Actual Quotes from OBAMA book

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
In article LSesk.685$lf2.108@trnddc07, "Mike"
wrote:

snip

Um, even if it did I think I have enough sense not to base an entire 8
year
presidency on that single act. I didn't really care that much when I
heard
Gingrich cheated on and then dumped his hospitalized wife either, other
than
the hypocrisy was interesting to note. So unlike some I apply those
standards equally.

Don't you mean 'the only one we found out about' in eight years?

You might want to read the entire thread and understand the context before
you jump in the middle.


snip

So does John McCain, who cheated on and dumped his first wife and mother
of
his children after she was disabled, yet still voted to remove Clinton
from
office for his extramarital affair. Apparently he wields enough
influence
to get a Presidential nomination.

Courious how you name two R's but neglected to name John Edwards, the
most recent D?

Again, see above.

Now, what does all this have to do with piloting???

Nothing. Hence, the "OT" (Off Topic) subject heading.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

wrote in message
...
On Aug 24, 11:40 am, "Jay Honeck" wrote:
Um, even if it did I think I have enough sense not to base an entire 8
year presidency on that single act. I didn't really care that much
when I
heard Gingrich cheated on and then dumped his hospitalized wife
either,
other than the hypocrisy was interesting to note. So unlike some I
apply
those standards equally.

I don't like any of that type of behavior. BUT, was Gingrich being
investigated in a sexual harassment charge?

You mean the one that was dismissed?

And, did Gingrich lie to
a grand jury?

Neither did Clinton.

And, did Gingrich conduct his dalliance on the floor of the Senate,
which some consider something akin to hallowed ground?

Clinton did what he did in his home at the time.

There was no perjury. Clinton was never convicted or even so much as
indicted for any such crime, or any other crime for that matter. If
you're not familiar with the facts of the situation, you should better
educate yourself before you comment.

Impeachment, which did occur, is a pretty good indictment.

Impeachment is a political process, not a criminal process. You might also
want to check the US Constitution sometime for the grounds required for such
an act and you might discover you have the cart before the horse.
Republicans couldn't win at the ballot box, so they went after Clinton with
politically motivated civil suits and politically motivated Special Counsel
investigations. When both of those failed they went after Clinton with a
partisan political process (and failed again).

There is no doubt that much of the prosecution was politically
motivated. However, had he been less of a liar and miscreant, such
prosecution wouldn't have had much traction.

So you justify one party subverting the civil legal process, the criminal
legal process, and the political process simply because Clinton got a hummer
and was less than forthcoming about it. Brilliant!

Now, what does all this have to do with piloting???

Check the OT on the subject line.

Cheating on Hillary was never the offense. Using the power of his
position to gain sexual favors from an employee *was*. Having sex was
never the offense, despite how desperately the Left has tried to make it
the salient point of the discussion.

You're kidding right? Do you honestly believe Clinton coerced the chubby
intern?

Sure do -- especially since the only other alternative is that she was
attracted to the old man.

Bottom line: Abusing power by coercing sex from/with an employee, during
business hours, on government property, is generally considered to be
illegal, as can be readily proven by the number of "public servants" who are
currently doing time right now for similar crimes. Therefore -- unless
you're suggesting that we hold the president to a lower standard than we do
our mayors or high school principals -- I think the entire framework of your
argument is as specious as Clinton's claims that he "did not have sex with
that woman."

Lying under oath is perjury.

I thought I had already told you that you might want to better educate
yourself before you continue to demonstrate your ignorance.

So you're saying that lying under oath isn't perjury in such an instance?
Cite, please?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news%lsk.257419$TT4.108517@attbi_s22...
Cheating on Hillary was never the offense. Using the power of his
position to gain sexual favors from an employee *was*. Having sex was
never the offense, despite how desperately the Left has tried to make it
the salient point of the discussion.

You're kidding right? Do you honestly believe Clinton coerced the chubby
intern?

Sure do -- especially since the only other alternative is that she was
attracted to the old man.

Not only was she attracted to him, she was infatuated with him. Your
ignorance of the details is really showing.


Bottom line: Abusing power by coercing sex from/with an employee, during
business hours, on government property, is generally considered to be
illegal, as can be readily proven by the number of "public servants" who
are currently doing time right now for similar crimes. Therefore --
unless you're suggesting that we hold the president to a lower standard
than we do our mayors or high school principals -- I think the entire
framework of your argument is as specious as Clinton's claims that he "did
not have sex with that woman."

First of all, what you describe never happened. Lewinsky was never coerced.
If you believe she was, you should better educate yourself as you are taking
ignorance to a fine art form.

Next, even if Lewinsky WAS coerced (she wasn't), Clinton would only be
guilty of breaking civil statues, not criminal ones, and Lewinsky's recourse
would be to file an EEO charge (which can never even result in punitive
awards, much less criminal convictions). No such thing ever happened.
Offering or accepting a sexual favor from a coworker, even a subordinate, is
not even remotely illegal.


Lying under oath is perjury.

I thought I had already told you that you might want to better educate
yourself before you continue to demonstrate your ignorance.

So you're saying that lying under oath isn't perjury in such an instance?
Cite, please?

First, lying under oath alone doesn't fit the definition of perjury. If
you're going to try to argue whether or not anyone committed perjury, a good
place to start might be with the actual definition. You think?

Next, you simply assume Clinton DID lie under oath. No such thing has ever
been proven despite a monumental effort to do so. So perhaps you think you
can succeed when much more qualified people have failed, but I don't share
your optimism. The legal case against Clinton failed. The political case
against Clinton failed. The popular opinion case against Clinton failed.
Perhaps in your own mind you succeeded, but I doubt you had a high opinion
of Clinton to lose in the first place. Furthermore the price for those
failures was equivalent of wiping your arse with the US Constitution.
Congratulations.

In article Telsk.632$Ro1.589@trnddc04, "Mike" wrote:

'The offense of willfulling telling an untruth in a court after
having taken an oath or affirmation."

You still don't have it right after two tries.

Take your complant to the people who wrote the dictionary.

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

In article gqlsk.634$Ro1.600@trnddc04, "Mike"
wrote:

Courious how you name two R's but neglected to name John Edwards, the
most recent D?

Again, see above.

I did. I also noticed that you didn't mention Teddy Kennedy, probably
one of the better know "offenders".

"Mike" wrote:
So you might want to start asking yourself how
someone who was subject to so much scrutiny able to escape without so
much as indictment for a charge you're so certain he committed.

While I elided much that I don't disagree with, I believe you are incorrect
on the indictment aspect. Impeachment is roughly the legal equivalent of an
indictment. Clinton was impeached on the perjury charge.

All taken out of context.. some words changed and some quotes are attributed
to a man that never spoke them.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/ownwords.asp



"FREEDOM-OF-SPEECH" wrote in message
...
Actual Quotes from OBAMA book

If the majority of America could get past our Marxist homosexual
controlled media most Americans would never vote for the man

This man wants to be our President and control our government. Pay close
attention to the last comment, I was stunned. Below are a few lines from
Obama's books in his own words:

From Dreams of My Father: 'I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the
age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was
ingratiating myself to whites.'

From Dreams of My Father : 'I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense
of grievance and animosity against my mothers race.'

From Dreams of My Father: 'There was something about him that made me
wary, a little too sure of himself, maybe. And white.'

From Dreams of My Father:'It remained necessary to prove which side you
were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name
names.'

From Dreams of My Father: 'I never emulate white men and brown men whose
fates didn't speak to my own. It was into my father's image, the black
man, son of Africa , that I'd packed all the attributes I sought in
myself, the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela.'

From Audacity of Hope: 'I will stand with the Muslims should the
political winds shift in an ugly direction.'

"Jay Honeck" wrote in news:ZMlsk.312575
$yE1.98360@attbi_s21:

Now, what does all this have to do with piloting???

Nothing. Hence, the "OT" (Off Topic) subject heading.

IOW just another way for you to spam.

Bertie