So you’d be willing to give me a blow job? Because a blow job or two between buddies is no big deal, right? It sure ain’t sex, so it’s no big deal if two men relax by sucking and licking each other’s engorged cocks until they ejaculate? That isn’t sex? If your wife walked in on you sucking me off, do you think she’d believe you when you said you weren’t having sex with me?
Seriously?
I believe that what sunk Clinton was not the exact particulars of how he perjured himself.
As everyone knows, impeachment is an inherently political act. And so when representatives and senators vote on a matter of impeachment, they always have one eye, if not two, on what their constituents will think of their vote.
And so what sunk Clinton was his public “I did not have sex with that woman” speech. That turned public opinion against him when it became clear that, yes, he did in fact have sex with that woman. If he had instead said something like, “This whole thing is motivated by politics and I won’t discuss my private life. While I haven’t always been the best husband that’s a matter for me and my family” then the public mood would have been very different.
It’s one thing to have an affair, and people expect you to be discreet about it. But you can’t pound the table and look the American people in the eye and tell them a flat lie without getting people annoyed. And without that annoyance you suddenly don’t have enough votes in the House for the bill of impeachment.
Wow, this is dumb.
If I had a wife, she wouldn’t like me kissing another man either. But to MOST of us, kissing isn’t sex. And if this is the best argument you can come up for defining “sex” that allows you to say that Clinton lied, then I think we can safely conclude that Clinton didn’t lie and you’re blowing desperate, desperate smoke.
This is seriously the most ridiculous line of reasoning I have ever experienced. I honestly have no idea where to begin in responding. It helps that I’m a little tipsy, but you are hilarious. I also wouldn’t play with your hair, shower with you, or give you a playful bite on the ear, but not because they’re sex.
This is complete and total BS.
It always surprises me that Clinton’s defenders proudly state that he’s the smartest man every to occupy the White House, and in the same breath say that this Ivy league trained lawyer doesn’t know the definition of perjury or sex. This boggles my mind, even years later and is the height of hypocrisy in my opinion.
I’m a middle of the road guy and that is what put me over the edge with him. I do think it was a bit (more than a bit actually) of a witch hunt, but that fact that the President committed perjury and his supported glossed it over push me over the edge enough to support the impeachment.
No perjury and I wouldn’t have supported the impeachment, and I think that’s the case with many.
As a note, the big reason Ross voted against conviction probably wasn’t due to high minded motives, but because he didn’t like Ben Wade, who was President pro Tempore of the Senate and would have become president if Johnson had been removed.
Elvis thanks for the lol moment you just gave me!
In order to show what the moral high ground is, you referenced a book attributed to JFK that he lied to the world about writing! I almost coughed up coffee on my keyboard!
Regret the hijack. Please carry on.
Not so fast. Cite for JFK not writing it? Explanation of how that affects the truth and significance of the contents even if he didn’t?
Or was that just a drive-by?
Captain, you can also portray that as Wade’s smallmindedness and vengefulness convincing Ross of the importance of separation of powers.
It didn’t have much to do with that, though. It was because one of Wade’s allies was Samuel Pomeroy, the other Senator from Kansas, and Ross was afraid that if Wade became President, then Pomeroy would be able to control Wade’s federal appointments in Kansas. By being the vote to save Johnson, Ross was able to parlay that into making Johnson give Ross’s allies patronage jobs. Regardless of whether or not you think Johnson should have been impeached, the idea that Ross was acting strictly out of high minded motives is generally considered a myth now.
As for the authorship of Profiles in Courage, this article might be helpful:
Come on Elvis!
Even you have to appreciate the humor that your guy’s idol was JFK, a guy who believed that the rules didn’t apply to him, and who bought elections and boffed everything that moved. And JFK received a Pulitzer prize for a book he didn’t write, and you referenced it to show what the morally right thing to do was!!
You do know what irony is, right?
Do you think that the Healthcare bill that was recently passed by the Obama Administration’s going to save lives? From what I understand, I think not. The fact that Obama appointed the kind of people that he did indicates precisely the kind of President that he is. It makes me more than glad that I did a write-in a year ago last month at the polls, instead of voting either the Obama/Biden or the McCain/Palin ticket.
So when two manly guys like ourselves suck each other off, we’re not having sex with each other? Seriously?
Alright, I’ll bite. Who did you write in that’d be doing a much better job than Obama or McCain?
My guess: Al Gore.
IOW, “Yes, that was a driveby.”
Hmmm, when you put it that way, I’m not sure. How about you blow me and I tell you my opinion.
At the time, it was a total political witch hunt. If it wasn’t for perjury, they would have done it for something else.
Dude, I thought the impeachment was bullshit, but yes, a blow job is sex: it’s called oral sex. Oral SEX. Right there in the title.
Duh.
It’s got a qualifier 'cause it ain’t sex. Qualifier, right there in the title. If I told you I had sex with someone, you wouldn’t think “handjob”, you would think sex, s-e-x.
Let’s put this into a little historical perspective.
FWIW: Johnson was never in danger of being convicted. The “one vote” was a way for some of the Republicans to toe the party line while insuring that Johnson was acquitted. I know there will be a “cite?” but I’d have to hunt up the research I did on this. Six Republicans voted for aqcuittal and 5 Reps (including Ross) committed to being that last vote for acquittal but Ross was the first to push it over the edge.
Second, the famous “one vote” was actually on Article XI which was denying the validity of the Fourteenth Amendment. Johnson was correct that it was ratified illegally, but since Congress decides when an amendment passes he was powerless to enforce this. Yes it is true that the vote on Article I acquitted Johnson by only one vote, but early on it was clear that too many Senators felt that the key word “term” meant that Stanton’s protection under the act ended when Lincoln died (viz. his term ended). The vote on Article III (appointing Lorenzo Thomas) was 34-19.
Now to Clinton. Many of the Dopers don’t realize that perjury was the new hot topic for impeachment. Claiborne was convicted of this in 1986 when the House decided that perjury was impeachable and the Senate upheld this. It was further solidified when Hastings and Nixon (Judge not Richard) was convicted and removed only for perjury in 1989. On the partisan side, IIRC there were 27 Democrats that voted to convict Nixon that later turned around and voted for acquittal for Clinton.
You can argue that perjury from the President is different than from a judge (I disagree) ot the perjury in a civil case about sexual harrassment is different than perjury in a criminal case about tax evasion or bribery (maybe). But the bottom line was that Clinton should have know that perjury was the flavor of the month in terms of impeachment charges and he was an idiot for perjuring himself.