinton's character is pathetic, considering George W Bush is a loser ex-cokehead with not a single honest, hardworking bone in his body.

So are you sayign that if someone used to use drugs they are forever condemned? He obviously does not use them anymore and hasn't for years so it's all behind him. As far as hard working he has had some cushy jobs as a result of his silver spoon but he goes out and chops wood and runs and bikes so I don't think he is afraid of exerting himself.

Now, let's think about Clinton. He used drugs, and just what hardworking jobs has he had? He has been in government all his career except when he has been dabbling in real estate etc. Not too hardworking. Certainly not honest.

[Lynn7]

Originally posted by TheDeadWalk


And don't get me wrong, I am TOTALLY against what Clinton did with Monica Lewinsky. (We would all be fired if we did what he did in our at work office) But just because he's a man of power doesn't mean that she wasn't just as much at fault, and accepting to any and all benefits of said courses of action. Same with Paula Jones, I wouldn't buy your innocent person that was tarnished by Slick Willy speech for a wooden nickel.

I hold a 50 year old to a stronger standard than a 21 year old. And he was in a postion of authority and the ultimate authority. Is it Ok for a 50 year old college profeesor to get Lewinski's from a 21 year old undergrad? I think if it is legal it is certainly unprofessional at the very least and I would fire that guy's butt. It is true that if people engage in sex in their workplace and got caught they would be fired.

[TheDeadWalk]

Originally posted by Lynn7
I hold a 50 year old to a stronger standard than a 21 year old. And he was in a postion of authority and the ultimate authority. Is it Ok for a 50 year old college profeesor to get Lewinski's from a 21 year old undergrad? I think if it is legal it is certainly unprofessional at the very least and I would fire that guy's butt. It is true that if people engage in sex in their workplace and got caught they would be fired.

I hold adults in the same category when it comes to adult responsibilities, regardless of age.

Yes it is ok for a 50 year old professor to get Lewinskies from a 21 year old undergrad unless it violates University policy by making the relationship detrimental to the University.



As far as your porn work by females who have been used and abused, you say the words "A LOT". What is a lot? 60%? 75%? Please do tell, because when you say "A LOT" I'm really thinking "MAJORITY", and would like you to prove this. If you want to say "SOME" then I think we can all agree, because without a doubt there would be "SOME" with the various numbers of people that work in that business. You can even tell the crying story of Linda Lovelace and how she was forced into deep throat, but I still simply would not buy the term "A LOT" with the same wooden nickel in this reference.

EDIT: All adults have decisions they have to face in life. Blaming it on said person of power who asked you for a 'Lewinsky' is a cop out way of saying that you are just a mindless zombie who isn't in control of your own life. (and therefore should be sterilized)

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by Lynn7
Do you know that a lot of women who work inthe sex industry have been sexually victimized by men in their lives? It's probably a way that they confront their feelings about sex- they dehumanize is so it can't hurt them.


Oh, you read Jenna Jameson's book too?

Paula Jones was pretty old when this happened, the generalization you are talking about deals with child abuse cases, where the children dissociate sex with personal intimacy, thereby developing a tendancy toward 'deviant' sexual behavior.

Adults, when victimized sexually, most commonly develop an aversion toward sex, and often become withdrawn from others. This is where the term "secondary victims", in part, stems from. It would be far from the statistical norm for an adult to feel abused using sex, then at such a stage in their life to turn toward the adult industry as a way to cope.

The same thing happens with adults with most trauma situations, they become averted, where children typically adapt to traumatic experiences. This is why children living in abuse houses are usually unaware they are being abused, then when they learn more about social norms, they begin to feel stigmitized, and some tend to bottle it up and act out in other ways, some will embrace it as who they are and allow it to intigrate into their personality.

Let's be fair though. I could talk post-trauma all day, and it wouldn't make a difference.

Let just stop trying to look at it so hard, and making it into things it's not --- Let's look at it straight up:

How many women that Clinton fooled around with ended up in the sex industry?

Jenna Jameson wrote a book saying she was abused by her father on a daily basis. Paula Jones got flashed by a prominent politician she admired. There's a bit of a difference, without even getting into year 2 psychology.

[Lynn7]

Originally posted by TheDeadWalk
I hold adults in the same category when it comes to adult responsibilities, regardless of age.

Yes it is ok for a 50 year old professor to get Lewinskies from a 21 year old undergrad unless it violates University policy by making the relationship detrimental to the University.



As far as your porn work by females who have been used and abused, you say the words "A LOT". What is a lot? 60%? 75%? Please do tell, because when you say "A LOT" I'm really thinking "MAJORITY", and would like you to prove this. If you want to say "SOME" then I think we can all agree, because without a doubt there would be "SOME" with the various numbers of people that work in that business. You can even tell the crying story of Linda Lovelace and how she was forced into deep throat, but I still simply would not buy the term "A LOT" with the same wooden nickel in this reference.

EDIT: All adults have decisions they have to face in life. Blaming it on said person of power who asked you for a 'Lewinsky' is a cop out way of saying that you are just a mindless zombie who isn't in control of your own life. (and therefore should be sterilized)

Well speaking from personal experience, at 21 years old I was very vulnerable because I didn't have a lot of experience making my own decisions.At that age many kids are just getting out of college and striking out on their own for the first time. This age group is easily led by people who have a lot more experience. I know Monica is the one who came on to Bill but he shouldhave been able to practice restraint. If you want to say that they had equal responsiblbity then that is technically true but morally, I htink it is wrong. But to be fair, I guess Clinton is no less a person than many of the rock stars who sleep with teens who worship them and yet iwould never want one of these rock stars to be in a postiton of supreme authority.Character does count in power and that is what Bill Clinton lacks.

As far as when I say " a lot" I don't mean a majority- I would probably say a majority. As I said int he porn thread, I have never done any personal research on the porn industry- I watch documentaries and I read a lot of magazines etc but I don't memorize statistics. Im more into general conversations. I'm more jack of all trades master of none ;)

[TheDeadWalk]

Originally posted by Lynn7
Well speaking from personal experience, at 21 years old I was very vulnerable because I didn't have a lot of experience making my own decisions.At that age many kids are just getting out of college and striking out on their own for the first time. This age group is easily led by people who have a lot more experience. I know Monica is the one who came on to Bill but he shouldhave been able to practice restraint. If you want to say that they had equal responsiblbity then that is technically true but morally, I htink it is wrong. But to be fair, I guess Clinton is no less a person than many of the rock stars who sleep with teens who worship them and yet iwould never want one of these rock stars to be in a postiton of supreme authority.Character does count in power and that is what Bill Clinton lacks.

As far as when I say " a lot" I don't mean a majority- I would probably say a majority. As I said int he porn thread, I have never done any personal research on the porn industry- I watch documentaries and I read a lot of magazines etc but I don't memorize statistics. Im more into general conversations. I'm more jack of all trades master of none ;)

What were you doing at the age of 21? Were you in college at this time, or just getting out? If so, did you have a job at McDonalds, Dunkin Donuts, or maybe doing some assembly line work at a local factory? Or if it was your nursing degree, did you get an entry level nursing job or something? You don't need to say exactly what you did, it's none of my business. I just want to know if this is true in a roundabout way to help serve my point.

This 20 something intern at the time -- that you compare yourself to at 21 years old... was working as an intern at THE WHITE HOUSE. She was not making mocha lattes behind the counter at Starbucks. She was not an intern at Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe law firm. She was brought into the white house because apparently out of all the interns you could get in America, she was one of the best, brightest, and smartest you could find. Am I wrong for that assumption? Or does George W. have Pimples McGee typing up his memos?

As far as the majority comment... I say this, because when you say "A LOT", I expect some form of representation, because you're making a HUGE accusation on something. You don't have to memorize factoids, but I expect something, maybe google it and see what you come up with. I can say Ive watched a few documentaries myself in the last few years, and therefore that means George W. Bush is a bad president. Right?

[The Postmaster General]

I don't think Paula Jones suffered any damages.

[stefanb]

Originally posted by outsyder
Maybe kicking the Taliban out of Afghanistan?
I don't know.

Iraq debate aside, Afghanistan was a fairly well supported endeavor at the onset. After all, they sheltered Osama, he ran camps, camps trained people, and some of those people caused 9/11. The rest is buried in 4 years of history. That said, I’d like to momentarily debate the statement “kicking the Taliban out of Afghanistan". Let’s recap. The US didn’t really do anything until late October, 2001. So anyone who felt like running and hiding had a good head start. I’m not faulting the Bush administration for that as exhausting the avenues of diplomacy was an arguably necessary step prior to invasion. From there, the Northern Alliance forces were really sort of a badly misused proxy army to supplement an overall lack of US ground forces, and somewhere prior to takeover of the capital, the Taliban actually left Kabul on their own... It wasn’t really an eviction, per se. It was more of a "bail-out" in advance of pending eviction.

Did anyone else notice 4 years have gone by, and they’re still in Afghanistan? They’re not the dominant force in the country, but I would argue they don’t really have to be. Their tactics are fairly simple. First, don’t group together in large numbers, so the resistance can’t suffer heavy losses in any one defeat. Second, make things generally annoying for occupying forces, indefinitely. The government of Hamid Karzai has power and actual control over a relatively small area of the country, and US forces have far from evicted what’s left of the Taliban and its supporters. Given the funds and supplies that enter the country from groups holding an interest in the outcome of said nation, it’s difficult to imagine a scenario where US forces pull out any time, perhaps ever, and the government left in place isn’t toppled by some sort of religious extremist organization, calling itself Taliban or not. I wouldn’t be so quick to put this one in the win column.

-S

[JohnTheHenchman]

I just saw Bill Clinton speak at my school, lol.

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by JohnTheHenchman
I just saw Bill Clinton speak at my school, lol.



Are the rumors true, John?

Did Clinton use mind control to put you into a trance that made you act like a stupid dirty little slut?

A lot of people keep implying that he has this ability, and it sounds far-fetched if you ask me.

[JohnTheHenchman]

He was there to blow smoke up Sen. Jon Corzine's ass (he's running for governor). I had no business even being there but Clinton is a charismatic sonofabitch and I enjoyed him.

I then gave him a blowjob.