- This topic has 62 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 8 months ago by
briansd1.
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 20, 2012 at 9:38 AM #748529July 20, 2012 at 10:25 AM #748540
Allan from Fallbrook
Participant[quote=briansd1]Why do you think Bill Clinton was so loved? People see themselves in him.
As far a Monica being ugly, as I recall you said before, Allan, people should just look at who they sleep next to every night.
And the Mormons are more wicked than we think. What happens behind the scenes….[/quote]
Brian: Diatribe much? I do enjoy the Monica Lewinsky line, though. It doesn’t change Monica’s looks, nor does it change the fact that she wasn’t, uh, Bill’s wife. I would think your inner Frenchman would demand someone a little more toothsome (and less zaftig) for the most Powerful Man on Earth.
As to the Mormons being more wicked than we think: This is new to me. The Mormons are wicked? How, exactly? Being Catholic, I don’t hold Mormons in any special esteem, but wicked? To me, that’s like saying Presbyterians are wicked. Or Methodists. The Mormons seem rather benign, no? I guess not.
What sort of perfidy are they up to, in their special Underoos?
Bill Clinton remains an undeniably adept pol, which is like saying Bill Clinton remains an undeniably adept con man. He is a politician, ergo, he is a lying shitbag, like all politicians. I’d love to get plastered with the dude, as I think he’d be a hoot to hang out with, but I’d make sure to check that I had my watch and wallet when we parted company. Careful to whom you give your virginity, Brian, you can’t ever get it back.
July 20, 2012 at 12:51 PM #748559bearishgurl
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook] . . . The Mormons seem rather benign, no? I guess not.
What sort of perfidy are they up to, in their special Underoos? . . . [/quote]
[img_assist|nid=13925|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=46|height=46]
Alan, you’ve got even me now frequently perusing my “Merriam Webster” bookmark!
The few “Mormons” I have met throughout life were NOT “benign,” by any stretch of the imagination. All were men who had problems with perfidy, among other indiscretions … in varying degrees. One was so perfidious, he could no longer tell truth from fiction and believed his own tall tales.
No offense to any Piggs out there but this has been my personal experience.
July 20, 2012 at 1:56 PM #748566briansd1
GuestAllan, to your “they are all the same” theme, they all cheat. I admire the French in that they do it, and they freely admit to it.
I don’t see what the big deal is with Bill and Monica. For all we know, Romney is doing the nasty with someone else.
July 20, 2012 at 2:06 PM #748569Hobie
ParticipantIntegrity. Something I expect for the highest office of the land.
It is not just the bj, but the lying afterward and even bigger is explaining to your daughter that indeed it is sex.
July 20, 2012 at 2:13 PM #748570Participant[quote=Hobie]Integrity. Something I expect for the highest office of the land.
It is not just the bj, but the lying afterward and even bigger is explaining to your daughter that indeed it is sex.[/quote]
Hobie: Expecting integrity from politicians is like expecting sobriety from a drunk.
In Clinton’s case, it was NOT the blowjob that got him into trouble, it was suborning perjury. Most people don’t realize that Clinton was disbarred for five years following L’affaire de Lewinsky.
July 20, 2012 at 2:16 PM #748571Participant[quote=bearishgurl][quote=Allan from Fallbrook] . . . The Mormons seem rather benign, no? I guess not.
What sort of perfidy are they up to, in their special Underoos? . . . [/quote]
[img_assist|nid=13925|title=|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=46|height=46]
Alan, you’ve got even me now frequently perusing my “Merriam Webster” bookmark!
The few “Mormons” I have met throughout life were NOT “benign,” by any stretch of the imagination. All were men who had problems with perfidy, among other indiscretions … in varying degrees. One was so perfidious, he could no longer tell truth from fiction and believed his own tall tales.
No offense to any Piggs out there but this has been my personal experience.[/quote]
BG: Like I said, I don’t know much about Mormonism personally, other than the holy underwear, getting your own planet and the golden plates stuff. Being Catholic, I generally avoid casting aspersions on another’s beliefs, since the Mother Church has her own sordid history in this respect.
Perfidy is a good one, isn’t it? Nefarious is good, too, but didn’t seem right, especially in conjunction with the Underoos.
July 20, 2012 at 2:30 PM #748572ParticipantDisbarred, big whoop. Being an ex-Pres trumps a bar license for lifestyle and earning potential.
Realistically, not much more they could have done to him.
July 20, 2012 at 3:11 PM #748573Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]. . . Being Catholic, I generally avoid casting aspersions on another’s beliefs, since the Mother Church has her own sordid history in this respect…[/quote]
Yes, being raised a Catholic myself, I, too, am mindful of the Mother Church’s “sordid history…”
July 20, 2012 at 3:16 PM #748576Participant[quote=Hobie]Disbarred, big whoop. Being an ex-Pres trumps a bar license for lifestyle and earning potential.
Realistically, not much more they could have done to him.[/quote]
Hobie: I agree re: the disbarment. I was simply making the point that the blowjob wasn’t the big deal: It was the subornation of perjury that was.
July 20, 2012 at 3:19 PM #748577Participant[quote=bearishgurl][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]. . . Being Catholic, I generally avoid casting aspersions on another’s beliefs, since the Mother Church has her own sordid history in this respect…[/quote]
Yes, being raised a Catholic myself, I, too, am mindful of the Mother Church’s “sordid history…”[/quote]
BG: I was Jesuit educated (12 years), including my first eight in a seminary school. You want to talk about a fun bunch, the Jesuits are the only priestly order that was actually excommunicated for a time.
Plus, you add in that whole Spanish Inquisition thing (which the Dominicans, in fairness, were also part of), and you have a whole bunch of that sordid history sitting in yer lap.
July 20, 2012 at 4:11 PM #748585Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Hobie: I agree re: the disbarment. I was simply making the point that the blowjob wasn’t the big deal: It was the subornation of perjury that was.[/quote]
What about Romney’s filing with the SEC that the was CEO of Bain when he wasn’t? Or was he?
July 20, 2012 at 4:47 PM #748592Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Hobie: I agree re: the disbarment. I was simply making the point that the blowjob wasn’t the big deal: It was the subornation of perjury that was.[/quote]
What about Romney’s filing with the SEC that the was CEO of Bain when he wasn’t? Or was he?[/quote]
Brian: While I think the whole Bain and tax return(s) thing is overblown and a distraction, I also think Romney needs to get everything out in the open.
I’d imagine that he probably: A) Made good money during the downturn and is apprehensive about showing that (especially given the number of people out of work/struggling), or B) He engaged in a perfectly legal tax avoidance scheme, like a Loss Carryover/Carryforward, that the average Joe/Jane won’t understand (making him look more elitist and out-of-touch).
On Bain, he was either directing traffic there (post-1999) or he wasn’t. Simple as that. If he wasn’t, divulge those documents/filings that prove it. If he was… Well, that’s a different kettle of fish entirely.
If I’m Obama, I keep hammering away at this (because it keeps attention away from the economy); If I’m Romney, I get this behind me and keep hammering Obama on the economy (which may ultimately prove to be a HUGE factor, if things don’t improve soon).
July 20, 2012 at 6:55 PM #748598Guest[quote=Allan from Fallbrook] On Bain, he was either directing traffic there (post-1999) or he wasn’t. Simple as that. If he wasn’t, divulge those documents/filings that prove it. If he was… Well, that’s a different kettle of fish entirely.
[/quote]Romey is not claimig that his SEC filings were false. So if the SEC filings were correct, then he’s lying to the public.
Romney is not now claiming his 13D filings were inaccurate or false, but he is claiming that although he was chief executive officer, managing director, chairman and president of Bain Capital, he was not really there, but in Utah managing the Winter Olympics. Nevertheless, he was earning more than $100,000 in salary from Bain. Since he will not release his income tax returns for 1999-2002, we have no idea how high this salary really was.
If Romney was not “involved” in the operations of Bain Capital, why was he being paid? As sole shareholder, why did he keep himself on as CEO? Also, at least with respect to the Stericycle deal, he invested as an individual along with the Bain entities. Why is Romney’s story about his relationship to Bain and its investment activities at odds with the documents his firm filed?
http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/20/opinion/karmel-romney-bain/index.htmlSEC filing that Romney signed:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/861878/0000950131-99-006448.txtNow, I would agree that this is a petty way of going after Romney. But if prosecutors went after Clinton for lying about his affair with Monica, then we ought to investigate Romney’s SEC and Massachusetts filings more closely. After all, lying is lying, right? As you would argue, Allan, it’s not the context that matters, but the act of lying itself.
July 20, 2012 at 7:30 PM #748599
svelteParticipant[quote=briansd1]Allan, to your “they are all the same” theme, they all cheat. I admire the French in that they do it, and they freely admit to it.
[/quote]whoa there. “Cheating” is doing something against the agreement between the couple. I look to the wife’s reaction. If Hillary is OK with Billy Boy having some fun, it’s OK with me too. She didn’t seem to mind, so I am presuming he didn’t “cheat”.
Now, Mrs. Schwarzenegger on the other hand, she DID mind. Therefore, I’m much more critical of Arnold’s side trips…
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.