Even if Hillary Clinton has lied about being named after Sir Hillary Edmud, who gives a flying fuck?  No one answered this when I posed this question before.  Who did she harm?  Does this mean she can't be trusted?  And her husband lied about getting a blow job.  Who gives a fuck?  Does this mean he can't be trusted?

George Bush lies about weapons of mass destruction and thousands upon thousands die.  Which is the greater lie.

I will even stand behind Republican's when they are unfairly attacked for their personal lives. Newt Gringrich is a fucking prick.  Many people took him to task for creating the "Contract with America" and calling for higher moral standards in this country and then divorcing his wife while she was dying of cancer because he wanted to marry the woman with whom he was having a long-term affair.  Who gives a fuck?   That's his private life and he and his famiily have to live with the repurcussions of his actions.  Not us.  

There is nothing wrong with calling for higer moral values but falling short of doing so in one's personal life. Maybe he's striving to live what he considers to be a moral life.

I"m all in favor of higher moral standards in this country, but how you define that is a matter for debate.  Whatever goes on in someone's private life is their business and no one else's.

Newt Gingrich is a gangrene-ridden prick whose mouth most often has looked more like a puckered asshole spewing shit for thoughts past that bleeding hemmorhoid of a  tongue.  There's plenty that he has done and said to fuck the American citizenry in the ass without  so much as favoring us with something as simple as a reach-around handjob while doing so.  There's no reason to stoop so low as to invade his personal life to support this conclusion.

How many threads a day are you going to start?  I'll humor you and cover a few more lies that Hillary never answered for but will have to as a presidential candidate.  She is going to get squashed for these.  Swiftboat! Swiftboat!

1) The documents taken from Vince Foster's (the guy who killed himself in shame from being associated W/ the Clintons) desk that magically appeared in her closet a week after the statute of limitations expired.

2) The $150,000 she made in a couple of weeks investing in cattle futures.  She denied it was inside trading and said it was from reading the WSJ.  They calculated that the odds were almost impossible for somebody to hit every booming cattle stock in a week's period of time.  It would be the equivelent of winning a lottery twice in a week.  Martha Stewart went to jail for shit not nearly as bad.

3) Travelgate.  She had the entire Whitehouse travel office fired and had the director indicted for theft so she could get her Arkansas buddies in their jobs.  The guy was acquitted in a 1/2 hour jury deliberation.  She ruined lives for no reason other than to get her friends cushy jobs.

I've got about 10 more but you get the point.  She basically had a pass as the First Lady and could control the media as a Senatorial candidate.  The Presidential race is a whole other ballgame.

PS-  Wonderful, enlightening editorial on Newt Gingrich.  You have really opened my eyes to him with those cognitive points.  I hope he does run for Pres,  He will make any and every Dem candidate look like an idiot in a debate.  He is simply smarter than the rest.

How many thread a day am I going to start?  As many as I want.  What's the fucking probem?  Is there a quota?  

All your complaints about HIllary have been investigated over and over and over again.  There has never been any evidence to substantiate any claims of wrongdoing. Not a shred.

Controlling the media?  And your evidence supporting this claim?  

I wish just one of the right wing conservatives would actually argue the issues and and policy rather than consistently turning to assaults on someone's character or regurgitating tired old accusations that have never been supported by any factual finding by a multiplicity of investigations. But then again, arguing issues and policy would be an exercise in futility and a dead-end street for you.

Hillary made all that money in cattle futures totally on the up-and-up by herself?  Do you actually believe that she instituted all those trades by herself, and then NEVER ENTERED THE MARKET AGAIN AFTER THAT?  If you do, there's a bridge I would like to sell to you that spans the East River!

1) Did she or did she not "find" the documents in her shoe closet a week after the statute of limitations expired?

2) Did she make the approx $150,000 in cattle futures? Have dozens of traders stated that it would be impossible to hit it so big so quickly?

3) Was the entire travel office fired?  Did she not publicly accuse them of embezzlement?  Was there an acquittal after a 1/2 hour jury deliberation?  Did her personal friends take over the office?

The answer to all of those are YES.  It has all been documented in front of our faces.  I will never understand the knee-jerk "no proof" argument concerning the Clintons.  There is a ton of proof in front of our face.  Read the Starr report.  I guess that all of their associates went to jail and he was impeached and disbarred and was plea bargaining during the literal last hours of his presidency means there was no proof.  The fact that they aren't in jail is the liberals "proof" of what great people the Clintons are.

-- Modified on 8/26/2006 9:35:54 PM

And disbarrment.  And impeachment.  And plea-bargaining.  And court fines.  And their associates going to jail rather than testifying against them.  And our own eyes and ears.  Other than that there was absolutely nothing.

As I said, allegations and innuendo.  Disbarrment for lying about having a sexual relationship outside of marriage.  Every married lawyer on this site would be disbarred.

Impeachment is the same as being indicted, but not convicted.   Hence, no crime.

Plea bargaining?  Many people take plea bargains because it is more expedient to plead to a lesser charge than expend all one's resources trying to mount a defense.

Someone goes to jail because she refuses to testify.  Ever heard of the fifth amendment?  Why would someone testify if doing so would incriminate one's self?  A suspect is not guilty because someone else doesn't testify.  

Ignorance is bliss.

He was disbarred for lying UNDER OATH in a COURT OF LAW.  He also got other people to commit perjury.  Remember the gifts and the Revlon jobs? The judge publicly chastised him for lying.

And it all stemmed from SEXUAL HARRASSMENT charges.  The ones he plead out because he was a President with millionaire friends.  But he was running out of resources.

Everyone associated with every shady deal of his went to jail.  Everybody but him!  I wonder why?  I'm sure it had nothing to do with being the most powerful man in the world and other people having to take the fall.

No conviction= No crime?  I guess OJ didn't do it then.

I noticed you moved away from all of Hillary's sins.  Don't worry. She's innocent as well.  She's not even in jail.  You are very astute.  You seem to be coming from this position that you are smarter than other people.  It's not working very well for you.  To the conservatives on the board you're a joke.  To the liberals you're an embarrassment.  Have you noticed that none of them are willing to stick up for you?  I guess it's because you're so much smarter than the rest of us.

George H.R. Bush's personal secretary has been his mistress for 30 years. Everyone in D.C. knows that as an open secret. However, he is out of office and to bring it up would be simply mean spirited, vicious, and irrelevant. It was not mentioned during his presidency because it was before the age of attacking politicians for what goes on in their personal lives.  That started when they were all out to get Clinton.

There was no sexual harrasment.  Read the well researched book called "A Vast Conspiracy" by award winning author Jeffrey Toobin.  All statments are supported and corrobotated.   Do you know the legal definition of sexual harassment?  I defy you to name the three IMPORTANT U.S. Supreme Court cases that have tried to define it.   Go ahead,  make my day.  Even though there have been three significant US Supreme Court cases that have tried to define sexual harrasment, it is stil largely a very murky area of law.

Paula Jones did not want to pursue a case agains Clinton. Her husband pushed it because he thought he could use it to leverage a career as an actor in Hollywoood.  That is documented in a video shot of Paula Jones being interviewd about he entire episode.  In the video she give varying accounts of her encounter with Clinton and at one point turns to her husband and says, "Is that the way it happened dear?"

Someone got a job with Revlon.  Who gives a fuck?  What's worse is that Halliburton (Dickhead Cheney's old company) got an non-bid contract to rebuidl the oil infrastructure in Iraq.  And there were massive cost overrruns cited by the GAO.  Of course, Dickhead no longer has a financial interest in the company. But what secret deals were made behind closed doors?  Why does he refuse to release the papers that are relevant to the formation of the administration's oil and energy policy?  What is he hiding?

No conviction, no crime. That is correct. But blind adherence to that is not valid. Of course OJ did it.  That was a pefect example of jury nullification.  Do you even know what jury nullification means?  

Hillary commited no crime.  Bad judgment is not a crime.

can we get you a room?

-- Modified on 8/28/2006 10:06:51 AM

he said worst PRESIDENT, not worst PERSON.

Presidents are supposed to run the country, no more or less, and that's what they're judged on.  That they might also fuck the syphilitic half of Cuba is not necessarily relevant.