# Top 11 known arrests/crimes from the family that was to restore dignity.. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 22, 2003, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-11-known-arrests-crimes-from-the-family-that-was-to-restore-dignity/208828 "2003-10-22T02:27:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![chorpler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chorpler/32/2888_2.png) [@chorpler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chorpler)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-11-known-arrests-crimes-from-the-family-that-was-to-restore-dignity/208828/61 "2003-10-24T20:41:55Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by UncleBeer \* > \*\*Care to address my questions about your interpretation of my cites, Elvis? Or do you wish us all to conclude that you cede the point? \*\* I think what he meant was that Clinton wasn’t holding _himself_ up as a paragon of family values. But I could be wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-11-known-arrests-crimes-from-the-family-that-was-to-restore-dignity/208828/62 "2003-10-24T20:44:10Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by UncleBeer \* > \*\*I dunno. 'Bout the same thing Laura Bush’s accident, Cheney’s drunk driving, and the theft of a Christmas tree had to do with Dubya. What did that list of stuff about Bush’s family have to do with Bush himself? I’m glad to see you now recognize how stupid the original list is. > This I might agree with. But then, it has not much of anything to do with the OP. \*\* I agree that guilt by association is a fallacy in the case of both Bush and Clinton. The Bush daughters’ arrest record may be relevant to Bush insofar as it pertains to showing hypocrisy on family values but even then I think it’s pretty small potatoes. I also think that there’s enough bad stuff to attack GWB for directly that there is no need to resort to trashing the family. Cheney’s record is not relevant to Bush but it is relevant to _Cheney_. He _is_ the Veep after all. ---
**Author:** ![UncleBeer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/977dab/32.png) [@UncleBeer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleBeer)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-11-known-arrests-crimes-from-the-family-that-was-to-restore-dignity/208828/63 "2003-10-24T20:50:44Z")
Mebbe so. And that might be a legitmate point. But he also said that none of my cites were about things Clinton said or were part of his campaign(s). That’s entirely false, as I’ve noted. I’d like to know just how Elvis came to such a mistaken conclusion. Might provide some insight as to how the guy thinks that will shed light on other of his idiotic utterances. ---
**Author:** ![chorpler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chorpler/32/2888_2.png) [@chorpler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chorpler)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2003, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-11-known-arrests-crimes-from-the-family-that-was-to-restore-dignity/208828/64 "2003-10-24T21:07:14Z")
The reason I thought that was what he meant is that when I read his statement “not all of your quotes are about Clinton, or his campaign,” I interpreted it to mean was that they weren’t about Clinton himself, or his campaign, being an example of family values. But I’m not sure – rereading it again, I see that I may have misread. For one thing, I thought it said “none”, not “not all.” So, who knows what else I’m wrong about. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2003, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-11-known-arrests-crimes-from-the-family-that-was-to-restore-dignity/208828/65 "2003-10-25T14:24:10Z")
**UncleBeer** , you seem to have some self-inflated notion that you’re worth replying to on an adult level. Where did you get that quaint notion from? Read through your own cites (for the first time, apparently). There’s at least one about _Bush_’s use of the term “family values”, not Clinton’s own. IOW, evidence of a cut-and-past job, not actual thought, although that was not expected of you. Clear? Now, are you going to explain how you think both men meant the same thing? **chorpler** gets it, why don’t you? ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2003, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-11-known-arrests-crimes-from-the-family-that-was-to-restore-dignity/208828/66 "2003-10-25T15:11:26Z")
Diogenes > [@](#): > > I also think that there’s enough bad stuff to attack GWB for directly that there is no need to resort to trashing the family. Indeed. So far, he has: [1] bloated the federal government by increasing both its revenues and its expenditures [2] created a whole new federal bureaucracy out of whole cloth [3] trampled the rights of innocent people in the guise of “national security” [4] invaded a sovereign nation on the flimsiest evidence conceivable [5] alienated nearly the entire world against the United States [6] made France and Germany seem reasonable [7] increased government’s meddling in the private affairs of peaceful honest people [8] hosted supporters of terrorism (Saudi Arabian Crown Prince Abdullah) at the White House [9] opposed a bill to arm pilots [10] extended the scope and authority of the quasi-governmental NATO (Never-ending American Taxpayer Obligation) [11] suspended the right to writ of habeas corpus in at least 2 cases [12] continued the trade embargo against Cuba [13] continued and expanded the War on Americans I Mean Drugs [14] encouraged the congress to federalize crime and that’s just an abridged list. He’s a tyrant. There’s plenty to criticize. ---
**Author:** ![UncleBeer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/977dab/32.png) [@UncleBeer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleBeer)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2003, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-11-known-arrests-crimes-from-the-family-that-was-to-restore-dignity/208828/67 "2003-10-27T18:45:43Z")
> [@](#): > > Now, are you going to explain how you think both men meant the same thing? Already did that. But to elaborate, I, in fact, expected this specific argument from you and anticipated it. Please note the cite from _The Atlantic_ which makes it quite clear that Clinton attempted to ally himself with exactly that same traditional family value crap spouted by Quayle. As does the cite from the _Daily Beacon_. Makes it quite obvious that Clinton did exactly as I initially put forth - that he spoke glowingly of “traditional family values.” If what you’re really saying is that Clinton didn’t mean what _he_ said, well then, I can surely believe that. Clinton is a known and transparent liar who came down on pretty much every side of pretty much every issue in each of his two campaigns for the presidency. > [@](#): > > Read through your own cites (for the first time, apparently). There’s at least one about Bush’s use of the term “family values”, not Clinton’s own. IOW, evidence of a cut-and-past job, not actual thought, although that was not expected of you. Clear? So you said before. But what’s very clear is that your reading comprehension sucks - you couldn’t be more wrong. Again, every one of the citations I provided is an analysis of a speech given by Bill Clinton. Perhaps you could dismount that lofty position you’ve assumed and, ya know, show me my error, if there is such. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2003, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-11-known-arrests-crimes-from-the-family-that-was-to-restore-dignity/208828/68 "2003-10-27T19:29:57Z")
This: "On Bill Clinton’s centerpiece theme, George Bush presented his Agenda for American Renewal, a defense of Republican small-government low-tax free-trade economics. “It is at least an agenda for after the election,” needled CBS’s Susan Spencer, “should he need it.” " And this is “American Spectator’s” (chortle) summary of their own views, not a quote from Clinton: “Clinton '92 is often remembered as a centrist campaign. It wasn’t entirely. It was a combination of populist family-values progressivism (back when the Democratic Leadership Council and its sister organization, the Progressive Policy Institute, were still salons of ideas)” Be glad I didn’t call you on that before, but you asked for it. You really expect the primary Scaife rag to be taken seriously as a cite? Well, to you, it might be. You still have not presented any thoughts, of your own or otherwise, as to what “family values”, traditional or otherwise, might consist of, but that doesn’t prevent you from taking credit for it, does it? Well, pardner, this is a multicultural nation, with a vast array of traditions and families, each with their own unique values as well as shared ones. Which do you think each candidate meant? For the hard-right GOP base, that’s easy - “traditional family values” is political code for gay-bashing, abortion-banning, and evangelical Christianity, with gun rights sometimes thrown in. I challenged you to say you think that is what Clinton meant too - but you _don’t_ know and don’t seem to want to, other than to say he’s a liar about it. It could well be that, to him as to most of us, “traditional family values” are about inculcating and practicing love and respect and understanding and tolerance for each other. If your family doesn’t include that, 'tis a pity indeed. But, then, this is the Pit and this is a thread devoted to bashing, so go ahead. Just remember that you can’t expect your bashes to be considered thoughtful. ---
**Author:** ![UncleBeer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/977dab/32.png) [@UncleBeer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleBeer)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2003, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-11-known-arrests-crimes-from-the-family-that-was-to-restore-dignity/208828/69 "2003-10-27T22:29:26Z")
> [@](#): > > This: "On Bill Clinton’s centerpiece theme, George Bush presented his Agenda for American Renewal, a defense of Republican small-government low-tax free-trade economics. “It is at least an agenda for after the election,” needled CBS’s Susan Spencer, “should he need it.” " You jest, right? The very next sentence says: > [@](#): > > ABC’s Chris Bury reported that Clinton “portrayed himself as a model of tolerance on Family Values” at Notre Dame University. See? Clinton. I know you dislike me and some of my politics, but goddamn. That’s just silly. > [@](#): > > Be glad I didn’t call you on that before, but you asked for it. You really expect the primary Scaife rag to be taken seriously as a cite? Well, to you, it might be. Please. I had literally hundreds of citations from which to choose. I selected several from a wide variety of sources. Shit, I even took one from The Atlantic—one of the more damning ones even. Simply because you dislike one of the sources, doesn’t mean: a) that it’s wrong, or even b) that the others are meaningless. As for it being an outright quote from Clinton, I never fucking claimed it was. I said they were from stories about something Clinton said, stories about, and analyses of, Clinton speeches. None of the goddamned things are actual Clinton quotes and I never said they were. Nor did you ask for citations as such. I gave you exactly what you asked for and since it doesn’t fit your mistaken notions, you are looking for reasons to discredit it. I ain’t havin’ it. Further, I don’t need to tell you what I believe “family values” means to Clinton. The cites given provide ample evidence that when mentioned family values in his speeches, the meaning was congruent with that of Quayle. I will again make the observation that your reading comprehension sucks. Either that or you are deliberately twisting my meanings in order to get a rise out of me. And we both know the label usually applied to such yammerings. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2003, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-11-known-arrests-crimes-from-the-family-that-was-to-restore-dignity/208828/70 "2003-10-27T23:04:52Z")
Um, **Elvis** - I don’t know that Clinton ever spoke words such as “everyone should aspire to emulate me and my stellar family values” ( but of course, I also doubt that GWB did, either), but it’s been shown that (and I also recall it personally) Clinton did speak on a ‘family values theme’ (whatever that means to the general public), so I suggest to you that this is a silly argument to get into. The republicans certainly don’t hold a monopoly on politicians who speak of rightious family values while having sexual liaisons with variety of other people/drinking to excess/gambling/ whatever item one wishes to include under the heading of “stuff not pious”. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2003, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-11-known-arrests-crimes-from-the-family-that-was-to-restore-dignity/208828/71 "2003-10-28T15:17:08Z")
**wring** , “whatever that means to the general public” is kind of the point, ain’t it? If you’re asserting that it’s all political bullshit anyway, since it lets people believe what they want, that’s certainly a reasonable stand. But to claim they not only meant something by it, but meant the _same_ thing, isn’t supportable by their actions or even their other words. GWB never said, AFAIK, the words you stated, but there’s really no doubting what he meant about “restoring honor and dignity to the White House”, is there? Please. You have to pick your targets more carefully, as I’ve mentioned to you before. If the argument is “silly”, take it up with Tio Cerveza, who does make the typical right-wingers’ moral-equivalence claim (albeit just indirectly enough that he can make pathetic claims not to have done so when cornered like the rabid weasel he is). This for him is an example of a rational and consistent position: > [@](#): > > Yeah. Like Clinton, the widely-noted and much-accomplished philanderer, never spoke glowingly of “traditional family values.” He’s every bit as hypocritical as you’ve made Bush out to be on that subject Note the sarcasm, which he’ll use to claim he never said that: > [@](#): > > None of the goddamned things are actual Clinton quotes and I never said they were. Some of them actually are, if you’ll read your own damn “cites”. I even gave you credit for that. But if you only intend to refer to _The American Spectator’s and other such’s own opinions about what he meant, and assert that to be fact_, then you really have no hope of convincing anyone but your own self of anything at all. Good Gawdamighty, man, do you ever do any of your own thinking? Do you have to have it spoonfed to you by the reflexive haters? ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2003, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-11-known-arrests-crimes-from-the-family-that-was-to-restore-dignity/208828/72 "2003-10-28T19:16:04Z")
**Elvis** - Since AFAIK, **no** politician ever gave a specific definition of “Family values”, the ‘whatever that means’ is the appropriate term. Your choices are thus: 1. That Clinton **never** used that term ever. I think that conclusively, we can say that is false, that he did in fact use that term. 2. That Clinton **meant** something different than the RW group when he used that term. If that’s your argument, since **none** of them defined the term, that’s pretty much a wash, an idiotic thing to argue about. I don’t see any other possability. So, pick one - false, or idiotic. as far as ‘spoon feeding’ opinions, who do you presume is holding the spoon in my case? I’ve argued on these boards for years, mostly in a pro-liberal stance (tho I am conservative on several issues). But, I’ve also argued a point, when I see it. So, when I see a liberal stance being argued poorly, I’ve also stepped in, as is the case here. Your stance in this instance is just plain silly. It bothers me more when some one argues my position poorly then when someone argues the oppositions’ point poorly. and, just for drill, apparently you’ve not ever noticed when I’ve corrected gender misidentification - I’m female. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/top-11-known-arrests-crimes-from-the-family-that-was-to-restore-dignity/208828.md?page=3)