Ahem....I couldn't care less how many times Clinton...
Posted By: Observer on 2007-10-16
In Reply to: inconsistency - reveille
"had a cigar" with Lewinsky. As a "values" voter, my problem was that he lied before the grand jury (and what he lied ABOUT has nothing to do with it) and that is a felony. He is an attorney, for pete's sake, he fully KNEW he was committing perjury. If he had an ethical bone in his body he would have resigned. Not sure who you are referring to with the other issue...Rudy Guiliani maybe? So far as I know he has not committed any felonies. He is not my guy at this point and probably will not be, but it would not be because he had a mistress...it would be because he is not pro life.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
- inconsistency - reveille
- Ahem....I couldn't care less how many times Clinton... - Observer
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
How many times was Clinton
accused of sexual harrassment? I mean seriously. You've got Edwards cheating on his wife who was dying...what is up with that anyway....she is still alive and wrote a book. Is she not dying now?
This kind of crap happens on both dems and pubs side. I'm not saying that either side is right when doing it. I frankly find it disgusting but if you are going to go after pubs it might be nice to look at your own party first and see that people in both parties pull this kind of crap. What is truly sad is that people only seem to go after the politicians in the opposing party rather than holding them all accountable for this kind of crap.
I couldn't care less what you think! (nm)
I will live a happy life no matter what you think of me. Frankly, I don't give you a second thought.
I couldn't care less whether he has
a party or not and who he has attend the party. However, I do have a problem if it is taxpayer money being used. If he is footing the bill himself, he could have disco fever every night at the WH for all I care. I just cannot imagine him footing the bill though and I believe taxpayer money is being spent wastefully and that is what makes me mad.
Actually, I really couldn't care less. I'm
N-M
More times than I care to remember!!
--
I couldn't care less who he detains
on his land. That is his private property and he has every right, IMO, to do what he has done. There is no reason why illegals should have more civil rights than Americans do in our country. That is just insanity. This will do nothing but spring up more illegals trying to score easy money off of Americans who have land down there. Seriously......we need to bring our troops home and keep these illegals out of our country. I may cost money to keep troops down there but it sure as sh!t would save us money for paying for more illegals in our country.
BTW, anyone nuts enough to vacation in Mexico is just that......nuts. I absolutely refuse to ever go to that country with all the kidnapping, etc. No reason for my vacation money go to support that country since a lot of our American jobs have gone there. They will get no money from me if I can help it.
Who's going to explain to your son that Bush couldn't care less
what happens to him AFTER he gets home, God willing that he is fortunate enough to get home in one piece!
Full funding for veterans health care in the future – Senator Durbin supports permanent, mandatory funding for veterans health care. He believes that veterans health care is an earned benefit that shouldn’t be subject to political deal-making. To accomplish this, he has co-sponsored the Assured Funding for Veterans Health Care Act of 2005 which makes Veterans health a “must fund” item so that it not subject to the cuts and shortages of the annual discretionary budget process.
Responding to Administration Failure to Adequately Fund Veterans Health Now – The Bush Administration requested more than $80 Billion in supplemental funding for war related costs in 2005 but not one extra penny for veterans. Senator Durbin found this to be unacceptable and supported an amendment offered by Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) to the 2005 Iraq supplemental spending bill to increase funding for veterans by $2 billion. The Murray amendment included a proposal by Senator Durbin to expand VA treatment capability for veterans suffering from Post-traumatic stress disorder. The amendment was defeated, with Republican leaders and the Bush Administration arguing that closing the VA funding gap was not an emergency. Just weeks later, the VA admitted that it was indeed more than $1 Billion short of needed funds in the current year and would be short for the next year as well. Durbin joined Murray and others in responding with renewed legislation for added funds for the VA and this time the measure was passed.
Helping veterans suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder – Senator Durbin continues to push for additional VA funding and staff to help veterans suffering from post traumatic stress disorder. According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO) officials at six of the seven VA facilities visited by the GAO said they might not be able to meet the demands for PTSD treatment of veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Welcome Home G.I. Bill, increased health care, education and financial support for veterans – Senator Durbin introduced the “Welcome Home GI Bill” which, like the original G.I. Bill offered at the end of World War II, will provide a package of benefits for returning veterans to ease their transition to civilian life. This bill would provide up to five years of health coverage for veterans who have no other insurance, as well as $5,000 tax-free for a home down payment. It also roughly doubles current levels of veterans’ educational benefits to $75,000 over four years.
Protecting veterans from harsh new bankruptcy rules – Senator Durbin sponsored a successful amendment to exempt from the harsh “means test” of the new federal bankruptcy law those disabled veterans whose debts are incurred primarily while they were serving on active duty. This successful addition to the new law provides protection
Concurrent Receipt of Both Retirement and Disability Payments – Senator Durbin feels strongly that military retired pay should not be reduced because a military retiree is also eligible for veterans' disability compensation awarded for a service-connected disability. Currently, a retiree can only receive both benefits in full if he or she is 50% or more disabled. To improve this situation, Senator Durbin has co-sponsored the Retired Pay Restoration Act (S. 558) which allows the receipt of both military retired pay and veterans' disability compensation with respect to any service-connected disability.
Senator Durbin Works to Help the Families of
Fallen Service Members
Increased support for surviving spouses and children of fallen service members – With Senator Mike DeWine (R-OH), Senator Durbin is pushing for substantial increases in health, education and financial benefits for surviving spouses and children of service members who die serving our nation. Their bill, S. 21, calls for increasing the “death gratuity” from $12,500 to $100,000; increasing the monthly compensation for surviving spouses to $1,500 per month plus an additional $750 per month for each surviving child. It provides surviving children with no-cost health care until they are turn 21 (23 if they are in school). And it increases education benefits for children and spouses to $80,000 each. Senator Durbin has been adamant that the increased death gratuity should be paid to the families who lose loved ones due to either combat or non-combat deaths.
Military Retiree Survivor Benefit Equity Act of 2005 – Senator Durbin is a co-sponsor of this bill which allows the spouse of a retired military member who dies from a service connected disability to receive benefits from both Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) paid by the Veteran's Administration and the military in the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). Currently the law forbids surviving families from receiving both benefits in full. |
|
|
|
Who are "you guys">>>>I couldn't care less about Ewards
00
Pardon me, but I couldn't care less if you approve of my opinion or my humor
This is the liberal board. It's very interesting that when one of you supposedly disappears, another shows up instantly to take the first one's place.
If you are truly interested in discussing this issue, then please tell me the points with which you disagree rather than rant and rave with personal attacks on my opinion and/or sense of humor.
Clinton health care
President Clinton and the First Lady tried to get a universal health care plan passed but the republicans fought them all the way and it was dead in the water. That was the first thing they focused on when starting his presidency. Senator Ted Kennedy also has tried to get a health care plan passed but the republicans once again stopped him. You see, with a health care plan drug companies, for profit hospitals, clinics, insurance companies wont become multi millionaires over the sickness and death of americans and republicans just cant let that happen, since it is just these types of companies that hire lobbyists who have the republican congress in their pockets. Yes, it is Bushs fault. He is the president, he has the power to sway the republican controlled congress. Instead of focusing on tort reform, bankruptcy law changes, which will affect middle class workers, does nothing to stop the trumps and other big businesses from filing for bankruptcy, privatizing social security, nonbid contracts to cheneys old company, he needs to focus on what affects the american worker, the ones who pay the majority of the taxes. Yes, healthcare is certainly one of the priorities for americans. In every poll I have seen it rates right up there with iraq and jobs and gas prices. Bush is going to give iraq free health care..what are his priorities, definitely not for the workers of america.
I could care less about Bill Clinton.
And I never got hung up in all of that either. As a matter of fact, no one I know did. I am sad that America fails to take possibly the most real threat towards our annihilation seriously. Everyone seems caught up in a conspiracy theory, no different than the kajillion conspiracy theories that abounded when Clinton was in office. I am not sure why Clinton has to be brought up at every juncture, but the point is, most are missing the point. I agree that these ladies have some good ideas and I have to say that probably the majority of Americans will agree with many of their points. However, when the true jihad hits America, what will it matter who caused or allowed or perpetuated 9/11? All of that pales next to what will happen if we do not stay the course. I spend my time watching the websites that deal with these issues, not the ones who put forth conspiracy theories. I simply am not interested in that.
ahem
h-o-w-s t-h-a-t r-e-c-o-r-d d-e-a-l c-o-m-i-n-g?
Ahem. I just disagreed with him....
100%. Go figure.
Hey....Ahem....and friend Lurker...
another cut and paste for you. Please pay special attention to the portion regarding Mr. Clinton and how he made the focus of his presidency regime change...so much so he signed it into LAW. So it wasn't just the big bad Bushes....your fav prez Mr. Clinton signed into LAW in 1998, American policy for regime change in Iraq...OH SAY IT AIN'T SO....but you didn't read THAT in the CNN article did you??? Typical, typical...typicallll.
The Act found that Iraq had, between 1980 and 1998 (1) committed various and significant violations of International Law, (2) had failed to comply with the obligations to which it had agreed to following the Gulf War and (3) further had ignored Resolutions of the United Nations Security Council. The Act declared that it was the Policy of the United States to support regime change. The Act was passed in the House [2] and Senate [3] and signed into law by the US President Bill Clinton on October 31, 1998. Its stated purpose was: to establish a program to support a transition to democracy in Iraq. Specifically, Congress made findings of past Iraqi military actions in violation of International Law and that Iraq had denied entry of United Nations Special Commission on Iraq (UNSCOM) inspectors into its country to inspect for weapons of mass destruction. Congress found: It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime. On December 16, 1998, President Bill Clinton mandated Operation Desert Fox, a major four-day bombing campaign on Iraqi targets.
Can we let this regime change stuff drop now??
Ahem...that was due to what was done in Congress during those years....
and you should really give credit where credit was due...there was a Republican majority in congress during most of Clinton's years as President and THAT is where all the changes are made, friend...in CONGRESS. So, on behalf of the Republican majority congress during the Clinton years, THANK YOU SO MUCH for endorsing the job they did, but please to give them the credit along with Mr. Clinton for all those years of prosperity you enjoyed.
I really love the way you paint it with such a broad brush...like Bush in and of himself could do any of those things. One man CAN'T. Congress is in the driver's seat. And the sound bite of most of the world not dependent on our good will hate us. And who would that be? France? They have ALWAYS hated us. It started right after we liberated their country during World War II and they immediately told us to get out. Yeah, the French, they loved us. Russia? Yeah, they realllyyy loved us. China? Wellll, they certainly loved Bill and Hill and the offshoring they did...google them and China some time for a real eye opener. Canada? Yeah they hate us, until they need to come here for medical care they can't get in their own country because of socialized medicine. Exactly what countries loved us before Bush and hate us now?
If you really want it back like it was in Bill's time, let's elect a Republican Congress. You will have it back then. And it really doesn't matter as much who is President...it matters who has the majority in Congress. And what pray tell has the Democratic majority done since they have been in office? Zip, zilch, nada as far as I can see. All those promises they made? Not one have they met. Why are you not posting about that?
AHEM - MY BABY HAD NO BRAIN. sm
It was totally 100% incompatible with life, so don't give me that bull**t about the health vs murder argument.
You are a cold-hearted SOB if you think I aborted for any other reason.
Ahem...I just heard "O" as you guys like to call him...
state that McCain told him on the call that he was going to suspend is campaign and asked him to do the same, to which "O" said he responded that his campaign would talk to McCain's campaign. So I fail to see why he is saying he didn't expect the announcement.
Again with the lying. Obama has lied (or flipped or whatever you want to call it) as many times as McCain has. Let's get real here.
Ahem. The West Bank is not theirs. Neither is Gaza.
So just how does that justify illegal settlements and settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank?
Speaking of terrorists...ahem....I mean pubs....(sm)
which one was it that was comparing the pub party to the Taliban....as insurgents...LOL.
Oh yeah...that was Pete Sessions.....
http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=sessions%20taliban&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wv#
who could possibly care? War, financial ruin, health care needs.
nm
Well, I care. I also care about the constitution.nm
nm
LA times
Everyone knows the L.A. Times is a liberal rag.
How many times?
Really is irrelevant. This woman is being used as a shill for a Marxist/Leninist organization called ANSWER, which has anything but America's interests at heart.
100 times????????
Okay, so when caught lying just spin an even bigger lie.
This is really getting out of hand on this board. All you CONS do is lie. This is crazy.
Okay, so please cite the 100 times I have accused someone of lying. This is your chance to squash us libs once and for all. I am waiting.
Maybe 300 times? nm
How many times have you said ANYthing?
How many times have you used that
just curious
How many times do I have to say this? sm
NO ONE, NOT ANYONE, EVEN A MOTHER OR A FATHER, can renounce a child's American citizenship, ONLY the child at the age of majority, 21, can choose to revoke it. PERIOD! Get it? NO ONE! This is per my brother who is an immigration attorney.
How many times have we seen
reporting that there is nothing to report...over...and over...and over, and repeating the information they DO have over, and over, and over? Going to the suspect's neighborhood, place of worship, high school, etc. trying to interview the ex-wife, parents, other people he knew, speculating like crazy just to fill air time and keep a big story alive? Or investigating the victim of the crime, going to his neighborhood, interview family, etc., to make the victim seem either a saint or a stinker?
The press never takes no for an answer. Denied hard facts from court or cops, they generally just make pests of themselves messing around in the suspect's personal life to find nuggets to report, then blather on and on. But they apparently do not consider this a big story. That they are not following their usual pattern in itself is a big story.
And many, many times...
physical abuse and murder happen without even a trace of slander. Go figure. ;-)
name you couldn't think of....
John Evander Couey
I read in August 2007 that he is *fit to die* - *applauds.....
http://www.jessicamarielunsford.com/
Couldn't have said it better
Nobody is questioning his patriotrism, but that's as far as it goes for me. I need someone who has a plan for the country. Who has the insight to see how far our country can go, the great things we can do as a nation.
While people may not know much about Barack one thing I do know is he has a plan and one that can be reached.
John McCain? He has no plan. Your absolutely correct. John McCain's platform is all about him and the time he spent as POW. At least Barack is making the election about us.
A lot of people may not know what Barack will bring (I do - a better future for us). Can you imagine what life would be like if we didn't do things because we didn't know what the outcome would be. A lot of our finest things have come because we took a chance on the unknown. We now have computers and other things, and we went to the moon and are exploring mars - all which was unknown years ago.
McCain - he will bring us war, no improvement in the economy, war, jobs continuing to go overseas, war, tax breaks for big companies and his wealthiest friends, war, continuing to rise food and gas prices, war, a rapidly rising deficit while we continue to send 1.8 billion dollars to Iraq (while they have a surplus), war, war, war, and more war. For those with children I think that would throw a huge red flag up. (and I don't mean the red, white and blue flag).
Couldn't have said it better.
nm
Couldn't have said it better.
nm
Couldn't have said it better....sm
McCain had the right idea - he just picked the wrong token female to do it....bad judgement all the way around. There is just no justifying Palin for VP of an entire country let alone to an elderly man with cancer in his medical history.
Couldn't have said it better
Now we have her Hollywood smile that is as irritating as G. W.'s infamous constant smirk. Not to mention "soccer mom" to go along with "when I was in prison." and PULEZ!!! spare me that "folksy stuff." How intelligent people can say she won the debate is far beyond me. I would like to know on exactly which points she won. I didn't hear her give one single intelligent answer to a single intelligent question. Heaven help us if she is one heart beat away from the presidency. We think this country is in trouble now...........
You got that right. Couldn't say it better myself.
x
I couldn't have said it better myself
thanks!
Thank you - couldn't have said it better
I get quite irate when I am told what I should or should not watch/read. I have a mind and I know what I feel is right from wrong. Let me think for myself. That's why I don't like a lot of the mainstream TV shows because they sit and give their opinions and then try and tell everyone that is the way they should think. The minute you try and stop certain groups from talking you take away their freedom of speech. Makes me want to shout out to them, how come you get to speak and I can't. They'll scream and shout if their viewpoint is held back but they'll hold back our viewpoints in a nannosecond.
I say let people use their own minds. Let them read and listen to everything. Then let them make up their own minds.
Knowledge is freedom!
Couldn't have said it any better myself! - sm
'I guess if churches don't want government running them, then maybe they should stop trying to run government with their religion.'
Maybe if the churches didn't keep trying to 'dish it out', they wouldn't be in danger of having to 'take it'.
You mean you couldn't tell by looking at him
 Why can't she listen to him anymore?????? His sexual preference doesn't affect his singing voice does it?
LA Times Article
Great article in opinion section of LA Times (you can get it online). Dated 06/24/2005, "Hustling on K Street" by Jonathan Chait, concerning Bush paying back the lobbyists and big business.
Reps. John Conyers and Maxine Waters are trying to get a meeting going in Congress tomorrow with Republicans joining in this time to debate and discuss the Downing Street Memos. Dont know if it will be covered on C-Span, sure hope so.
Laughter for trying times.
Ain't that the truth!!! ~MJ
|
You accused someone several times of something they did not do. sm
And yet you harp on. Have you no shame?
I probably have used third person at times....
Why is it so important to you?
And if you cannot see the obvious differences in writing, well, you appear to be quite ignorant or unobservant or else you are not telling the truth. But that is your problem and I am not going to make it mine!!!
Yes, PK, too many lies too many times
How many times are you going to say the same thing?!
Geesh! Get over it! You already said, "attacking an innocent..." like a million times! Wow! Move on to the next story already!
No, that would be you......several times today and beyond...nm
z
I don't dismiss. How many times have I said...
that all of us should vote for who we feel is best for the country? How is that dismissing? Yes, I am conservative, have always been conservative. I have not changed...the parties have changed. That is why I am now independent..independent of any party. That is how I view being an independent. You have to register as SOMETHING to vote in national elections...and independent most closely defines me at this point, not republican or democrat.
From Asia Times
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/JI03Aa02.html
Fannie Mae/NY Times
Check out the date on this. Of course, this came as no surprise to me. It's surprising to ever find an objective article from the NY Times, but sometimes they surprise us.
Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending
By STEVEN A. HOLMES
Published: September 30, 1999
In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.
The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets -- including the New York metropolitan region -- will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring.
Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.
In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates -- anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans.
''Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer. ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.''
Demographic information on these borrowers is sketchy. But at least one study indicates that 18 percent of the loans in the subprime market went to black borrowers, compared to 5 per cent of loans in the conventional loan market.
In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.
''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.''
Under Fannie Mae's pilot program, consumers who qualify can secure a mortgage with an interest rate one percentage point above that of a conventional, 30-year fixed rate mortgage of less than $240,000 -- a rate that currently averages about 7.76 per cent. If the borrower makes his or her monthly payments on time for two years, the one percentage point premium is dropped.
Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, does not lend money directly to consumers. Instead, it purchases loans that banks make on what is called the secondary market. By expanding the type of loans that it will buy, Fannie Mae is hoping to spur banks to make more loans to people with less-than-stellar credit ratings.
Home ownership has, in fact, exploded among minorities during the economic boom of the 1990's. The number of mortgages extended to Hispanic applicants jumped by 87.2 per cent from 1993 to 1998, according to Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies. During that same period the number of African Americans who got mortgages to buy a home increased by 71.9 per cent and the number of Asian Americans by 46.3 per cent.
|
