How very Marsha Brady of you. Let’s set aside that it isn’t even an analogy: how is it that you expect the President to populate the executive branch of government with people who don’t like his policies while practically screaming “Troll!” at someone who posts things you don’t like? Just because your knee jerks into your chin when Roseworm posts something doesn’t mean that she’s trying to get a rise out of you. Maybe you’re just a too sensitive weenie. Hell, some of the shit you leftists post makes my hair stand on end, but I don’t accuse you of being jerks and trolls.
Um, is it too much to ask for a cite for this?
And this?
Is that truly how you define success and failure in politics, by who manages to acquire and hold power and not by what they do with it? I care a lot about the “peace and prosperity” of my nation, and not one whit about any political party.
Just after the welfare reform was passed during Clinton’s presidency, I heard a well-known conservative radio host ranting about how Clinton had co-opted an originally Republican idea, and that now he was going to get the credit for it having passed. I don’t understand that way of looking at the world. Here was a policy that he should have been in favor of, and on the strength of that good idea it was enacted into law. That should be a time to celebrate a positive change, but all he could say about it was that it was the slick, politically-acute, poll-driven president stealing their thunder.
I do not understand when our two-party system is reported and debated as a zero-sum game. It is not, and should not, be just Us vs. Them.
Stoid, you claimed that the impeachment was illegal. To show your case, you need a legal cite - something from a judge or the Supreme Court or something.
You were talking out of your ass (as usual). So, either come up with a real cite, or admit that you were lying. Again. Or stick it up your rancid and sweaty ass.
Sorry you reacted so badly to having milroyj call you on your latest fantasy.
OK, I lied, I am not sorry in the slightest. I am really wondering how close you think you can come to telling another poster that you are putting him on your Ignore list and not be banned.
Regards,
Shodan
Not so, Shodan. Stoid claimed:
The cites certainly show that at least a large number of Constitutional scholars found the impeachment illegal and unconstitional. The statement is true, or, at the very worst, not false. (Yellow light 
)
I disagree, I believe that Congress may impeach and convict the President for any reason their little hearts desire as long as they phrase it properly. But that’s just me.
That’s the worst analogy that you’ve ever heard? Did you just take Lib off of your ignore list, mate? 
Good gods… I agree with sevastapol.
How many o’ them thar seven seals have been opened?
Well, touche on that bit. But, to continue:
It is also consistent with Roseworm’s entire posting history to date. Ergo, not something that he has led us to expect him to be above.
Milroyj may or may not be all these things you say. I will note that you were asked for a cite to support your earlier statement:
Your cites do not support your statement. Those are not Constitutional scholars, they are Historians.
I do not see where they say that the impeachment was illegal or unconstitutional.
You make no mention of Newt Gingrich in there.
So, in regards to “asses with agendas who relentlessly lie,” I’d have to say Pot, Kettle, Black, bitch.
As for the OP, I saw the clip.
Big freakin’ deal. I thought it was nice to See Brother Billy relax a little bit, and give that pompous twit, Peter Jennings a bitchslap.
“Yes, you do care.”
My response would have been.
"Don’t tell me what the fuck I care and don’t care about you well-groomed airhead. I know what I care and don’t care about. I’m a two term President from a time of unprecedented prosperity who took every punch they could throw at hime with a smile on his face. I pulled my party’s candidate from the sewer to the edge of victory and would have pushed him over if I didn’t have a heart attack and had to be sliced open like a melon and dissected like a frog.
I’m a controversial motherfucker with my own brand new library, and out of all the contoversies and disagreement that I’ve been party to over the last four decades there is absolutely no controversy, and in fact, total agreement over the one incontrovertible fact that nobody expects me to sit here, take shit, and be told what I think by a mothball-brained well-animated mannikin like yourself.
Ok, Peter?"
That’s what I think he should have said.
No, it isn’t just you. It is everyone else who genuinely understands the Constitution as well.
Stoid claimed that the impeachment was illegal and unconstitutional. Historians do not decide what is or is not illegal, that is the job of judges and justices. And only the Supreme Court decides what is unconstitutional.
In other words, as Scylla points out, Stoid pulled her accusation out of her fetid and purulent rectum, and has nothing to back it up. As per usual.
Regards,
Shodan
um.
the quote did in fact say that stoid made the claim that “certain Constitutional Scholars found that…”. ’
you may disagree that the scholars views should be of any interest or value, but that was indeed the claim she made and she did indeed support it.
As usual, you were posting bullshit then. The impeachment can’t be unconstitutional, unless and until a judge makes a ruling to that effect. Come back when you have a cite for a Federal Appeals Court or SCOTUS ruling that it was. Since they didn’t, and therefore you can’t provide a cite, you’re just posting partisan fantasy nonsense.
One question for you:
Where did I lie? (Much less relentlessly?) Back it up, Stoid, or retract.
Seeing as an impeachment proceeding is done entirely within the congress.
Just what the fuck judge are you talking about??
Idiot.
Good I’m surrounded by idiots.
Is there nothing but idiots on the right wing??
How the hell can we fly?
It takes two wings you know.
Bzzzt. Stoid made the claim that “a vast majority of Constitutional Scholars found that”… not that "certain" CS found that. You are misrepresenting her claim, and she did NOT support her claim.
And I get called a liar? :rolleyes:
Right, it was done according to the Constitution. So Stoid’s whining and complaining that the impeachment was illegal and uncontstitutional is nonsense.
Thanks, wring, but one correction: I did say “vast majority” and was quoting Clinton, as I pointed out.
And, in doing my research, I saw that in fact, the vast majority of scholars who offered a public opinion on the matter, since we cannot know until they do, did in fact call it unconstitutional.
That’s all you’ve got, huh? Wow, man.
Oh, I see. You’re using the ear-plug defense. You lose.