Q: What did Nixon say during the great “Kitchen Debate” with Nikita Kruschev?
A: “I am not a cook.”
And then being boxed into taking the fifth on a whole line of questions, a la Mark Fuhrman? I can just imagine how that would have gone:
Ken Starr: “Did you snog that intern?”
Bill Clinton: “I take the fifth.”
Ken Starr (immediately perking up): “Did you shoot Vince Foster? And sodomize the head wound?”
Bill Clinton: " … I take the fifth."
*KS (visibly excited) *: “Did you personally check out a nuclear warhead from the Navy’s inventory and deliver it to a whorehouse in Red China?”
BC: “Um, I take the fifth.”
KS (trembling in sweaty ecstasy): “Did you first bathe said nuclear weapon with the blood of a Christian fetus? As a sacrifice to your dread lord Satan?”
BC: " … Fifth."
Yes, actually.
I know I’ve seen a bunch of stuff that puts Barbara Bush somewhere basically as being like a linebacker. And I seem to remember she did quite a bit of suffering in one of the Naked Gun movies.
-Joe, actually in the office today
Good thing you didn’t bet the farm, because if you did, I’d own it right now. Of COURSE the Bush people control the whitehouse.gov website. They have EVERYTHING to do with the bios of past presidents.
They are going lite on Clinton because they respect and revere the office of the presidency. If you want to be a shallow idiot who does not understand politics, you can view the situation this way…
There is a custom among presidents to not critisize their predecessors. This works to their advantage simply because they in turn will not be critisized.
Let’s try this then:
Here’s a link for the archived WH website from 2000:
Pick a presidential biography from 2000, and one from today’s WH website . I’ll grant you two things: that the “fast fact” and “fun fact” no longer exist, and that Clinton’s biography has changed, being that he was president in 2000 and the full story of the Clinton presidency wasn’t available yet. These can be attributed to routine upkeep of the website.
So what are the differences? Tell me in what way the Bush White House had EVERYTHING to do with the bios of past presidents.
Yes, and it wasn’t politically motivated to try to nail a guy for perjuring himself about an illicit affair; there are SCADS of republicans in jail for doing that. :rolleyes:
The fact of the matter is, though Clinton was sexually immature and self-indulgent, and tried to get away with a little extra poontang, nothing he ever did rose to the level of an impeachable offense.
When’s the last time you heard of someone being charged with perjury for covering their own ass on the witness stand? In any case, evidence regarding a consensual relationship (with Lewinsky) had no business being brought into a lawsuit about harassment (Jones)–and a bogus one at that.
Yes, and it wasn’t politically motivated to try to nail a guy for perjuring himself about an illicit affair; there are SCADS of republicans in jail for doing that. :rolleyes:
The fact of the matter is, though Clinton was sexually immature and self-indulgent, and tried to get away with a little extra poontang, nothing he ever did rose to the level of an impeachable offense.
When’s the last time you heard of someone being charged with perjury for covering their own ass on the witness stand? In any case, evidence regarding a consensual relationship (with Lewinsky) had no business being brought into a lawsuit about harassment (Jones)–and a bogus one at that.
Oh, and this:
scroll to the bottom.
Silly me, I should have seen that earlier.
Okay, Muldoon, I’ve been away from this thread for a few days, but now I … ah, fuck … too late.
I had a good tired old one-liner to whip on him too.
The late Phil Hartman portrayed Barbara Bush on SNL. A couple of times. Then he told the writers, “I don’t want to do that any more. She’s a lady; these sketches make me look like an asshole.” There really wasn’t any humor in it anyway.
mack says:
Think, Mack, think. Don’t you suppose that the whitehouse.gov website is controlled by the CURRENT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA? Who else would have editorial control? Not even Bush would be fucking stupid enough to cede control of it to someone else.
The Bush people (of course Bush himself is too busy to be bothered with the Clinton bio) PICK THEIR HISTORIAN. They PICK THE BOOK they take the bio from. Whoever is in charge of the presidential bios knows that he had better damn well not stir up shit, else he be out of a job.
Can you imagine any president turning over editorial control to an independant entity? Of course not, that’s insane. Whoever wrote the bio is immaterial. It was vetted by a competant person in the Bush whitehouse.