So pointing out that Clinton was a liar, sexual harasser, and sleazeball makes it OK to lie about Bush?
Although it is comforting to have this quote around as evidence that criticism of Bush is more partisan lies.
Hey!
Bill was a liar and a sleazeball, but that harassment thing is far from clear…
So all criticism of Bush, even that of his foreign policy rather than bad stuff his family did, is partisan lies? :dubious: :rolleyes:
finagle, you might want to reread the thread title. Notice the word “family” in there, chump?
Beer, let’s overlook that not all of your quotes are about Clinton, or his campaign, but nice job Googling. Now, do you really think he and Bush meant the same thing?
I think it’s time for the aliens to come back to Earth and reboot.
**You also might want to reread the thread title. Notice the word “known” there? So accusations against Laura Bush, since she is not known to have been arrested, or convicted, are, shall we say, inaccurate.
No, now that you mention it, I am reasonably sure that Clinton was lying thru his teeth, and didn’t mean a word of it.
No, I am sure some poor black guy would have executed on the spot.
Especially if he were confronted with the Magic Psychic Eight-Ball of Future Destiny, that could see far into the misty future, and reveal that a 17 year old girl was going to be First Lady some day, and therefore there better be a proactive cover-up.
I know, I know - you are going to come back with more of your ridiculous crapola about how the findings of a federal judge mean nothing in establishing that Clinton lied under oath.
How’s the tinfoil hat working out for you?
Regards,
Shodan
Well, no, lying about Clinton doesn’t make it all right to lie about Bush. The reason conservatives have to take their lumps about Bush is THEIR misbehavior wrt Clinton. It sure isn’t a surfeit of honesty.
**Although it is comforting to have this quote around as evidence that criticism of Bush is more partisan lies. **
See, this is where conservatives keep screwing up – you think stuff like that is “evidence.”
:smack:
Not true.
Huh? What? How do you get that? These cites are all from stories about Clinton’s speeches. Every goddamned one of them is about something the man actually said at some point. Show me one that’s not; show me one that is what you claim it to be. And please do that without, ya know, the stretching that you dislike so much.
Here’s what you asked for:
And this is exactly what you got - cites of Clinton speaking in favor of traditional family values. And the googling was a snap. Took me all of about 2 minutes to find these. I just picked a few of the hundreds the search returned.
As for Clinton actually meaning traditional family values as the Republican party defines the term, well, yes. I think that’s exactly what Clinton was talking about. Else why would (as demonstrated in one of my cites) why would Quayle have “praised” him?
Oh, lordy. Let us please not go there — to Clinton and his tortured definitions, I mean. There is no way to know what he might mean by “family values”. Perhaps when he uses the term, it means “brick fireplace”.
Hey, let’s have some more fun. Here’s a list of people embroiled in just a couple Clinton scandals that were convicted and served time. Unlike the OP, these are actual real “sad pathetic truths,” instead of a mix of “urban myths and sad pathetic truths.”
**Whitewater: **
[ul]
[li] AK Gov. Jim Guy Tucker - fraud felony convictions - 3 counts (Tucker resigned facing impeachment) [/li][li] Jim McDougal - fraud and conspiracy felony convictions - 18 counts [/li][li] Susan McDougal - felony - 4 counts (pardoned during Clinton’s last minute pardongate payoffs) [/li][li] William J. Marks Sr - conspiracy [/li][li] Stephen Smith - conspiracy [/li][li] Larry Kuca - Fraud [/li][li] Neal Ainley - 2 misdemeanors for embezzlement [/li][li] David Hale - guilty plea - conspiracy [/li][li] Chris Wade - felony - Whitewater real-estate investor [/li][li] John Haley - recent! 1998 on fraud [/li][li] Robert Palmer - felony for conspiracy [/li][li] Charles Matthews - guilty plea for bribery [/li][li] Eugene Fitzhugh - Whitewater - bribery [/li][li] Webster Hubbell - #2 ranking Justice Dept. Official - felony for embezzlement and fraud [/li][li] John Latham - CEO of Madison Bank - bank fraud [/li][/ul]
**Campaign Finance: **
[ul]
[li] Johnny Chung - Clinton cronie - felony guilty plea - funneling money from China [/li][li] Gene Lum - convicted - felony for money laundering for the DNC [/li][li] Nora Lum - convicted - felony for money laundering for the DNC [/li][li] Howard Glicken - guilty plea - 2 midemeanors - funneling foreign donations [/li][li] Yah Lin “Charlie” Trie - guilty plea - illegal Clinton campaign donations [/li][li] John Huang - Clinton cronie - felony guilty plea - funneling money from China[/li][/ul]
Looks like the Bush “friends and family” have moved the executive branch quite a distance on the continuum from the previous administration.
I grew up thinking, in a nutshell, the Republican version of “family values” was the mom and dad, two kids, pappa’s home from work by six cuz that’s when the meatloaf’s out the oven right on time kind of thing, and the Democrat version of “family values” is family and all it means but includes supporting the single working mom, kids with two step parents, aunt and uncle raising the nephews.
As you were.
“Wha… I thought we were gonna embrace Fanny Values.”
Yes, but explain to me why the sins, venial or otherwise, of Bush’s relations should be of interest to me when judging the performance of our chief executive? I’m fairly sure that none of the powers vested in the POTUS involve being able to go back in time and control the actions of their brothers in scandals that took place before they achieved political office.
The only reason that this list would be of interest would be if we bought into the notion that malfeasance runs in the blood and that if one relative is a scum-sucking weasel, then they all are. But our everyday experience contradicts this. We all know families that have their black sheep and yet other members of that same family have admirable characteristics. In fact, I’m sure that some of your relations are intelligent and capable of carrying on rational arguments, even though you yourself seem to be a drooling imbecile.
What did any of these “scandals” have to do with Bill Clinton?
Clinton was exonerated from any wrong doing in Whitewater, despite all the lives that were destroyed during the Starr inquisition.
Let’s ignore the family stuff and just focus on Shrub’s own crimes. He is a wartime deserter, a convicted drunk driver and ex-cokehead who lied his way into an illegal war. He claimed he would restore ethics to the White House but he has yet to perform a single ethical act as POTUS.
I also think it’s amusing that Hillary gets villified by the right while Laura Bush gets a pass for murdering somebody. 
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.
You all don’t know what kind of danger you’re in.
In the 1970’s when a Republican administration was in power, Chuck Colson received 6 months jail for having one illegally obtained FBI file in his possession.
No Democrat would do a thing like that.
Now that the Republicans are back in power. Who knows what will happen next.
finagle, you can’t even read the thread title but you still presume to call someone who can a “drooling imbecile”? If you don’t like the OP concept, take it up with the OP poster, wanker.
If you insist on looking only at Dubya’s own history, for only criminally corrupt business dealings, a definition that narrow indeed isn’t going to come up with much. They’re better described as a series of bungling and bailouts from his highly-connected daddy and people who wanted his favor than as actual criminal activity. There, Dubya’s exonerated. Does that make you feel any better, numbnut? Or simply as gullible as you look?
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 was taking it up with the OP. Then you decided to make it your cretinous business. And “drooling imbecile” is not based on your reading comprehension, it’s based on a careful consideration of your posts over the past six months or so.
If you’re so desperate to find something to pin on George W., why don’t you do some actual research instead of glomming on to some sordid bit of inbox spam? I’m sure the story of how Dubya parlayed 600K of mostly borrowed money into a 15 million dollar fortune is worth telling.