Obama toman convicted of DUI "This Bud's For You"

DeafCaroline said:
That sexual harassment suit should never have happened anyway. She didn't even win and despite the Senate have a Republican majority, they couldn't get the 2/3 majority vote to actually impeach him.

That says a lot about what people think of this whole ridiculous debacle.
Click to expand...
Doesn't matter who won and who lost. He was under oath. I would have been sent to prison for it.

The Republicans had a majority but not a 2/3 supermajority. Also, I know it's picky, but he was in fact impeached. He was just not convicted.
 
rockin'robin said:
If I were President of the USA, there would be no cause for me to "stand on a platform" and admit that "I had a blowjob".

We didn't vote for a President to drag us in the mud...(of his own doings)...and he was married at the time...he not only embarrassed his wife, he embarrassed the American people....Sure, I bet there was a lot of "laughter" when he was exposed...but it was also a big blow to those of us that have R-E-S-P-E-C-T for our President(s)....and a "blowjob" in the Oval Office is not a respectful thing for anyone to announce to the world. Our sex lives should remain private, and in the bedroom...

But he was, all in all, a good President to my way of thinking and knowledge... but a lousy and disrespectful Husband.
Click to expand...

And smoking the cigar after using it as a dildo is a tad.....creepy. "Taste's pretty good"

I wonder if he ever says "Hey Hill, wear a blue dress tonight just for fun"
 
BTW: try not to shoot yourself in your own foot

Your example of Vancouver stated "poor single parents". WTF, if they are poor and single why are they having a child!!
 
Just curious... how poor do they have to be to not have a baby, Rolling7? Do they have to earn at least a certain amount of income per year...?

20k per year perhaps? or more?
 
rolling7 said:
BTW: try not to shoot yourself in your own foot

Your example of Vancouver stated "poor single parents". WTF, if they are poor and single why are they having a child!!
Click to expand...

why not? even poor people like having families. i was married when i got pregnant but my husband fucked off before the baby was born and i had no choice but to apply for welfare, go to the soup kitchen, ask for food donations and apply for assistance so my child could go to daycare while I could go to school and get my degree.

so when you talk about underhanded folks who dared to breed, you're talking about people like me as if i deliberately intended to put myself in that situation just for the sake of making you pay for it. that wasn't the case and people don't have babies with that intention, generally speaking.

i'm disengaging from this futile debate with you. I prefer constructive dialogue, not pointing fingers and talking about how underhanded it is for poor people to "breed".
 
Daredevel7 said:
Just curious... how poor do they have to be to not have a baby, Rolling7? Do they have to earn at least a certain amount of income per year...?

20k per year perhaps? or more?
Click to expand...

Not that I think there needs to be a law or anything.....but I would sure hope people making $20,000/year wouldn't be making babies unless they have rich parents. At 20,000/yr you can barely afford a pet and in alot of area you can't even afford rent.
 
So being poor and having kids.. Some are rich and have kids and become poor later. So????

I have seen well doers go broke in the past few years and go on welfare due to the recession and losing their jobs, homes etc....

What about the well doers that get a divorce and the ex refuse to pay child support. Leaving the single parent with no choice but to file for assistance??

Can not just say poor people should not have children.. that would be silly.. anyone can go broke.
 
Babyblue said:
Can not just say poor people should not have children.. that would be silly.. anyone can go broke.
Click to expand...
I think rolling is saying "It ain't my problem you went broke", then ignoring anything the other person might say. I can only hope for something to open the eyes of such people. I also find it repulsive to bring Jesus into a thread that is supposed to be about Obama had a beer with this naughty plumber, but thread hijackings are a familiar concept in his world.
 
darkdog said:
Doesn't matter who won and who lost. He was under oath. I would have been sent to prison for it.

The Republicans had a majority but not a 2/3 supermajority. Also, I know it's picky, but he was in fact impeached. He was just not convicted.
Click to expand...

I stand corrected. He was impeached - for lying about a blowjob. I mean, if we're going to get picky here....

you would have been sent to prison if you lied about a blowjob while under oath? really?
 
DeafCaroline said:
I stand corrected. He was impeached - for lying about a blowjob. I mean, if we're going to get picky here....

you would have been sent to prison if you lied about a blowjob while under oath? really?
Click to expand...

Yes....perjury is a crime here.
 
Babyblue said:
So being poor and having kids.. Some are rich and have kids and become poor later. So????

I have seen well doers go broke in the past few years and go on welfare due to the recession and losing their jobs, homes etc....

What about the well doers that get a divorce and the ex refuse to pay child support. Leaving the single parent with no choice but to file for assistance??

Can not just say poor people should not have children.. that would be silly.. anyone can go broke.
Click to expand...

No doubt
 
TXgolfer said:
Yes....perjury is a crime here.
Click to expand...

I know but I thought one would get imprisoned for it only if the perjury led to grand miscarriage of justice.

In any case, he did pay the price for perjury. his license to practice law in Arkansas got suspended for 5 years and while he did have the opportunity to contest disbarment after the suspension, he voluntarily surrendered his license to the Supreme Court. In addition he paid $115,000 in fines as well as $850,000 to Paula Jones. One of the reasons for not filing criminal charges against him was because he already paid a big enough price by being so publicly condemned by America after his impeachment.
 
DeafCaroline said:
I stand corrected. He was impeached - for lying about a blowjob. I mean, if we're going to get picky here....

you would have been sent to prison if you lied about a blowjob while under oath? really?
Click to expand...
Perjury is perjury. It doesn't matter how mundane the topic is. Even if I lied under oath about the color of my car or where I went shopping yesterday, that would be perjury. Details matter in court cases.
 
DeafCaroline said:
I know but I thought one would get imprisoned for it only if the perjury led to grand miscarriage of justice.

In any case, he did pay the price for perjury. his license to practice law in Arkansas got suspended for 5 years and while he did have the opportunity to contest disbarment after the suspension, he voluntarily surrendered his license to the Supreme Court. In addition he paid $115,000 in fines as well as $850,000 to Paula Jones. One of the reasons for not filing criminal charges against him was because he already paid a big enough price by being so publicly condemned by America after his impeachment.
Click to expand...

Impeachment IS a criminal charge. That is what it is called when office holders are charged.
 
DeafCaroline said:
I stand corrected. He was impeached - for lying about a blowjob. I mean, if we're going to get picky here....

you would have been sent to prison if you lied about a blowjob while under oath? really?
Click to expand...
DeafCaroline said:
I know but I thought one would get imprisoned for it only if the perjury led to grand miscarriage of justice.

In any case, he did pay the price for perjury. his license to practice law in Arkansas got suspended for 5 years and while he did have the opportunity to contest disbarment after the suspension, he voluntarily surrendered his license to the Supreme Court. In addition he paid $115,000 in fines as well as $850,000 to Paula Jones. One of the reasons for not filing criminal charges against him was because he already paid a big enough price by being so publicly condemned by America after his impeachment.
Click to expand...

he never got impeached.
 
Jiro said:
he never got impeached.
Click to expand...

Actually, he did. Impeachment is not the same as conviction. darkdog was right.

Impeachment means to formally file charges of misconduct against an public official while he's in office.
 
TXgolfer said:
Impeachment IS a criminal charge. That is what it is called when office holders are charged.
Click to expand...

there's a reason it's called impeachment and not a criminal charge. impeachment means a formal filing of charges against a public official for misconduct, of which in Clinton's case, was lying about a BJ.

It's not the same as arresting them, fingerprinting them and then throwing them in jail until their trial.
 
William J. Clinton | The White House
In 1998, as a result of issues surrounding personal indiscretions with a young woman White House intern, Clinton was the second U.S. president to be impeached by the House of Representatives. He was tried in the Senate and found not guilty of the charges brought against him.
Click to expand...
 
DeafCaroline said:
there's a reason it's called impeachment and not a criminal charge. impeachment means a formal filing of charges against a public official for misconduct, of which in Clinton's case, was lying about a BJ.

It's not the same as arresting them, fingerprinting them and then throwing them in jail until their trial.
Click to expand...

when it comes to impeachment, that would means he's been removed from the office.
 
Back
Top