 | | Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
|
|
(...) Yes, thanks for showing a good way to do the feet. (26 years ago, 20-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
|
|
(...) I'd put big money on him getting off. BIG money. Sad, but it will happen. (...) Didn't say he tried to resign. I said he tried to make himself a martyr, which he did. I have no more respect for him than I do Clinton, because, for me, the core (...) (26 years ago, 20-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | A Letter to the President
|
|
Please note that I did NOT write this, nor know the person who did. There is reference at the bottom to the author. ---...--- Dear Mr.. President: It's not about sex. If it were about sex, you would be long gone. Just like a doctor, attorney or (...) (26 years ago, 20-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
|
|
(...) The biggest problem with the whole impeachment investigation, and the eventual impeachment of the President, is that it was related to sex. IF it was JUST about sex, he'd still be in office ... possibly with another intern :P Though as the (...) (26 years ago, 20-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
|
|
(...) I almost rolled out of my chair today when I saw a replay of some democrat talking about sexual McCarthyism (sp). It's amazing how many people want to focus in on the sex involved in this to the extent that they want to ignore the rest or say (...) (26 years ago, 20-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
|
|
(...) At least the house didn't allow censure. Its not their constitutional right to vote on it. The Senate can, but its strictly forbidden to the house. (...) They are definitely impeachable offenses. Perjurs who aren't the president get put behind (...) (26 years ago, 20-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
|
|
Also sprach Larry Pieniazek: : My prediction: He won't be convicted because there is no way 67 Senators : will go along. I agree ... even assuming that the 'defectors' even out as they did in the house, that still leaves only 60 'sure-thing' votes (...) (26 years ago, 20-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
|
|
(...) That's my prediction as well. However, you missed the point above. Starr found things like perjury and tampering with witnesses, not sex. I wish he found more of the stuff that is mentioned in Unlimited Access - a book by a former FBI security (...) (26 years ago, 20-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: lugnet.religion.flame
|
|
It is unfortunate, but from time to time one meets the occassional, ultra-right wing religeous nut, who is comparable to Hitler. I have met one or two in my time, and call them god-Nazis. There. Hope that kills it off for good. Too much bad feeling (...) (26 years ago, 19-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geez, its hard to stomach all of this
|
|
(...) Wish that Starr had found the real dirt instead of this stuff. Who cares who he slept with? The law (1) that compelled him to testify is flawed and should be repealed, but since it wasn't he has to uphold it. My prediction: He won't be (...) (26 years ago, 19-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
