Hypocrite Watch

[onmyknees]

Treat yourself to this little gem....Dirty Harry in 2006 when he was minority leader railing against spending and raising the debt ceiling. It's so incredulous that one wouldn't think it's the same guy that just days ago had to be dragged kicking and screaming to accept some modest spending reductions...The same guy that last week made his speech fighting back crocodile tears about the horrors republicans wanted to do by cutting some chump change from the federal budget. ...so what's the difference between now and then? ( besides trillions more in debt) but hey don't take my word for it....listen to him, then then recall his 2006 words as the battle for raising the debt ceiling nears.

Harry Reid ....Budget cutter in 2006.....Big spender in 2011.

YouTube - Harry Reid in '06: Raising debt limit last thing we should do, will weaken country, hurt economy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELkbDdPeL7I)

[Silcc69]

YouTube - Read my lips: no more taxes (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5DZBFbMdjI)

[Faldur]

I'll write a reply just as soon as I finish borrowing the $4,500 million dollars we need to borrow to pay for today's government. Brb! Silcc can you borrow tomorrow's $4,500 million? I have my golf league.

[Ineeda SM]

Why didn't the GOP do something about the debt ceiling when they had control of the congress and Bush in the White House? During the Bush years, the republicans raised the debt ceiling 6 times to allow Bush's illegal Iraq war to continue. Doing so almost doubled our national debt. But it was okay when the republicans did it for an illegal war.

The GOP had 8 fucking years to do the magic they brag sooooo much about. They had total control, and could have passed any economic reform bill they wanted. Instead, they gave us the shit economy we have now. If the GOP had gone against their arrogant Texan cowboy, they could have made this economy great and earned enough respect to keep power for many years. But they chose to make a mistake by kissing Bush's ass and fuck over the country. And they lost respect because of it, and the country elected Obama.

Under Obama polices, our economic recovery has been slow but consistant in the right direction for the first time since Bush fucked it up and ran smiling back to his 40,000 acres of oil wells in Texas. It is a big knife in the backs of the GOP that a young smart black democrat is making things right again, and they didn't. They want Obama's recovery to stop now so they have a better shot at regaining the power that feeds their bank accounts. Talk about your fucking hypocrites.

[TJ347]

The rich will always have the advantage regardless of what Obama or any other leftist leaning politician does, or any politician period for that matter. In fact, those same politicians will ensure it, because they themselves (like Obama) are wealthy. What? You think they're going to cut their own throats? Yeah, right!

On another note, as a black man, I am sick and fucking tired of having Barack Obama identified as black by liberal whites and blacks desperate to claim anyone getting any type of positive recognition as a member of the "club". He is a bi-racial man, and there is a difference. I mean, if a drop fills a bucket then three-fifths is true.

[Ineeda SM]

The rich will always have the advantage regardless of what Obama or any other leftist leaning politician does, or any politician period for that matter. In fact, those same politicians will ensure it, because they themselves (like Obama) are wealthy. What? You think they're going to cut their own throats? Yeah, right!

On another note, as a black man, I am sick and fucking tired of having Barack Obama identified as black by liberal whites and blacks desperate to claim anyone getting any type of positive recognition as a member of the "club". He is a bi-racial man, and there is a difference. I mean, if a drop fills a bucket then three-fifths is true.

Being rich is a state of wealth. How you think of yourself as rich is another story. Yes many dems are very rich millionaires. But they still vote for the poor and middle working class. They are not cutting their throats.

During the Clinton years, Bill Clinton himself was a very rich man and raised taxes on those rich men like himself. Those rich people didn't suffer one tiny little bit. Their lifestyles didn't change in any way, and they all still got much richer. The extra taxes they had to pay was pocket chump change to them. They never missed one penny. That policy is what fixed our economy and gave Bush the best economy this country has ever seen. Bush reversed that policy and gave the rich tax CUTS. Yeah that did us a lot of good huh?

When Clinton was campaigning for Obama, he sarcastically thanked Bush for the big tax cuts for the rich. He said, Bush gave me more money, and it is coming out of the pockets of the rest of you who work hard for a living. If you think that is fair, and the correct thing to do, then vote for McCain. But if you think I can afford to give a little to help you save more, then vote for Obama. It's a simple choice. You do the math.

The rich dems are democrats for a reason. They give a shit about poor and working class people. The Rich GOP owns the big businesses that run the country, so they have a greedy self help agenda. Power and money is their driving force.

[Silcc69]

The rich will always have the advantage regardless of what Obama or any other leftist leaning politician does, or any politician period for that matter. In fact, those same politicians will ensure it, because they themselves (like Obama) are wealthy. What? You think they're going to cut their own throats? Yeah, right!

On another note, as a black man, I am sick and fucking tired of having Barack Obama identified as black by liberal whites and blacks desperate to claim anyone getting any type of positive recognition as a member of the "club". He is a bi-racial man, and there is a difference. I mean, if a drop fills a bucket then three-fifths is true.

Conservative whites say the same damn thing. The guy wasnt even raised by his black father or family he should relate more to whites than black but they don't see it that way. Besides he is way over the one drop rule anyways.

[Faldur]

I'm not going to fall into the useless trap of judging Obama by his skin color. I choose to judge him by the "content of his character", the man's an idiot and unfit to lead our country. Much like the last asshole we had as president. Time we start electing qualified people for our leadership roles.

[onmyknees]

Why didn't the GOP do something about the debt ceiling when they had control of the congress and Bush in the White House? During the Bush years, the republicans raised the debt ceiling 6 times to allow Bush's illegal Iraq war to continue. Doing so almost doubled our national debt. But it was okay when the republicans did it for an illegal war.

The GOP had 8 fucking years to do the magic they brag sooooo much about. They had total control, and could have passed any economic reform bill they wanted. Instead, they gave us the shit economy we have now. If the GOP had gone against their arrogant Texan cowboy, they could have made this economy great and earned enough respect to keep power for many years. But they chose to make a mistake by kissing Bush's ass and fuck over the country. And they lost respect because of it, and the country elected Obama.

Under Obama polices, our economic recovery has been slow but consistant in the right direction for the first time since Bush fucked it up and ran smiling back to his 40,000 acres of oil wells in Texas. It is a big knife in the backs of the GOP that a young smart black democrat is making things right again, and they didn't. They want Obama's recovery to stop now so they have a better shot at regaining the power that feeds their bank accounts. Talk about your fucking hypocrites.


Look.....once again I disagree strongly with most on here, but respect the fact they're passionate and well read about what they feel... but you're different...you don't fact check yourself and have no self disipline and sound more like you're a college debating back bencer with a wet asshole flapping in the breeze than a person with a life time of expierence. You're hardly worth responding to because you keep repeating the same falsehoods over and over . You can't possibly be trying to convince me...so why keep repeating the same bullshit? You can say the war was illegal, but you make yourself sound like an pinhead. You must be auditioning for the All in the Family role of "Meathead" at your local
theater group and trying your dumb ass act out on us.


So let me once again educate you , as tedious as that has become....

For most of the Bush Presidency the economy was doing rather well.

1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon
3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%
4) The DOW JONES hit a record high--14,000
5) Americans were buying new cars, taking cruises, vacations overseas, living large!


I know because I made lots of money in the stock market, so you don't have a clue what the fuck you're talking about. Then the sub prime crisis which led to a world wide economic recession. Bush was chided regularly by fiscal conservatives all during his second term for spending too much. You were still a sophomore in high school then, so I forgive you for not knowing that. His spending in comparison to Obama's is like a fart compared to a pile of shit...maybe you will understand that analogy. Yes the deficit was a concern then....but it's way past concern now. It's a crisis now. And grow some fucking balls and stop blaming Obama's predecessor. That tune was overplayed a year ago. All the Omnibus and stimulus spending and Obama Care and Keynesian Economic Theory was suppose to pull us out of the Bush mess....but as you say it's been slow. Maybe at this rate by 2025 we'll have only 5% unemployment. At what point does the statue of limitations on Bush run out and Obama's begin ? You've already excused away nearly 2 1/2 years...how much more time do you need...?? The 2012 election will be here before you know it ! LMAO

And as usual you're dead wrong. It's either that or half truths with you....but in this case you're factually wrong. Bush DID NOT have a Republican Congress for 8 years. Look it up...then go stand in the corner for telling more tall tales. Epic Fail...as usual. You're starting to bore me.

[onmyknees]

Hey Ineeda...this pretty much sums up the level of your political discourse...

[Silcc69]

Some people on here try hard as hell to be epic in here.

[Stavros]

If there is an alternative point of view of what went wrong during the Bush Presidency I would suggest the attitude to 'regulation' because it became an issue here in the UK with Blair and Brown preferring 'regulation lite' to the 'heavy hand of government'. During the Bush Presidency, admittedly independent of it, the development of new financial instruments in the markets -for example CDO's -Collateralised Debt Obligations- and Credit Default Swaps (which emerged in the 90s but expanded hugely in the Bush era) deepened and extended debt.

Unless the Treasury in both of our countries are staffed by idiots I don't undersand how someone on their staffs whose brief was to monitor the markets could miss seeing the vast amount of debt that was being amassed -and not just through sub-prime mortgages- and draw the obvious conclusions. It used to be the case that in the UK, the Treasury, the smallest major dept of govt and for that reason often called 'the village' was staffed by the brightest minds -I think the rot set in with Thatcher when people were hired because they suited Mrs T's ideological approach to economic policy; it sank into an abyss with the even worse need in the Blair era for everything to look and sound good on tv regardless of reality.

My point is about the regulation: and it applies to other areas too the most obvious of which is the environment and the Deepwater Horizon catastrophe, partly due to a sloppy attitude to regulation -the laws after all are there for the govt to impose them.

Getting the government off you back is one thing, watching the economy take a hike on Highway 61 is another...

God said to Abraham -kill me a son
Abe said: man you must be puttin' me on
God said no, Abe said what
God said you can do what you want Abe but
Next time you see me coming you better run
Well, Abe said where you want this killin done
God said out on highway 61

[Ineeda SM]

Oh hell, I'm not worried about ONMYKNEES. Everyone here knows he is a troll. Everything he says is bull shit, and hateful for his own personal entertainment. He wouldn't know a fact if it bit him in the ass. His replies prove it and everyone knows it.

A republican telling anyone that they don't check their facts, is ironic, and actually quite amusing. It's one of his favorite lines that always gives us a big laugh.

I like the pic of the kid crying "It's all Bush's Fault". He posted something that is true and we already knew, and he is stupid enough to think he was being clever and hurting me. I love stupidity in people like him who just don't know that they have lost the argument a long time ago.

Once a troll, always a troll. Keep it coming ONMYKNEES. You just keep proving me correct.

[trish]

Republicans aren't hypocrites. Hell no. They're just straight out liars. LOL
(Just for those of you who might not have heard the story: Jon Kyl, a republican, declares on the floor (so that it's read into the Congressional Record which pro-lifer's will quote as fact for the next century) that Planned Parenthood spends 90% of it's budget on abortions. The actual amount Planned Parenthood spends on abortions is 3%. When later confronted with this huge discrepancy, Kyl says his claim "wasn't intended to be a factual statement."

[robertlouis]

Oh hell, I'm not worried about ONMYKNEES.

I like the pic of the kid crying "It's all Bush's Fault". He posted something that is true and we already knew, and he is stupid enough to think he was being clever and hurting me. I love stupidity in people like him who just don't know that they have lost the argument a long time ago.

.


Yep, and anyone with an objective perspective and any sense of history knows that it was the process of financial deregulation that started under Reagan, accelerated under Bush Snr and finally came off the rails under Dubya that essentially fucked the western world's financial consensus.

Blaming Obama for the mess that Bush left behind is like Nazi apologists who blame the Jews for the holocaust.

[yodajazz]

If there is an alternative point of view of what went wrong during the Bush Presidency I would suggest the attitude to 'regulation' because it became an issue here in the UK with Blair and Brown preferring 'regulation lite' to the 'heavy hand of government'. During the Bush Presidency, admittedly independent of it, the development of new financial instruments in the markets -for example CDO's -Collateralised Debt Obligations- and Credit Default Swaps (which emerged in the 90s but expanded hugely in the Bush era) deepened and extended debt.

Unless the Treasury in both of our countries are staffed by idiots I don't undersand how someone on their staffs whose brief was to monitor the markets could miss seeing the vast amount of debt that was being amassed -and not just through sub-prime mortgages- and draw the obvious conclusions. It used to be the case that in the UK, the Treasury, the smallest major dept of govt and for that reason often called 'the village' was staffed by the brightest minds -I think the rot set in with Thatcher when people were hired because they suited Mrs T's ideological approach to economic policy; it sank into an abyss with the even worse need in the Blair era for everything to look and sound good on tv regardless of reality.

My point is about the regulation: and it applies to other areas too the most obvious of which is the environment and the Deepwater Horizon catastrophe, partly due to a sloppy attitude to regulation -the laws after all are there for the govt to impose them.

Getting the government off you back is one thing, watching the economy take a hike on Highway 61 is another...

God said to Abraham -kill me a son
Abe said: man you must be puttin' me on
God said no, Abe said what
God said you can do what you want Abe but
Next time you see me coming you better run
Well, Abe said where you want this killin done
God said out on highway 61

I think you are very right about the debt analysis. Around 2004, I was getting about five calls a day from companies soliciting me to take out equity loans. In California, my brother was told the value of his home had doubled, leading him to believe he had all this equity value, which encouraged him to borrow. If the value of his home was true. He could have borrowed a huge amount, then later sold his home, paid his debts and still had a good profit. So basically, there was all this spending based upon debt. This was the prosperity of the Bush years. I still feel, there was criminal activity somewhere, but no one has ever been charged.

One company did make 20 Billion betting, that home prices were over valued.

[TJ347]

Yes many dems are very rich millionaires. But they still vote for the poor and middle working class. They are not cutting their throats.

During the Clinton years, Bill Clinton himself was a very rich man and raised taxes on those rich men like himself. Those rich people didn't suffer one tiny little bit. Their lifestyles didn't change in any way, and they all still got much richer. The extra taxes they had to pay was pocket chump change to them. They never missed one penny. That policy is what fixed our economy and gave Bush the best economy this country has ever seen. Bush reversed that policy and gave the rich tax CUTS.

Sir, you are so delusional that I don't know how to begin to set you on the path back to reality. I have therefore decided not to try. If you believe what you wrote above to be true, you are one of the most gullible people I have ever run across online. You constantly praise any and every Democrat, yet claim you don't believe any one party has all the answers, huh? Interesting... and pure bullshit.

Silc, my point was that if you accept the "one drop rule", then how do you not accept the "three-fifths" determination? I hate when black people try to use racism in their favor when it's seemingly beneficial to them to do so, and this thing with Obama is a perfect example. He's black because his dad was black? Well, no. His dad was African, my dad is black. Different culture, divergent histories, not the same.

[Silcc69]

Oh good ole Dubya what happened to this

YouTube - The George Bush You Forgot (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9SOVzMV2bc)

[onmyknees]

Oh good ole Dubya what happened to this

YouTube - The George Bush You Forgot (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9SOVzMV2bc)


OK Time for your and Ineeda's economics and civics lesson for today





The Washington Post babbled again today about Obama inheriting a huge deficit from Bush. Amazingly enough, a lot of people swallow this garbage!!

So once more, a short civics lesson.

Budgets do not come from the White House...although the President can state his desires for spending. They come from Congress and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democratic Party.

Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for FY 2008 and FY 2009 as well as FY 2010 and FY 2011.

In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush belatedly got tough on spending increases.

For FY 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the FY 2009 budgets.(You may remember Obama making a speech about the 740 billion dollar budget and saying there was no earmarks...when he was confronted with the facts he deferred to Congress and said he was not a part of this process because he had not put his imprint on this particuar budget.)

And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete FY 2009. Let's remember what the deficits looked like during that period: (below)









If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the FY 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets.




If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself.



In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is I inherited a deficit that I voted for


and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th.

[Silcc69]

OK Time for your and Ineeda's economics and civics lesson for today


LOL u never fail from cracking me up. That video had NOTHING to do with the economy as I can tell you didn't even bother to watch it.

[onmyknees]

Republicans aren't hypocrites. Hell no. They're just straight out liars. LOL
(Just for those of you who might not have heard the story: Jon Kyl, a republican, declares on the floor (so that it's read into the Congressional Record which pro-lifer's will quote as fact for the next century) that Planned Parenthood spends 90% of it's budget on abortions. The actual amount Planned Parenthood spends on abortions is 3%. When later confronted with this huge discrepancy, Kyl says his claim "wasn't intended to be a factual statement."


Kyl who is a decent guy was wrong to say what he said...no question. Had I been his spokesperson, I would have said this..." Senator Kyl made an incorrect statement. What he meant to say is Planned Parenthood makes 90% of it's mutli million dollar profit by preforming abortions" That would be a far more accurate statement.......now wouldn't it Trish? The actual number is 40% but hell this is politics and what's a little
exaggeration and spin to a party that redefined what is is, and who told us to we have to pass the bill to find out what's in the bill !! And btw...has your guy Dirty Harry ever apologized for standing in the Senate proclaiming...."The War is Lost" ?

[trish]

Kyl told us what he intended. He said we intended to make a statement that wasn't factual. Quite literally he lied and then said he intended to lie.

[Ineeda SM]

Sir, you are so delusional that I don't know how to begin to set you on the path back to reality. I have therefore decided not to try. If you believe what you wrote above to be true, you are one of the most gullible people I have ever run across online. You constantly praise any and every Democrat, yet claim you don't believe any one party has all the answers, huh? Interesting... and pure bullshit.

Really? Name one part of my last post that was incorrect. Bill Clinton DID raise taxes on the rich. The RICH did continue to get richer. Clinton DID hand Bush the best economy ever in our history. Clinton DID make that statement. Everything I said was fact. If I am wrong prove it with facts and not just your juvinile retorts.

[TJ347]

An embittered pensioner wants me to reverse the damage done to him by a failed public school system and a head injury... I don't know where to start, and can't be bothered to try. I am done conversing with you on topics of any gravity, sir, and Trish doesn't need your help, especially such as it is. And the word, again, is "juvEnile" with an "e".

[trish]

Actually I find Ineeda SM's post often on point. BTW, there's quite a few posters on both sides of the fence who avail themselves of non-standard forms of spelling. I don't see that it matters much, so I rarely mention it.

[Ineeda SM]

OK Time for your and Ineeda's economics and civics lesson for today

The Washington Post babbled again today about Obama inheriting a huge deficit from Bush. Amazingly enough, a lot of people swallow this garbage!!

So once more, a short civics lesson.

Budgets do not come from the White House...although the President can state his desires for spending. They come from Congress and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democratic Party.

Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for FY 2008 and FY 2009 as well as FY 2010 and FY 2011.

In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush belatedly got tough on spending increases.

For FY 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the FY 2009 budgets.(You may remember Obama making a speech about the 740 billion dollar budget and saying there was no earmarks...when he was confronted with the facts he deferred to Congress and said he was not a part of this process because he had not put his imprint on this particuar budget.)

And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete FY 2009. Let's remember what the deficits looked like during that period: (below)

If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the FY 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets.


If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself.


In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is I inherited a deficit that I voted for


and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th.

Now for the real lessons that ONMYKNEES and all republicans never talk about because they are embarrassed.

The first stimulas was Bush's idea including the earmarks, and Obama agreed it was a good idea.

The spending bills that the democratic congress passed added $300 Million to the debt but was infintesimal in comparison. They were not the cause of our economic troubles today.

If you remember your recent history, Clinton left the Bush administration a beautiful economy with a deficit surplus for the first time ever. Obama took office with the worse economy ever. There was only one president in between Clinton and Obama. That was your boy Bush.

Bush's illegal war was his decision and he reneged on his word to the dems to wait for the weapons inspectors to be allowed to finish their jobs. When it came down to the final decision by Bush to invade Iraq, Bush went to war without the consent of the UN, the world, or the dems. The dems gave thier authorization to make war with caveats that Bush agreed to but went against on his own. Bush's illegal war costs the USA 3.2 trillion dollars that went to the debt that Obama and the dems inherited.

Bush gave the richest 3% a big tax break with his then republican congress, and put in a clasue that the tax breaks could not be repealed until just last year. That added another 1.2 trillion to the debt that Obama and the dems inherited. Between Bush and the republican congresses big tax breaks for the rich, and the illegal war that Bush lied to get us into and made the decision to invade on his own, Bush added $4.4 TRILLION to the debt, almost doubling it in just 8 years. This was done by a republican congress and a lying Teaxs cowboy who made his own decision to invade Iraq against the wishes of the world and the agreement he gave the dems for their support. Even Bush's own republicans were very openly criticising him for acting alone in his decision to invade Iraq. Even the republicans knew it was wrong.

So once again, Obama inherited the debt of Bush and his original republican congress. This is not an opinion. It's a fact. Look it up. Google it and learn the facts.

[TJ347]

Actually I find Ineeda SM's post often on point. BTW, there's quite a few posters on both sides of the fence who avail themselves of non-standard forms of spelling. I don't see that it matters much, so I rarely mention it.

Well, he supports your position, so it's not surprising that you'd give him kudos. I occasionally don't know on first read what his point is, but in any event, anyone who tries to tell me that white Union soldiers fought and died in the Civil War to free black slaves isn't someone I see as credible, non-standard spelling aside.

[Ineeda SM]

Well, he supports your position, so it's not surprising that you'd give him kudos. I occasionally don't know on first read what his point is, but in any event, anyone who tries to tell me that white Union soldiers fought and died in the Civil War to free black slaves isn't someone I see as credible, non-standard spelling aside.

But if you actually read a history book, you would find that to be the absolute truth. White Union soldiers along with several black Union soldiers fought to keep the United States free, and together as one country. The only issue keeping that from happening was slavery. That is exactly what they did and every educated person knows it. Stop being an ignorant asshole and look it up for yourself before making such a stupid comment.

[TJ347]

Kyl told us what he intended. He said we intended to make a statement that wasn't factual. Quite literally he lied and then said he intended to lie.

I can't argue with you on this one, Trish. Big boo-boo by John Kyl there. So shall we now go back and forth tying all members of a political party to numbskull gaffes of an individual member? That Kyl made a fool of himself doesn't make every Republican a fool anymore than Bubba's indiscretion makes every Democrat a sex fiend. I just don't want to see things descend into stupidity across the board. Some of us enjoy this section of the forum.

[trish]

A booboo is an accident. A mistake. I didn't know lying was a accident or a mere mistake. I thought committing a lie was a moral offense. In Kyl's case an offense against all Americans, not just his wife. But you're right...just because one republican is a fool doesn't mean they all are. But every republican who swallowed that lie was a fool. And every republican who stored it away as club to be used later, knowing it was a lie, is worse than a fool.

[TJ347]

What about independents who swallowed that lie? What about Americans of whatever stripe that believed Al Gore when he claimed to be responsible for the invention of the internet, or believed Bubba when he claimed not to have had sex with "that woman"? Let's not be so selective in who we hold up to the moral litmus test.

[Ineeda SM]

What about independents who swallowed that lie? What about Americans of whatever stripe that believed Al Gore when he claimed to be responsible for the invention of the internet, or believed Bubba when he claimed not to have had sex with "that woman"? Let's not be so selective in who we hold up to the moral litmus test.

Al Gore NEVER claimed to have invented the internet. That was an exaggeration by Rush Limbaugh that caught on with republicans and spread fast.

Al Gore was responsible for getting the internet into every school. It was one of his pet projects as VP. He made a speech saying that he was proud to be able to bring the world together by allowing schools to interact with schools around the world.

Rush had to make his nasty remarks about Gores wonderful achievement, so he did what right wingers do soooo very well. He twisted Gores words and said that Gore was taking credit for the internet. Of course every good little republican picked up on the comment, and spread it around.

Bill Clinton cheated on his wife. He did nothing to you, me, or the country. All of that crap the republicans made of it was because of a blow job. He actually did nothing illegal. Immoral yes, but not against the law. His action was personal with his family, and should never have been made a big deal of.

Kyl lied directly to the entire country while speaking on the floor of congress. It was political.

[Faldur]

http://fc02.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2010/003/d/b/MANBEARPIG_by_xX_Pixie_Dust_Xx.jpg

http://www.veganporn.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/al-gore-internet.jpg

[Silcc69]

Yeah then we had Neutered Newt trying to impeach Clinton when he was doing the same fucking thing. Let's be real there are hypocrites on BOTH sides.

[natina]

Perhaps the most confounding of these politico and faux-politico speech fees is that of Sarah Palin's daughter, Bristol. Bristol Palin is most famous for being the pregnant teen daughter of a VP hopeful who preached abstinence, and though her mother is no longer involved in politics, Bristol Palin is attempting to spin her situation into a career. The younger Palin is reportedly asking for $15,000-$30,000 to speak at conferences (http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/#) and fundraisers, abstinence and "pro-life" programs. At 19, with very specific experience, it goes without saying that a name can cost a lot more than the substance of the speech. (Bad behavior is all too common in the workplace, but it can't match the drama of these celebrities' stunts.

Bristol Palin’s Nonprofit Paid Her Seven Times What It Spent On Actual Teen Pregnancy Prevention (http://thinkprogress.org/2011/04/05/bristol-palin-profiteer-teen-pregnancy/)
(http://thinkprogress.org/2011/04/05/bristol-palin-profiteer-teen-pregnancy/)

http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?t=55554
http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?t=55554
http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?t=55554
http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?t=55554

[TJ347]

Natina, I don't know why anyone would pay Bristol Palin a dime to speak on abstinence given the fact that it clearly didn't work for her. That would be as stupid as going to Bill Clinton, Newt Gingrich, John Edwards or Mark Sanford for marriage counseling. Only in America I guess...

[onmyknees]

Yeah then we had Neutered Newt trying to impeach Clinton when he was doing the same fucking thing. Let's be real there are hypocrites on BOTH sides.

Yes there are...(hypocrites on both sides) But please don't fall into the same "selective memory" trap that so has entangled Ineeda. Yes both men were having extra marital affairs...no question, but one was doing it in the oval office and one in a hotel. One was asked about it at a grand jury hearing one was not. One lied, one did not. One was impeached one was not. Does that make Newt a creep? Probably...but now is where it gets tough for you Clinton supporters. You all told us for years...."Ah..get over it...it's just a blow job" . So do you hold the same standard for Newt...or do you have different standards based on what party the philanderer is from? And remember...the hypocracy police are watching !!!!!

[Ineeda SM]

Yes there are...(hypocrites on both sides) But please don't fall into the same "selective memory" trap that so has entangled Ineeda. Yes both men were having extra marital affairs...no question, but one was doing it in the oval office and one in a hotel. One was asked about it at a grand jury hearing one was not. One lied, one did not. One was impeached one was not. Does that make Newt a creep? Probably...but now is where it gets tough for you Clinton supporters. You all told us for years...."Ah..get over it...it's just a blow job" . So do you hold the same standard for Newt...or do you have different standards based on what party the philanderer is from? And remember...the hypocracy police are watching !!!!!

There you go again defending your right wing thinking. You say Clinton lied to a grand jury. I want to know why he was brought before a grand jury in the first place. What crime did he commit? A blow job from a whore may be immoral but it is not a crime of law. It is not illegal. Why was Clinton impeached? Again he did not commit any crimes. He did nothing illegal.

The reason is because the GOP was in control and made a big stink over something that had nothing to do with any of us. It was all the GOP could come up with against Clinton. Clinton and Newt didn't owe any one of us an apology. They did nothing to us. The only ones who needed the apology was their wives and families.

To answer your second question, I hold both to the same standard. They are both assholes for cheating on their spouses. And neither one did anything illegal or against the country. That's the difference between us. Republicans seem to excuse Newt. But Clinton had to be brought to a grand jury and be impeached for the same thing that newt got a slap on the wrist for. I don't remember Newt going before a grand jury. Of course not. Not while the GOP is in charge. If Clinton had been a republican, he wouldn't have either. There is your hypocrisy.

[yodajazz]

There you go again defending your right wing thinking. You say Clinton lied to a grand jury. I want to know why he was brought before a grand jury in the first place. What crime did he commit? A blow job from a whore may be immoral but it is not a crime of law. It is not illegal. Why was Clinton impeached? Again he did not commit any crimes. He did nothing illegal.

The reason is because the GOP was in control and made a big stink over something that had nothing to do with any of us. It was all the GOP could come up with against Clinton. Clinton and Newt didn't owe any one of us an apology. They did nothing to us. The only ones who needed the apology was their wives and families.

To answer your second question, I hold both to the same standard. They are both assholes for cheating on their spouses. And neither one did anything illegal or against the country. That's the difference between us. Republicans seem to excuse Newt. But Clinton had to be brought to a grand jury and be impeached for the same thing that newt got a slap on the wrist for. I don't remember Newt going before a grand jury. Of course not. Not while the GOP is in charge. If Clinton had been a republican, he wouldn't have either. There is your hypocrisy.

I agree with this post. But not only this. During the height of media attention on Clinton's affair, a man name Osama Bin Laden issued a fatwa, that American soldiers should be killed anywhere. In my city, the article was on page six; while the Clinton thing was all front page headline news. I say, that it was more important for the nation, that Clinton Sould have been free to perform his duty, to help protect our nation. I believe ultimately Republicans were really more concerned about a power grab, than what was good for the nation (i.e., the President being able to perform his duties.) The legalities related to the affair could have waited, until he was out of office. The whole Clinton 8 year investigation, as well as the current Obama birther movement, was/is just a way to circumvent, the process of democracy.

[TJ347]

That the Clinton investigation occured and the Obama birther movement exists is democracy. If we don't want political leaders to be subjected to impeachment hearings or questioned as to their place of birth, then we don't want democracy as it exists in this country presently.

Personally, I find the whole Clinton affair to be a non-issue, and think impeachment hearings were purely political. That said, it isn't as if this kind of thing is one-sided, which is something few here ever seem to acknowledge. Democrats act for the good of the nation alone, whereas Republicans are concerned only with helping the rich... That's the mindset of many on this board, as if politics and issues related thereto could possibly be that black and white. This is why conversations on these topics always descend into lame talking points and general stupidity, because we all too often won't acknowledge the wrongs committed by "our" guys.

[onmyknees]

There you go again defending your right wing thinking. You say Clinton lied to a grand jury. I want to know why he was brought before a grand jury in the first place. What crime did he commit? A blow job from a whore may be immoral but it is not a crime of law. It is not illegal. Why was Clinton impeached? Again he did not commit any crimes. He did nothing illegal.

The reason is because the GOP was in control and made a big stink over something that had nothing to do with any of us. It was all the GOP could come up with against Clinton. Clinton and Newt didn't owe any one of us an apology. They did nothing to us. The only ones who needed the apology was their wives and families.

To answer your second question, I hold both to the same standard. They are both assholes for cheating on their spouses. And neither one did anything illegal or against the country. That's the difference between us. Republicans seem to excuse Newt. But Clinton had to be brought to a grand jury and be impeached for the same thing that newt got a slap on the wrist for. I don't remember Newt going before a grand jury. Of course not. Not while the GOP is in charge. If Clinton had been a republican, he wouldn't have either. There is your hypocrisy.


I've explained this to you many times, but your young brain of mush can't seem to absorb it. So let me explain it one more time to you. Weather or not you and I agree with the reasons he was sitting in front of a grand jury ( and they were many....Whitewater, The Paula Jones affair...etc) is completely and wholly irrelevent. The fact of the matter is he was sitting in the chair answering questions. Slick Willie, as a skilled attorney when asked the question about the intern...no matter if you, me, and the rest of the nation thought that part of the probe was out of bounds, he was required to answer truthfully. If he had....we wouldn't be having this continued discussion. But politicians don't answer direct questions truthfully. If this is your standard for outrage why weren't you as
incensed at the entire overeach by the prosecutor in the Scooter Libby affair? Mr. Libby was not the source of the leak, and the prosecuter knew that but he was fishing. He got Mr. Libby to say some things by design or mistake that were conflicting or less than truthful. He was found guilty of lying to a grand jury, just as Martha Stewert was. In both cases , just as in Clinton's there proved to be no underlying crime. Your approach to both these instances is perfectly liberal....Chris Matthews spent month after month on the Scooter Libby affair and was elated when they found him guilty. Rewind to the Clinton affair and you'll see a completely differnt defense. Where's the outrage for Mr. Libby and Ms. Stewert meathead? The facts are the facts and you can't change them , so stop your revisionist history. Speaking of a finding of guilt....I find you guilty as charged of hypocracy and ignorance. Maybe you should have been on your kness in the oval office instead of Monica by the sounds of it. Again...you don't think life was fair to Slick Willie....but you're perfectly content to let Ms. Stewert go to jail for the same offense.

Do you now understand the legal differences ( not the political) between what happened to Clinton and Gingrich? I'd like to move on if we can.

[Silcc69]

Yes there are...(hypocrites on both sides) But please don't fall into the same "selective memory" trap that so has entangled Ineeda. Yes both men were having extra marital affairs...no question, but one was doing it in the oval office and one in a hotel. One was asked about it at a grand jury hearing one was not. One lied, one did not. One was impeached one was not. Does that make Newt a creep? Probably...but now is where it gets tough for you Clinton supporters. You all told us for years...."Ah..get over it...it's just a blow job" . So do you hold the same standard for Newt...or do you have different standards based on what party the philanderer is from? And remember...the hypocracy police are watching !!!!!

No you can't be all high and mighty and doing the same thing Clinton was doing. That is the issue just because Newt got away with his shit doesnt make him any better than Clinton.

[TJ347]

Silcc, who is saying Newt is any better than Clinton, if in fact you're saying someone is saying that? Seems to me you have people agreeing with your take, and then one person trying to minimize Clinton's situation in comparison to Newt's, just as he does all matters where Democrats are involved. So we therefore seem to have agreement among all thinking people who've commented on this matter and can now move along.

[onmyknees]

No you can't be all high and mighty and doing the same thing Clinton was doing. That is the issue just because Newt got away with his shit doesnt make him any better than Clinton.

....if anything Newt can't shake his "personal" issues....yet Slick Willie is living quite nicely and looking in the rear view mirror and laughing all the way home to Hillary. That's fine...I have no issues with that at all. But the two are not treated equally in the Media...

Newt is brilliant...perhaps one one the sharpest political intellects in the country today, but he's not very likeable. Slick Willie is no fool, but not nearly as sharp as Newt,IMHO but he has people skills, and is a brilliant politician. Two different skill sets.

And once more because three's a charm...

Setting aside the grand jury issues, Slick Willie was getting hummers in the Oval Office and putting cigars in places you wouldn't want your mother to hear about.... Many Americans feel that's a bit too unseemly for thier Commander in Chief. Not comparing, but it is interesting to note that Bush the elder, W, and Reagan would not enter that office without a suit jacket....but hey maybe I'm old fashion ! LMAO

[Ineeda SM]

I've explained this to you many times, but your young brain of mush can't seem to absorb it. So let me explain it one more time to you. Weather or not you and I agree with the reasons he was sitting in front of a grand jury ( and they were many....Whitewater, The Paula Jones affair...etc) is completely and wholly irrelevent. The fact of the matter is he was sitting in the chair answering questions. Slick Willie, as a skilled attorney when asked the question about the intern...no matter if you, me, and the rest of the nation thought that part of the probe was out of bounds, he was required to answer truthfully. If he had....we wouldn't be having this continued discussion. But politicians don't answer direct questions truthfully. If this is your standard for outrage why weren't you as
incensed at the entire overeach by the prosecutor in the Scooter Libby affair? Mr. Libby was not the source of the leak, and the prosecuter knew that but he was fishing. He got Mr. Libby to say some things by design or mistake that were conflicting or less than truthful. He was found guilty of lying to a grand jury, just as Martha Stewert was. In both cases , just as in Clinton's there proved to be no underlying crime. Your approach to both these instances is perfectly liberal....Chris Matthews spent month after month on the Scooter Libby affair and was elated when they found him guilty. Rewind to the Clinton affair and you'll see a completely differnt defense. Where's the outrage for Mr. Libby and Ms. Stewert meathead? The facts are the facts and you can't change them , so stop your revisionist history. Speaking of a finding of guilt....I find you guilty as charged of hypocracy and ignorance. Maybe you should have been on your kness in the oval office instead of Monica by the sounds of it. Again...you don't think life was fair to Slick Willie....but you're perfectly content to let Ms. Stewert go to jail for the same offense.

Do you now understand the legal differences ( not the political) between what happened to Clinton and Gingrich? I'd like to move on if we can.

Trolling trolling trolling...you just love to troll on everything on this forum. I bet you smile as your imagination dreams up what you are typing. You never EXPLAIN anything to anyone. You just make shit up as you go along because you think it sounds clever, and the smart people here won't notice.

FACT: Clinton was wrongfully brought before a grand jury for the blow job by Monica, and that is all, PERIOD. It had nothing to do with Whitewater (which they gave up on long before Monica because of lack of evidence in that republican wild goose chase), or Paula Jones or anything else, and you fucking know it. And that makes it relevant. Clinton did nothing illegal, and you don't go before any kind of jury in any court of law, unless you commit a crime. And you know that too. You are just trolling your lies to keep your stupid argument going.

FACT: Libby was as guilty as sin. He admitted to it. You can't get more guilty than openly admitting it. You have nothing to defend there. Just more trolling lies to the stupid minded.

What the fuck are you talking about by saying that Clinton and Stewert did the same offense? Clinton did not commit any crime, and Stewert frauded the stock market which is a real crime. Stop smoking crack while you make up your bull shit.

FACT: All of the MSNBC anchors were condemning Clinton for cheating on his wife. None of them defended him for that. They gave him hell every night for a few weeks. But they honestly reported on the republicans desperate move to hurt him nationally for a personal matter that was none of our business. Then again, you knew that too, but you so enjoy trolling your lies for your personal entertainment. Funny though how FoxGOP channel never said anything bad about when Newt did it. Hmmm. Oh I forgot. They are not allowed to say bad things about anything republican. Fair and balanced my ass.

FACT: There are NO legal differences between Newt and Clinton. Both cheated on their wives, both did nothing illegal. Neither one committed any crime. But the GOP congress forced Clinton to a grand jury, and gave Newt a slap on his little hairy wrist. But of course you know that too. Even more of your trolling.

And of course you want to move on. That is what a troll does when they know they do not have any defense of their own bull shit. They need to move on so their lies do not become so obvious. But you are way too late for that.

You just dug your hole a few inches deeper. Cut the fucking lies and bull shit troll. It doesn't work here. People see right through your lies. After all, you make it so easy for us.

[Silcc69]

....if anything Newt can't shake his "personal" issues....yet Slick Willie is living quite nicely and looking in the rear view mirror and laughing all the way home to Hillary. That's fine...I have no issues with that at all. But the two are not treated equally in the Media...

Newt is brilliant...perhaps one one the sharpest political intellects in the country today, but he's not very likeable. Slick Willie is no fool, but not nearly as sharp as Newt,IMHO but he has people skills, and is a brilliant politician. Two different skill sets.

And once more because three's a charm...

Setting aside the grand jury issues, Slick Willie was getting hummers in the Oval Office and putting cigars in places you wouldn't want your mother to hear about.... Many Americans feel that's a bit too unseemly for thier Commander in Chief. Not comparing, but it is interesting to note that Bush the elder, W, and Reagan would not enter that office without a suit jacket....but hey maybe I'm old fashion ! LMAO

Cause Slick Willie is done with being the president his relevancy is way lower than it was back then. Newt on the other hand maybe trying to run for the president so now his ghosts are gonig to come back and haunt his ass.

[onmyknees]

Cause Slick Willie is done with being the president his relevancy is way lower than it was back then. Newt on the other hand maybe trying to run for the president so now his ghosts are gonig to come back and haunt his ass.


Wrong again........One is a conservative that falls short of moral perfection, and one os a liberal that falls short of moral perfection. Guess who wins that draw in the overwhelming left wing media?

[Ineeda SM]

Wrong again........One is a conservative that falls short of moral perfection, and one os a liberal that falls short of moral perfection. Guess who wins that draw in the overwhelming left wing media?

Probably the opposite of the the winner in the draw of the right wing media. That's just politics. Your own guy is always an angel and the other guy is always the devil.

No Silcc69 is right. Both of their moral imperfections were over, done with, and forgotten years ago. Nobody has said a word about Newt's sexcapades for a long time. But Newt has put himself back in the limelight as a potential candidate for president. So his past will be back in the limelight with him. If Clinton ran for office again, his past would come back and bite his ass too. Right now, Bill Clinton is just background filler. It was mentioned a few times when Hillary was running for president. But she made it clear that Bill was not the one running, and she was. That seemed to shut the right wing media up.

You should know by now that any candidate with a shady past will be shrouded by any bad shit in their past.

[TJ347]

One is a conservative that falls short of moral perfection, and one os a liberal that falls short of moral perfection. Guess who wins that draw in the overwhelming left wing media?

So true, and yet the left claims Fox News isn't fair and balanced. Anyone ever manage to sit through a whole Ed Schultz, Rachel Maddow or Chris Matthews show? Tell me that's fair or balanced, let alone both.

[onmyknees]

Trolling trolling trolling...you just love to troll on everything on this forum. I bet you smile as your imagination dreams up what you are typing. You never EXPLAIN anything to anyone. You just make shit up as you go along because you think it sounds clever, and the smart people here won't notice.

FACT: Clinton was wrongfully brought before a grand jury for the blow job by Monica, and that is all, PERIOD. It had nothing to do with Whitewater (which they gave up on long before Monica because of lack of evidence in that republican wild goose chase), or Paula Jones or anything else, and you fucking know it. And that makes it relevant. Clinton did nothing illegal, and you don't go before any kind of jury in any court of law, unless you commit a crime. And you know that too. You are just trolling your lies to keep your stupid argument going.

FACT: Libby was as guilty as sin. He admitted to it. You can't get more guilty than openly admitting it. You have nothing to defend there. Just more trolling lies to the stupid minded.

What the fuck are you talking about by saying that Clinton and Stewert did the same offense? Clinton did not commit any crime, and Stewert frauded the stock market which is a real crime. Stop smoking crack while you make up your bull shit.

FACT: All of the MSNBC anchors were condemning Clinton for cheating on his wife. None of them defended him for that. They gave him hell every night for a few weeks. But they honestly reported on the republicans desperate move to hurt him nationally for a personal matter that was none of our business. Then again, you knew that too, but you so enjoy trolling your lies for your personal entertainment. Funny though how FoxGOP channel never said anything bad about when Newt did it. Hmmm. Oh I forgot. They are not allowed to say bad things about anything republican. Fair and balanced my ass.

FACT: There are NO legal differences between Newt and Clinton. Both cheated on their wives, both did nothing illegal. Neither one committed any crime. But the GOP congress forced Clinton to a grand jury, and gave Newt a slap on his little hairy wrist. But of course you know that too. Even more of your trolling.

And of course you want to move on. That is what a troll does when they know they do not have any defense of their own bull shit. They need to move on so their lies do not become so obvious. But you are way too late for that.

You just dug your hole a few inches deeper. Cut the fucking lies and bull shit troll. It doesn't work here. People see right through your lies. After all, you make it so easy for us.


You are an absolute moron...devoid of any capacity to grasp facts. No... I'm serious you're a tragically ignorant fool but you seem utterly content to remain that way. There really is no other way to say it. You have no sence of fact from fiction....There isn't a legal scholar or impartial commontator that would agree with what you've stated. Not one. You confuse your emotion with fact. Instead of posting your fantasies try something like Wikepedia. It's not hard...just a couple keystrokes will tell you what a complete failure you are.

Has it ever occured to you that not one of the other liberal posters on here ever bolsters what you say? You never prove ANYTHING with back up data, or even opinion articles. Never. I've asked you for proof of your wild assertions time and time again and you just keep spouting your childish nonsence. You're the class clown of these boards. The perfect idiot.

Now...once more because even a puppy learns by repitition..

Clinton was called to testify before Ken Starr's grand jusry. Like it or not...Starr had wide ranging powers and was inverstagating everything from Whitewater to the Paula Jones affair( by the way....do you dispute her testimony?) He was tipped off by Linda Tripp about the Lewinski encounters, and Starr went on a fishing expedition. Slick Willie was asked direct questions about the Lewinski affair, and he was less than truthful. But if you decline to belive what I'm telling you.....then why the fuck was he disbared by the Arkansas Bar ?????? You fucking idiot.


There was no underlying crime in the Libby affair, and he did not leak the the name. He was less than truthfull to the grand jury.He never admitted to anything and had his sentence commuted. You fucking idiot.

This is what the sentencing judge said at the Stewart Trial.........

"lying to government agencies during the course of an investigation is a very serious matter, regardless of the outcome of the investigation.”

She was less than honest with investagators and the Grand Jury. You fucking idiot.

Go fuck yourself with that dildo...you're too stupid to waste any more time on. You're a zombie. ( look it up)

[Ineeda SM]

You are an absolute moron...devoid of any capacity to grasp facts. No... I'm serious you're a tragically ignorant fool but you seem utterly content to remain that way. There really is no other way to say it. You have no sence of fact from fiction....There isn't a legal scholar or impartial commontator that would agree with what you've stated. Not one. You confuse your emotion with fact. Instead of posting your fantasies try something like Wikepedia. It's not hard...just a couple keystrokes will tell you what a complete failure you are.

Has it ever occured to you that not one of the other liberal posters on here ever bolsters what you say? You never prove ANYTHING with back up data, or even opinion articles. Never. I've asked you for proof of your wild assertions time and time again and you just keep spouting your childish nonsence. You're the class clown of these boards. The perfect idiot.

Now...once more because even a puppy learns by repitition..

Clinton was called to testify before Ken Starr's grand jusry. Like it or not...Starr had wide ranging powers and was inverstagating everything from Whitewater to the Paula Jones affair( by the way....do you dispute her testimony?) He was tipped off by Linda Tripp about the Lewinski encounters, and Starr went on a fishing expedition. Slick Willie was asked direct questions about the Lewinski affair, and he was less than truthful. But if you decline to belive what I'm telling you.....then why the fuck was he disbared by the Arkansas Bar ?????? You fucking idiot.


There was no underlying crime in the Libby affair, and he did not leak the the name. He was less than truthfull to the grand jury.He never admitted to anything and had his sentence commuted. You fucking idiot.

This is what the sentencing judge said at the Stewart Trial.........

"lying to government agencies during the course of an investigation is a very serious matter, regardless of the outcome of the investigation.”

She was less than honest with investagators and the Grand Jury. You fucking idiot.

Go fuck yourself with that dildo...you're too stupid to waste any more time on. You're a zombie. ( look it up)

What dildo? I don't own one, never have. Unless you were referring to yourself, in which case I must decline your offer. I have standards and you are very far below them. I don't fuck old angry asshole guys who sell out their principals to propaganda for cash. But thanks anyway.

How much does the GOP pay you to troll forums for them? Just curious how much money it takes to get you to be this stupid on purpose, and in front of others.

You and your 2 troll friends are the only ones posting similar troll like bull shit. Nobody else has said I was wrong yet, but you have had several counter replies to the crap you puke at us. You really need to get those facts straight......I'm sorry, I forgot. You are a troll and you already know these things. But your job is to spread propaganda. So please continue and entertain us some more.

Some of your lines are just repeating what I say to you. How desperate you are for new lies. You must be digging that hole to China. If you ever say something that is remotely factual, I am going to declare it a fucking holiday. It would be a first. Please go on. I actually kinda enjoy it.

[Ineeda SM]

So true, and yet the left claims Fox News isn't fair and balanced. Anyone ever manage to sit through a whole Ed Schultz, Rachel Maddow or Chris Matthews show? Tell me that's fair or balanced, let alone both.

Watch closely. On FoxGOP channel, they make all kinds of claims that are never accompanied by an uncut video or recording to prove what they say. And if they DO use a video, they only show a quick soundbyte for just the words they need to make their lie sound like truth, but not the entire paragraph to understand the real context. That is not fair or balanced. That is very one sided and biased.

Now watch Ed, Rachel, Lawrence, and Chris. Everything they report is backed up by the actual video, uncut in it's entirety with the republican's own words coming from their own mouth. Or they put up actual documents with the source and the sources web address so anyone can go there and prove it to themselves. That IS fair and balanced. You get to go and varify it yourself. Usually MSNBC anchors are doing their shows to give proof of republican or FoxGOP channel lies.

[TJ347]

You are an absolute moron...

...you're too stupid to waste any more time on.

:iagree: Glad you've come to see the light at long last!

[Ineeda SM]

:iagree: Glad you've come to see the light at long last!

Awwww isn't that sweet. The trolls are all alone so they cling to each other for comfort. That's nice.

[yodajazz]

Watch closely. On FoxGOP channel, they make all kinds of claims that are never accompanied by an uncut video or recording to prove what they say. And if they DO use a video, they only show a quick soundbyte for just the words they need to make their lie sound like truth, but not the entire paragraph to understand the real context. That is not fair or balanced. That is very one sided and biased.

Now watch Ed, Rachel, Lawrence, and Chris. Everything they report is backed up by the actual video, uncut in it's entirety with the republican's own words coming from their own mouth. Or they put up actual documents with the source and the sources web address so anyone can go there and prove it to themselves. That IS fair and balanced. You get to go and varify it yourself. Usually MSNBC anchors are doing their shows to give proof of republican or FoxGOP channel lies.

I dont watch much television, but recently I was in a office waiting for an appointment, that had Fox News on. They had a clip of a Congressman from the Northeast making a statement. I noticed I pretty much agreed with his statement, so I wondered how they were going to deal with it. Well, they brought someone who they claimed was an expert. But he simply said, the man was a socialist, and never addressed the issue. There are terms for arguments like that. I think one is "ad hominem attacks". That would mean attacking the person, rather than addressing the argument. I look deeper to see a message, that says; 'socialists' are incapable of speaking truth. Its a form of brainwashing, or mind control technique. I see the results of this type of thinking, on Yahoo News comments.

However, they did state one fact, that I consider credible. They said some people consider that the head of CitiBank (or Citigroup), who recieved government bailout funds, recieving a 116 million dollar compensation package, as a sign of excess. The commentator did not say she believed it was, but that others felt that way.

[yodajazz]

You are an absolute moron...devoid of any capacity to grasp facts. No... I'm serious you're a tragically ignorant fool but you seem utterly content to remain that way. There really is no other way to say it. You have no sence of fact from fiction....There isn't a legal scholar or impartial commontator that would agree with what you've stated. Not one. You confuse your emotion with fact. Instead of posting your fantasies try something like Wikepedia. It's not hard...just a couple keystrokes will tell you what a complete failure you are.

Has it ever occured to you that not one of the other liberal posters on here ever bolsters what you say? You never prove ANYTHING with back up data, or even opinion articles. Never. I've asked you for proof of your wild assertions time and time again and you just keep spouting your childish nonsence. You're the class clown of these boards. The perfect idiot.

Now...once more because even a puppy learns by repitition..

Clinton was called to testify before Ken Starr's grand jusry. Like it or not...Starr had wide ranging powers and was inverstagating everything from Whitewater to the Paula Jones affair( by the way....do you dispute her testimony?) He was tipped off by Linda Tripp about the Lewinski encounters, and Starr went on a fishing expedition. Slick Willie was asked direct questions about the Lewinski affair, and he was less than truthful. But if you decline to belive what I'm telling you.....then why the fuck was he disbared by the Arkansas Bar ?????? You fucking idiot.


There was no underlying crime in the Libby affair, and he did not leak the the name. He was less than truthfull to the grand jury.He never admitted to anything and had his sentence commuted. You fucking idiot.

This is what the sentencing judge said at the Stewart Trial.........

"lying to government agencies during the course of an investigation is a very serious matter, regardless of the outcome of the investigation.”

She was less than honest with investagators and the Grand Jury. You fucking idiot.

Go fuck yourself with that dildo...you're too stupid to waste any more time on. You're a zombie. ( look it up)

I argue that Scooter Libby's lying was related to National security, a serious matter, related to the duties of the adminstration. It was part of a process that led to the war in Iraq, where people have lost thier lives, and others live/lived in imminent danger. The Paula Jones matter was, related to a personal lawsuit, against the President. It was not related to the original investigation, or Clinton's duties as President. It could have waited, because for the well being of the nation, including national security.

I have long believed that the investigations related to Clinton's sex life, distracted the serious threat posed by Osama Bin Laden. Whether or not Paula Jones was telling the truth, it was not more important than thousands of people loosing thier lives, (assuming that the US government was not responsible for 9/11). Then when you add the lives lost by the people of Iraq, it goes to over 100,000, (again assuming that the invasion of Iraq was related, in any way, to 9/11). So I say that Scooter Libby did do something wrong, in a matter that had serious consequences for millions of people around the world.

[Ineeda SM]

I argue that Scooter Libby's lying was related to National security, a serious matter, related to the duties of the adminstration. It was part of a process that led to the war in Iraq, where people have lost thier lives, and others live/lived in imminent danger. The Paula Jones matter was, related to a personal lawsuit, against the President. It was not related to the original investigation, or Clinton's duties as President. It could have waited, because for the well being of the nation, including national security.

I have long believed that the investigations related to Clinton's sex life, distracted the serious threat posed by Osama Bin Laden. Whether or not Paula Jones was telling the truth, it was not more important than thousands of people loosing thier lives, (assuming that the US government was not responsible for 9/11). Then when you add the lives lost by the people of Iraq, it goes to over 100,000, (again assuming that the invasion of Iraq was related, in any way, to 9/11). So I say that Scooter Libby did do something wrong, in a matter that had serious consequences for millions of people around the world.

:iagree:Thanks Yoda. I got called a moron, idiot and jumped on by 2 trolls for stating such facts. It's good to see another voice of truth and reason.

[natina]

http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/images/icons/icon4.gif Hypocrite Watch the pregnant teen daughter of a VP hopeful who preached abstinence
Perhaps the most confounding of these politico and faux-politico speech fees is that of Sarah Palin's daughter, Bristol. Bristol Palin is most famous for being the pregnant teen daughter of a VP hopeful who preached abstinence, and though her mother is no longer involved in politics, Bristol Palin is attempting to spin her situation into a career. The younger Palin is reportedly asking for $15,000-$30,000 to speak at conferences (http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/#) and fundraisers, abstinence and "pro-life" programs. At 19, with very specific experience, it goes without saying that a name can cost a lot more than the substance of the speech. (Bad behavior is all too common in the workplace, but it can't match the drama of these celebrities' stunts.

Bristol Palin’s Nonprofit Paid Her Seven Times What It Spent On Actual Teen Pregnancy Prevention (http://thinkprogress.org/2011/04/05/bristol-palin-profiteer-teen-pregnancy/)
(http://thinkprogress.org/2011/04/05/bristol-palin-profiteer-teen-pregnancy/)

http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?t=55554 (http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?t=55554)
http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?t=55554 (http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?t=55554)
http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?t=55554 (http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?t=55554)
http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?t=55554 (http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?t=55554)



Perhaps the most confounding of these politico and faux-politico speech fees is that of Sarah Palin's daughter, Bristol. Bristol Palin is most famous for being the pregnant teen daughter of a VP hopeful who preached abstinence, and though her mother is no longer involved in politics, Bristol Palin is attempting to spin her situation into a career. The younger Palin is reportedly asking for $15,000-$30,000 to speak at conferences (http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/#) and fundraisers, abstinence and "pro-life" programs. At 19, with very specific experience, it goes without saying that a name can cost a lot more than the substance of the speech. (Bad behavior is all too common in the workplace, but it can't match the drama of these celebrities' stunts.

Bristol Palin’s Nonprofit Paid Her Seven Times What It Spent On Actual Teen Pregnancy Prevention (http://thinkprogress.org/2011/04/05/bristol-palin-profiteer-teen-pregnancy/)
(http://thinkprogress.org/2011/04/05/bristol-palin-profiteer-teen-pregnancy/)

http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?t=55554
http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?t=55554
http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?t=55554
http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?t=55554