Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 11, 2008 at 11:19 AM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237618July 11, 2008 at 11:19 AM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237626
Allan from Fallbrook
ParticipantPeace: I don’t think you and I are talking about the same thing here. Suborning perjury is not lying, it is getting another person to lie under oath (in this case, Monica Lewinsky).
Yes, I have a problem with a President lying, whether he is Dem or Repub. However, I have a much bigger problem with a sitting President, who is also a trained attorney, suborning perjury before Congress. A lie is bad. This is far worse.
And the American people have been wearing that blue dress since the 1950s.
July 11, 2008 at 11:19 AM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237674Allan from Fallbrook
ParticipantPeace: I don’t think you and I are talking about the same thing here. Suborning perjury is not lying, it is getting another person to lie under oath (in this case, Monica Lewinsky).
Yes, I have a problem with a President lying, whether he is Dem or Repub. However, I have a much bigger problem with a sitting President, who is also a trained attorney, suborning perjury before Congress. A lie is bad. This is far worse.
And the American people have been wearing that blue dress since the 1950s.
July 11, 2008 at 11:19 AM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237688Allan from Fallbrook
ParticipantPeace: I don’t think you and I are talking about the same thing here. Suborning perjury is not lying, it is getting another person to lie under oath (in this case, Monica Lewinsky).
Yes, I have a problem with a President lying, whether he is Dem or Repub. However, I have a much bigger problem with a sitting President, who is also a trained attorney, suborning perjury before Congress. A lie is bad. This is far worse.
And the American people have been wearing that blue dress since the 1950s.
July 11, 2008 at 10:14 AM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237390Allan from Fallbrook
ParticipantOC: Nope. I didn’t vote for Bush (either time) and find the actions of his Administration, especially regarding torture, rendition, willful destruction of our civil liberties and the woefully bad prosection of the war in Iraq to be reprehensible.
The fact that he is a Republican and Clinton was a Democrat have nothing to do with it.
I was simply speaking to a point made about “the blowjob” and how that really wasn’t the issue at all.
July 11, 2008 at 10:14 AM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237523Allan from Fallbrook
ParticipantOC: Nope. I didn’t vote for Bush (either time) and find the actions of his Administration, especially regarding torture, rendition, willful destruction of our civil liberties and the woefully bad prosection of the war in Iraq to be reprehensible.
The fact that he is a Republican and Clinton was a Democrat have nothing to do with it.
I was simply speaking to a point made about “the blowjob” and how that really wasn’t the issue at all.
July 11, 2008 at 10:14 AM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237532Allan from Fallbrook
ParticipantOC: Nope. I didn’t vote for Bush (either time) and find the actions of his Administration, especially regarding torture, rendition, willful destruction of our civil liberties and the woefully bad prosection of the war in Iraq to be reprehensible.
The fact that he is a Republican and Clinton was a Democrat have nothing to do with it.
I was simply speaking to a point made about “the blowjob” and how that really wasn’t the issue at all.
July 11, 2008 at 10:14 AM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237579Allan from Fallbrook
ParticipantOC: Nope. I didn’t vote for Bush (either time) and find the actions of his Administration, especially regarding torture, rendition, willful destruction of our civil liberties and the woefully bad prosection of the war in Iraq to be reprehensible.
The fact that he is a Republican and Clinton was a Democrat have nothing to do with it.
I was simply speaking to a point made about “the blowjob” and how that really wasn’t the issue at all.
July 11, 2008 at 10:14 AM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237592Allan from Fallbrook
ParticipantOC: Nope. I didn’t vote for Bush (either time) and find the actions of his Administration, especially regarding torture, rendition, willful destruction of our civil liberties and the woefully bad prosection of the war in Iraq to be reprehensible.
The fact that he is a Republican and Clinton was a Democrat have nothing to do with it.
I was simply speaking to a point made about “the blowjob” and how that really wasn’t the issue at all.
July 11, 2008 at 9:39 AM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237329Allan from Fallbrook
ParticipantPeace: Ah, the nostalgia, indeed. And the mis-remembering. I think the whole “President suborning perjury” deal was a little more important than the blowjob itself.
Didn’t the Republicans, and Newt Gingrich specifically, also provide most of the good ideas (“Contract with America”) that Clinton stole and claimed for his own?
Yup, the halcyon days of yore.
July 11, 2008 at 9:39 AM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237462Allan from Fallbrook
ParticipantPeace: Ah, the nostalgia, indeed. And the mis-remembering. I think the whole “President suborning perjury” deal was a little more important than the blowjob itself.
Didn’t the Republicans, and Newt Gingrich specifically, also provide most of the good ideas (“Contract with America”) that Clinton stole and claimed for his own?
Yup, the halcyon days of yore.
July 11, 2008 at 9:39 AM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237471Allan from Fallbrook
ParticipantPeace: Ah, the nostalgia, indeed. And the mis-remembering. I think the whole “President suborning perjury” deal was a little more important than the blowjob itself.
Didn’t the Republicans, and Newt Gingrich specifically, also provide most of the good ideas (“Contract with America”) that Clinton stole and claimed for his own?
Yup, the halcyon days of yore.
July 11, 2008 at 9:39 AM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237519Allan from Fallbrook
ParticipantPeace: Ah, the nostalgia, indeed. And the mis-remembering. I think the whole “President suborning perjury” deal was a little more important than the blowjob itself.
Didn’t the Republicans, and Newt Gingrich specifically, also provide most of the good ideas (“Contract with America”) that Clinton stole and claimed for his own?
Yup, the halcyon days of yore.
July 11, 2008 at 9:39 AM in reply to: Shouldn’t we know the sexual turn-ons of the candidates? #237531Allan from Fallbrook
ParticipantPeace: Ah, the nostalgia, indeed. And the mis-remembering. I think the whole “President suborning perjury” deal was a little more important than the blowjob itself.
Didn’t the Republicans, and Newt Gingrich specifically, also provide most of the good ideas (“Contract with America”) that Clinton stole and claimed for his own?
Yup, the halcyon days of yore.
July 10, 2008 at 8:33 PM in reply to: McCain should win in landslide. Obama turning out to be a lightweight. #237134Allan from Fallbrook
ParticipantJohn: Well, as the old expression goes: You do learn something new every day. I didn’t know that about Jackson. I recall seeing the picture from the balcony and Jesse was prominently pictured there.
-
AuthorPosts
