and from what tef just posted, it looks like Congress has classified perjury as a "high crime" before.
I'm not arguing that perjury is NEVER impeachable. I'm just disagreeing with you both that "perjury is perjury"; it's not that simple. You have to look at the facts.
I'm only on page 1 but how can anyone believe healthcare is a privilege and not a right (the government doesn't owe us healthcare)
How can you look another human being on the eye and say, well, you got cancer, but you happen to work in a job without health care benefits, so sucks to be you?
Seriously? Just because we oppose the current gov't run healthcare we are ok with this? This is the kind of inflammatory comment that feeds the fire between Ds and Rs. It's not either/or.
No, I wish my side would concentrate on proposing an alternate healthcare solution instead of flapping about this impeachment business.
I'm only on page 1 but how can anyone believe healthcare is a privilege and not a right (the government doesn't owe us healthcare)
How can you look another human being on the eye and say, well, you got cancer, but you happen to work in a job without health care benefits, so sucks to be you?
Seriously? Just because we oppose the current gov't run healthcare we are ok with this? This is the kind of inflammatory comment that feeds the fire between Ds and Rs. It's not either/or.
No, I wish my side would concentrate on proposing an alternate healthcare solution instead of flapping about this impeachment business.
Are there any proposals for an alternate solution? I haven't heard any. I am not trying to be snarky. If the Rs manage to overturn Obamacare, I would like to know what my options might be. As a self employed person with a pre-existing condition, I couldn't get individual insurance prior to the ACA. Do the Rs have some ideas for how someone like me will be able to get insurance?
You're right, I'm still missing your point. "just because it happened doesn't mean that is was legal". Can you rephrase that because I'm not sure what you're referring to.
I agree the impeachment was a political act, but don't understand your statement that perjury is not a high crime or misdemeanor. Actually, it was a felony, punishable by a jail term up to five years. Clinton's law license was suspended because of it.
I don't think think Clinton should have been impeached, but once he was, I'm not sure how he wasn't judged guilty, because he definitely perjured himself. The vote fell almost 100% along partisan lines.
I'm still not sure why you objected to the teacher discussing the political motivations of an impeachment that you concede was wholly political in nature. I would think you'd approve.
Perjury especially about the matter that was lied about (a personal matter not related to a Presidential act ) should not be considered a high crime or misdemeanor that can lead to the removal of a President. That is clearly where we differ here. The fact that the teacher said it was a political act and THEN said she thought it was a - ok that a President was impeached because of it is reprehensible to me. Again - I don't think ANY President of any party should ever be removed from the highest office of the land after being properly elected by the American people because the opposing party hated him and found a legally minor crime related to a personal law suit that they then used the rarest of all checks and balances to impeach.
Ok, I get you on the rest, but I think you have the teacher all wrong. Completely backwards, in fact. The teacher felt Clinton should be impeached due to the perjury and obstruction of justice being a crime. The teacher also said that going for impeachment was a really bad political move by the Republican party, however. So the teacher's opinion was not the politically motivated or politically expedient one. The teacher felt the President should be accountable for breaking the law.
I was against the impeachment, because they were just continuously casting a wide net trying to catch him at anything just to be obstructionist.
It's a difficult ethical question. I actually believed lying was the more honorable course in this case, rather than embarrass his wife or put the spotlight on Lewinsky. Of course the most honorable thing would have been if he had just kept it in his pants! I was so disappointed in Clinton for being such a moron and not being able to keep it in his pants - he knew everyone would be trying to catch him at some indiscretion. What the hell was wrong with him? Kind of like Wiener getting caught a second time....
However, I can appreciate the opinion that the President isn't above the law and should be beyond reproach. I know people who felt it was a huge abuse of his office to be involved with an intern. They thought sexual harrassment should have also been a charge. I don't think that most of the politicians who supported impeachment were motivated by ethics, but I won't automatically discount that as the motivation for "some" supporters of impeachment.
Seriously? Just because we oppose the current gov't run healthcare we are ok with this? This is the kind of inflammatory comment that feeds the fire between Ds and Rs. It's not either/or.
No, I wish my side would concentrate on proposing an alternate healthcare solution instead of flapping about this impeachment business.
Are there any proposals for an alternate solution? I haven't heard any. I am not trying to be snarky. If the Rs manage to overturn Obamacare, I would like to know what my options might be. As a self employed person with a pre-existing condition, I couldn't get individual insurance prior to the ACA. Do the Rs have some ideas for how someone like me will be able to get insurance?
I hear ya. I had the tv on in the background today and Ben Carson was on talking about alternatives. I was only half listening so didn't get the full gist to do it justice here.
Seriously? Just because we oppose the current gov't run healthcare we are ok with this? This is the kind of inflammatory comment that feeds the fire between Ds and Rs. It's not either/or.
No, I wish my side would concentrate on proposing an alternate healthcare solution instead of flapping about this impeachment business.
I'm going to guess that the reason they can't figure out an alternative is because for 20 years this WAS their alternative (to the UHC, i mean, rank socialism proposed by dems).
I'm willing to bet it's bc they (both sides) all are politicians far removed from the problem. Not people in the trenches who have more expertise.
I'm only on page 1 but how can anyone believe healthcare is a privilege and not a right (the government doesn't owe us healthcare)
How can you look another human being on the eye and say, well, you got cancer, but you happen to work in a job without health care benefits, so sucks to be you?
Seriously? Just because we oppose the current gov't run healthcare we are ok with this? This is the kind of inflammatory comment that feeds the fire between Ds and Rs. It's not either/or.
No, I wish my side would concentrate on proposing an alternate healthcare solution instead of flapping about this impeachment business.
Well, maybe you don't feel that way, but my parents do. So, some R's ARE okay with it.
And really, what solution could they come up with that adheres to Republican ideals? No gov't-run healthcare because big government. No mandate to make all employers offer healthcare because no regulations on businesses. So . . . .
Honorable would have been to cop to being a cheater cheater because let's face it, we all knew he was which was how he ended up being slapped with a sexual harassment suit. In fact, admitting to cheating was certainly more honorable than admitting to flashing his dick at someone which was indeed the whole reason we were there, Republicans notwithstanding.
Lying wasn't honorable because it was a relatively easy lie to dispute which only dragged out the proceedings further, and thus embarrassed his family further. Plus, don't tell me Hillary didn't know anyway. If she didn't know about Monica exactly, she knew he regularly misbehaved himself AT BEST with women who were not his wife.
If he'd copped to it, sobbed and cried about it a little, promised he was new again in Christ or whatever, people would still have despised him but prostrating yourself in guilt was certainly not a new phenomenon for the era of Jimmy Swaggart and daytime television.
As for Lewinsky, he could have put it all on himself, blathered on about a position of power, and done quite a bit more to take the responsibility for his idiocy on himself and perhaps shut down widespread talk that she was just a skank, a skank he wouldn't even take credit for sleeping with.
and from what tef just posted, it looks like Congress has classified perjury as a "high crime" before.
The charges against Nixon were basically the same, when it comes down to it - obstruction of justice and perjury.
The circumstances of the obstruction and perjury were significantly different as one related to a civil lawsuit unrelated to his office, but I agree, it seems they've classified perjury and obstruction of justice as a high crime before.
Seriously? Just because we oppose the current gov't run healthcare we are ok with this? This is the kind of inflammatory comment that feeds the fire between Ds and Rs. It's not either/or.
No, I wish my side would concentrate on proposing an alternate healthcare solution instead of flapping about this impeachment business.
Well, maybe you don't feel that way, but my parents do. So, some R's ARE okay with it.
And really, what solution could they come up with that adheres to Republican ideals? No gov't-run healthcare because big government. No mandate to make all employers offer healthcare because no regulations on businesses. So . . . .
If I knew the answer I would run for freaking President! There has to be a happy medium or alternate solution. I'm a teacher, I'm not in the medical field. Perhaps politicians should do their homework and ask those closest to the problem what needs to be fixed, not pander for votes all the time. I look at how the VA healthcare is run and am appalled. Nothing gets done when there is so much bureaucracy.
Regarding your parents: Wow. I've never heard that point of view. However, just as when I see extremes on the Dem side, I don't make generalizations about the whole party-----even though I agree with very little
Well, maybe you don't feel that way, but my parents do. So, some R's ARE okay with it.
And really, what solution could they come up with that adheres to Republican ideals? No gov't-run healthcare because big government. No mandate to make all employers offer healthcare because no regulations on businesses. So . . . .
If I knew the answer I would run for freaking President! There has to be a happy medium or alternate solution. I'm a teacher, I'm not in the medical field. Perhaps politicians should do their homework and ask those closest to the problem what needs to be fixed, not pander for votes all the time. I look at how the VA healthcare is run and am appalled. Nothing gets done when there is so much bureaucracy.
Regarding your parents: Wow. I've never heard that point of view. However, just as when I see extremes on the Dem side, I don't make generalizations about the whole party-----even though I agree with very little
As far as I can see, though, they aren't offering up much in the way of alternatives. And if they aren't, then it seems they are ok with pre-ACA healthcare. So, yeah, it does come across that the Rs don't care if someone goes without health insurance and can't get treatment. I am open to hearing other ideas. But until I hear a better alternative, I would like ACA to stay.
Honorable would have been to cop to being a cheater cheater because let's face it, we all knew he was which was how he ended up being slapped with a sexual harassment suit. In fact, admitting to cheating was certainly more honorable than admitting to flashing his dick at someone which was indeed the whole reason we were there, Republicans notwithstanding.
Lying wasn't honorable because it was a relatively easy lie to dispute which only dragged out the proceedings further, and thus embarrassed his family further. Plus, don't tell me Hillary didn't know anyway. If she didn't know about Monica exactly, she knew he regularly misbehaved himself AT BEST with women who were not his
I think my personal dislike, (apart from political differences) for HRC grew when she sat on that stage and called it a right wing conspiracy. Come on, even she couldn't believe what she was saying. She should have said nothing. Private matter. Instead, she used her husband's adultery to take a jab at their opponents. I normally don't dislike politicians on a personal basis, but that was kind of gross. Again, both sides are guilty of that kind of crap. There is no civility anymore. Eh, not trying to make this a Hillary Clinton thread, but I wanted to get that off my chest.
If I knew the answer I would run for freaking President! There has to be a happy medium or alternate solution. I'm a teacher, I'm not in the medical field. Perhaps politicians should do their homework and ask those closest to the problem what needs to be fixed, not pander for votes all the time. I look at how the VA healthcare is run and am appalled. Nothing gets done when there is so much bureaucracy.
Regarding your parents: Wow. I've never heard that point of view. However, just as when I see extremes on the Dem side, I don't make generalizations about the whole party-----even though I agree with very little
As far as I can see, though, they aren't offering up much in the way of alternatives. And if they aren't, then it seems they are ok with pre-ACA healthcare. So, yeah, it does come across that the Rs don't care if someone goes without health insurance and can't get treatment. I am open to hearing other ideas. But until I hear a better alternative, I would like ACA to stay.
Yes, the republicans hated him but I think there was a massive culture shift between the last guy in the oval office to dick around on his wife and Clinton. Everyone knew what Kennedy was doing but no respectable or even less than respectable paper was willing to report it. By the time Slick Willy rolled around, papers would report anything and sex scandals both political, religious, celebrity, or mundane were fodder for daytime television and the basis of the movie of the week.
Also, it should be remembered that Clinton didn't lie to save his family embarrassment. He lied because Paula Jones accused him of sexual harassment and admitting that he was fucking with an intern doesn't exactly help your case when trying to prove that you aren't the kind of guy who shows your dick to random women.
Didn't George HW also have a mistress? It wasn't like Kennedy was the last philanderer before Clinton. Hell, LBJ is rumored to have had.code.words and shit for his secretary to warn him when the first lady was on her way. Actually, maybe that was Eisenhower. Either way, the kind of man who becomes the leader of the free world is probably the kind of man who will dip his dick in just about anything.
I can't find a legitish source for the assertion that HW had an affair. But Carter didn't and I don't think Reagan did either. And there can be no doubt that the press had changed markedly in that time and so had what people were willing to discuss in public.
I'm not saying the political climate was irrelevant to the scandal at all, merely that social mores and polite conversation had changed so drastically by the time Clinton rolled around that it was certainly a contributor.
Gary Hart and Jimmy Swaggart also helped break the taboo on those types of discussions in the public arena as did Oprah, Donahue, and Rikki Lake.
just saw a news ahrticle. He agreed to avoid criminal charges for.lying. it was for 5 years. Over in 06. Odd
No. He was held in contempt for intentionally lying (this would be the difference between "lying under oath" and the more complicated charge of perjury). He had his license suspended and paid a fine. There were no criminal charges because it was a criminal contempt (as opposed to a civil contempt). So, the fine wasn't to avoid criminal charges. It was the punishment for the contempt.
r. Clinton agreed to the suspension on his last full day as president, Jan. 19, 2001. The agreement came on the condition that prosecutors not pursue criminal charges against him after he lied under oath about his relationship with Lewinsky, a White House intern.
Wasn't Nancy "the other woman"? I mean, it all worked out because they were cookoo for coco puffs for each other. But if memory serves, Reagan's feelings about the sanctity of marriage didn't extend to his first marriage.
No, not that I can see. Unless wiki is telling lies lol. Jane Wyman said that their marriage was never the same after the birth and immediate death of their last child but that what actually caused the divorce was his desire to enter politics. She filed in 1948 and the divorce was finalized in 49, the same year he met Nancy though they didn't marry until 1952.
I think my personal dislike, (apart from political differences) for HRC grew when she sat on that stage and called it a right wing conspiracy. Come on, even she couldn't believe what she was saying. She should have said nothing. Private matter. Instead, she used her husband's adultery to take a jab at their opponents. I normally don't dislike politicians on a personal basis, but that was kind of gross. Again, both sides are guilty of that kind of crap. There is no civility anymore. Eh, not trying to make this a Hillary Clinton thread, but I wanted to get that off my chest.
It was a right wing conspiracy. They fucking hated him. That doesn't mean he wasn't a disgusting chauvinistic man whore. It just means that every president before him had also had a personal life like a daytime soap opera and Clinton's was just the first one anyone gave a shit about.
No, I meant that she made it sound like the adultery was made up etc. by us. Like it was absurd to even suggest there was a hint of truth to the story.
Yeah, if Hillary had said they were only fixated on her husband's personal life because of politics, I wouldn't have given it another thought. But her stance is that the entire world was lying on Clinton for funsies and he absolutely hadn't been shady with other women.
Yeah, if Hillary had said they were only fixated on her husband's personal life because of politics, I wouldn't have given it another thought. But her stance is that the entire world was lying on Clinton for funsies and he absolutely hadn't been shady with other women.
Yeah uh huh
Except it wasn't just about Clinton doing shady sexual things. Vince Foster, Whitewater, pork futures, Roger Clinton, the Travel Office. He and HRC were constantly being accused of doing doing illegal or immoral and it dogged most of Clinton's Presidency. They weren't very good at taking their share of the blame for not handling things well, but I don't blame anyone for thinking the Rs were indeed creating and chasing conspiracy theories. Clinton was accused by some Rs of murder, FFS. The entire thing was exhausting.
George HW Bush had a mistress right? I remember that coming out during Bush's 2000 run.
And LBJ was a huge philanderer. Like by some accounts worse than Kennedy, it just wasn't with Marilyn Monroe. And with JFK some rumors were that it would have been more of an issue had he run in 64.
I'm not sure at what point in changed but in one era, it was something most men did that no one discussed in polite company and then only in the last 30 or so years has it become something that's considered a huge moral failing. I'd be curious to know where that turned. Lord knows social mores have become much looser of the last few years.
Maybe it's because marriage has changed and divorce is more acceptable. Maybe it was more useful to ignore infidelity in an era where you couldn't get divorced or where to do so as a woman was far more detrimental to your life and the lives of your children. Now you can leave your cheating bastard of a husband and take half his shit. Or maybe it's an entirely different reason, idk.
Post by lasagnasshole on Jul 28, 2014 7:02:00 GMT -5
I always love seeing teachers*, who get taxpayer-provided health care as part of their job benefits, coming out against making sure everyone has access to affordable healthcare, regardless of employer. Fucking swell.
I always love seeing teachers*, who get taxpayer-provided health care as part of their job benefits, coming out against making sure everyone has access to affordable healthcare, regardless of employer. Fucking swell.
USA! USA! USA!
*Assuming they teach public school. OBVS.
If you're referring to me, I don't teach in public school.
I always love seeing teachers*, who get taxpayer-provided health care as part of their job benefits, coming out against making sure everyone has access to affordable healthcare, regardless of employer. Fucking swell.
USA! USA! USA!
*Assuming they teach public school. OBVS.
If you're referring to me, I don't teach in public school.
Well, that's good.
It's awfully early on a Monday for me to bust out my rage boner.
If you're referring to me, I don't teach in public school.
Well, that's good.
It's awfully early on a Monday for me to bust out my rage boner.
Lol. I'm wasting time myself bc I don't want to drag my butt up and exercise.
For the record, I am not anti access to healthcare for everyone and too bad if you don't have a job that provides it. Ideally, I'd like the insurance companies and medical field to work something out. Sigh.