wrote:
On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 08:03:56 -0500, DownTime wrote:


Do you have any links or sites to prove 'the most...' aspect of that
statement ?

Well, if you put Bush "most incompetent" in Google, you'll get 62,000
links.

Guess what Google just gave me?

"Results 1 - 10 of about 769,000 for clinton adultery. (0.13 seconds)"

Beat your Googlin by over 1000%

DownTime wrote:
wrote:
On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 08:03:56 -0500, DownTime wrote:


Do you have any links or sites to prove 'the most...' aspect of that
statement ?

Well, if you put Bush "most incompetent" in Google, you'll get 62,000
links.

Guess what Google just gave me?

"Results 1 - 10 of about 769,000 for clinton adultery. (0.13 seconds)"

Beat your Googlin by over 1000%


I always get a chuck out of those sorts of comparisons...

"Bush started a war." "But Clinton got a blowjob!"

"Bush sent 3800 Americans to die in Iraq." "But Clinton got a blowjob!"

et cetera.

Obviously, the Republican "base" thinks nothing of sending people off to
die in a political war, but are horrified, just horrified, by the idea
of a blowjob. Or lying about a blowjob.

HK wrote:
Obviously, the Republican "base" thinks nothing of sending people off to
die in a political war, but are horrified, just horrified, by the idea
of a blowjob. Or lying about a blowjob.


I am not horrified by it, but you started the 'incompetence' thread.
Clinton is a liar. Show me a politician who doesn't lie and I'll donate
to their campaign.

I hate us being in this war, I'd vote to bring all the troops home NOW
and be done with it.

Now there's a whole list of other issues Clinton mismanaged that are not
exactly shining moments of his administration. Clinton didn't go to war,
but he had the chance to prevent it along time ago. He failed to act &
respond at that time.

On Nov 20, 6:00�am, DownTime wrote:
HK wrote:
Obviously, the Republican "base" thinks nothing of sending people off to
die in a political war, but are horrified, just horrified, by the idea
of a blowjob. Or lying about a blowjob.

I am not horrified by it, but you started the 'incompetence' thread.
Clinton is a liar. Show me a politician who doesn't lie and I'll donate
to their campaign.

I hate us being in this war, I'd vote to bring all the troops home NOW
and be done with it.

Now there's a whole list of other issues Clinton mismanaged that are not
exactly shining moments of his administration. Clinton didn't go to war,
but he had the chance to prevent it along time ago. He failed to act &
respond at that time.

Go to an appropriate forum and refresh your memory. Without rebutting
your statement and promoting even more political argument, I will
suggest you start by looking up the response of the congressional
majority when Clinton lobbed some cruise missles at Osama bin Ladin's
training camps. See if you don't find congressional comments decrying
the cost of each missle, and a host of bitchy congressional remarks
about how BC was trying to "distract" the country from the most
pressing issue facing the nation- a blow job in the oval office and a
married man's initial denial when accused of an extra-marital sexual
encounter.

There must be dozens of sites where this subject is appropriate, and
where you could refresh your memory.

Chuck Gould wrote:
Go to an appropriate forum and refresh your memory. Without rebutting
your statement and promoting even more political argument, I will
suggest you start by looking up the response of the congressional
majority when Clinton lobbed some cruise missles at Osama bin Ladin's
training camps. See if you don't find congressional comments decrying
the cost of each missle, and a host of bitchy congressional remarks
about how BC was trying to "distract" the country from the most
pressing issue facing the nation- a blow job in the oval office and a
married man's initial denial when accused of an extra-marital sexual
encounter.

There must be dozens of sites where this subject is appropriate, and
where you could refresh your memory.

Chuck, point taken. I'll avoid being drawn into political discussions in
this forum going forward.

DownTime wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
Go to an appropriate forum and refresh your memory. Without rebutting
your statement and promoting even more political argument, I will
suggest you start by looking up the response of the congressional
majority when Clinton lobbed some cruise missles at Osama bin Ladin's
training camps. See if you don't find congressional comments decrying
the cost of each missle, and a host of bitchy congressional remarks
about how BC was trying to "distract" the country from the most
pressing issue facing the nation- a blow job in the oval office and a
married man's initial denial when accused of an extra-marital sexual
encounter.

There must be dozens of sites where this subject is appropriate, and
where you could refresh your memory.

Chuck, point taken. I'll avoid being drawn into political discussions in
this forum going forward.

Down,
It is hard, especially when they jiggle the bait just right.

Reginald Smithers III wrote:
Down,
It is hard, especially when they jiggle the bait just right.


Heck, I've ben falling for about any bait used. Topwater, sinking, live,
cut, you name it. I think a stinkbait even got me once.

Now if i could just get them redfish & snook to cooperate in Thursday,
I'll be mighty thankful...

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 06:34:23 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:

On Nov 20, 6:00?am, DownTime wrote:
HK wrote:
Obviously, the Republican "base" thinks nothing of sending people off to
die in a political war, but are horrified, just horrified, by the idea
of a blowjob. Or lying about a blowjob.

I am not horrified by it, but you started the 'incompetence' thread.
Clinton is a liar. Show me a politician who doesn't lie and I'll donate
to their campaign.

I hate us being in this war, I'd vote to bring all the troops home NOW
and be done with it.

Now there's a whole list of other issues Clinton mismanaged that are not
exactly shining moments of his administration. Clinton didn't go to war,
but he had the chance to prevent it along time ago. He failed to act &
respond at that time.

Go to an appropriate forum and refresh your memory. Without rebutting
your statement and promoting even more political argument, I will
suggest you start by looking up the response of the congressional
majority when Clinton lobbed some cruise missles at Osama bin Ladin's
training camps. See if you don't find congressional comments decrying
the cost of each missle, and a host of bitchy congressional remarks
about how BC was trying to "distract" the country from the most
pressing issue facing the nation- a blow job in the oval office and a
married man's initial denial when accused of an extra-marital sexual
encounter.

There must be dozens of sites where this subject is appropriate, and
where you could refresh your memory.

If you'll notice, most of the political crap, including the post above,
started after your political post earlier.

HK wrote:

Obviously, the Republican "base" thinks nothing of sending people off to
die in a political war, but are horrified, just horrified, by the idea of
a blowjob. Or lying about a blowjob.


There's more to the Clinton story than a simple blowjob and lying about it.
The issue that is not often discussed is this:

Before the current policy of "don't ask, don't tell", homosexuality in the
military was cause for immediate discharge. The main reason was the
potential of those with access to classified material being blackmailed by
various operatives to get information. In those days, homosexuality was not
accepted in society like it is today and those of the persuasion kept it in
the "closet" to avoid public and even family humiliation. Those of us that
were in the military in the 60's remember the lectures well.

Clinton had a lot of world credibility to lose by having an affair with a 21
year old political intern. As a married man and as POTUS he was expected to
live up to a generally accepted standard of conduct as it existed then.
Having an affair with the wrong person could have easily made him vulnerable
to blackmail. According to Lewinsky, it was not a one-time event. She
claimed that there were at least 14 "meetings" and an exchange of gifts,
etc.

It's easy to downplay the nature of his conduct now, but at the time it was
potentially serious.


Eisboch

"DownTime" wrote in message
. ..
wrote:
On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 08:03:56 -0500, DownTime wrote:


Do you have any links or sites to prove 'the most...' aspect of that
statement ?

Well, if you put Bush "most incompetent" in Google, you'll get 62,000
links.

Guess what Google just gave me?

"Results 1 - 10 of about 769,000 for clinton adultery. (0.13 seconds)"

Beat your Googlin by over 1000%


You guys sure do need a three party system......... some kind of real choice
from the usual fare.