2016 Election -- Part II
Poll
 | 57 votes (47.89%) | ||
| | 33 votes (27.73%) | ||
| | 12 votes (10.08%) | ||
| | 10 votes (8.4%) | ||
| | 4 votes (3.36%) | ||
| | 3 votes (2.52%) |
119 members have voted
Quote: ams288Because it's much easier for you to pretend it doesn't exist than actually address it.
Someone wrote a book a long time ago about how conservatism is an expression of selfishness. It's not a perfect theory, and there are plenty of areas where I am conservative myself, but it explains a certain strain pretty well.
What happens when you die? The people in my club live forever and the people in the other clubs are punished for not being us.
How do you know which country is right in a war or dispute? The country in which I live is always right.
Scientists say our generation is ruining the earth for future generations. No we aren't.
Your racial majority has some unfair advantages over racial minorities and sometimes exploits them. No we don't. And even if we did, it's actually their fault. So I think we help them too much, which is unfair to me, the real victim.
I've always thought the same thing. It certainly explains a lot.Quote: RigondeauxSomeone wrote a book a long time ago about how conservatism is an expression of selfishness. It's not a perfect theory, and there are plenty of areas where I am conservative myself, but it explains a certain strain pretty well.
Quote: AZDuffmanAnd some of you peeps wonder why I do not care about charges of "racism?"
I don't wonder. I think it's fairly clear you don't care about any race-related issues because you don't want to.
Quote: MrGoldenSunI don't wonder. I think it's fairly clear you don't care about any race-related issues because you don't want to.
Pretty much the case. We have legal equality in the USA. Time to find a real problem.
If the people who are worried about "minorities" would spend half the energy they spend trying to make conservatives look racist and took that energy to teach the same people to be more self-reliant we would really have something.
Case in point is the Redskins debate. 90% of Indians are not bothered by the name, but most white liberals are. So they spend their energy agitating and agitating. Meanwhile the poverty on so many Indian Reservations is as bad as the poorest countries. But do they try to help solve a real problem? NOPE! They would rather argue about a name.
I am not afraid to say I do not care about charges of racism. Years and years of them but no wolf yet.
If Hillary Clinton had said "laziness is a trait in blacks" the way Trump did, would you support her for it or would you criticize her for it?Quote: AZDuffmanI am not afraid to say I do not care about charges of racism. Years and years of them but no wolf yet.
Quote: MathExtremistIf Hillary Clinton had said "laziness is a trait in blacks" the way Trump did, would you support her for it or would you criticize her for it?
Blacks make up 13% of the population and account for 38% of those on welfare. Conversely, Whites are 72% of the population and account for 37% of those on welfare. So, what's yer point, hey hey?
Quote: soxfanBlacks make up 13% of the population and account for 38% of those on welfare. Conversely, Whites are 72% of the population and account for 37% of those on welfare. So, what's yer point, hey hey?
This should spice up the thread.....
Just passing by, thought I would throw some fuel on the fire.
Quote: MathExtremistIf Hillary Clinton had said "laziness is a trait in blacks" the way Trump did, would you support her for it or would you criticize her for it?
I generally do not listen to her as she says nothing that is not focus-group tested. I would probably figure she thought it would raise her standing in some group without fear of losing the black vote as blacks vote Democrat no matter what.
Let's not get into a battle of misapplication of statistics here, hey hey? I could make a similar point with similar statistics about the college education level of Trump supporters vs. Hillary supporters and imply that Trump supporters are stupid, but that would be just as inartful a mathematical misdirection as what you've just done.Quote: soxfanBlacks make up 13% of the population and account for 38% of those on welfare. Conversely, Whites are 72% of the population and account for 37% of those on welfare. So, what's yer point, hey hey?
My question isn't about whether Trump is right or wrong. My question is whether AZDuffman would applaud Hillary for uttering the same quote or whether he'd criticize her for it.
Do you support Trump? Do you care that he uttered the line "laziness is a trait in blacks?" If Hillary said it, would you give that a thumbs up or thumbs down?
Quote: soxfanBlacks make up 13% of the population and account for 38% of those on welfare. Conversely, Whites are 72% of the population and account for 37% of those on welfare. So, what's yer point, hey hey?
Black unemployment is always higher than whites. The least developed nations are in Africa.
So you decline to actually answer the question? That's your prerogative, but let's not kid ourselves that you dodged the question.Quote: AZDuffmanI generally do not listen to her as she says nothing that is not focus-group tested. I would probably figure she thought it would raise her standing in some group without fear of losing the black vote as blacks vote Democrat no matter what.
Quote: MathExtremistLet's not get into a battle of misapplication of statistics here, hey hey? I could make a similar point with similar statistics about the college education level of Trump supporters vs. Hillary supporters and imply that Trump supporters are stupid, but that would be just as inartful a mathematical misdirection as what you've just done.
My question isn't about whether Trump is right or wrong. My question is whether AZDuffman would applaud Hillary for uttering the same quote or whether he'd criticize her for it.
Do you support Trump? Do you care that he uttered the line "laziness is a trait in blacks?" If Hillary said it, would you give that a thumbs up or thumbs down?
There is no "misapplication" of statistics. And Zeus forbid that Trump or anyone else make a truthful statement regarding the predisposition that blacks have for parasitism, hey hey.
Welfare Demographics
Percent of recipients who are white 38.8 %
Percent of recipients who are black 39.8 %
Percent of recipients who are Hispanic 15.7 %
Percent of recipients who are Asian 2.4 %
Percent of recipients who are Other
http://www.statisticbrain.com/welfare-statistics/
Illegal immigrant families receive welfare?Quote: onalinehorse71% of illegal immigrant households with children receives welfare.
Just passing by, thought I would throw some fuel on the fire.
Otherwise, I liked some numbers being in the thread rather than just adjectives ;-)
Quote: AZDuffmanBlack unemployment is always higher than whites. The least developed nations are in Africa.
LOL
No need to say any more.
We all understand your thought process at this point...
Quote: MathExtremistSo you decline to actually answer the question? That's your prerogative, but let's not kid ourselves that you dodged the question.
How about if I rephrase then. I cannot stand Hillary and would never support anything she said as I would never believe she was serious in the first place.
I am not supporting or condemning Trump for supposedly saying it. I simply do not care. My life is not such that I hang on every word someone else says.
Quote: ams288LOL
No need to say any more.
We all understand your thought process at this point...
So you are denying the facts?
Quote: soxfanThere is no "misapplication" of statistics. .
On the flip side, most welfare recipients are white.
I prefer Say Hey
The say hey kid, one of my heroes growing up
He was black by the way :-)
Mathextremist, conservatives like AZ cant answer your question
If I am presented with an offensive remark, I will condemn it regardless of who said it. wrong is wrong
That's logical thinking
Conservatives can't condemn an offensive remark until they know who said it
If a Lib says it, its gotcha. If a conservative says it, a shrug
Its another example of illogical thinking by conservatives.
Quote: terapinedOn the flip side, most welfare recipients are white.
Actually, most welfare recipients are BLACK despite the fact that blacks are 13% of the population and Whites are 72%. Blacks excel in two areas; the perpetrating of cowardly(ie atrocity against Channon Christian) criminality and parasitism, hey hey.
That will probably accommodate all the Trumpsters in the building, but what about the protesters outside?
Quote: terapined
Mathextremist, conservatives like AZ cant answer your question
If I am presented with an offensive remark, I will condemn it regardless of who said it. wrong is wrong
That's logical thinking
Conservatives can't condemn an offensive remark until they know who said it
If a Lib says it, its gotcha. If a conservative says it, a shrug
Its another example of illogical thinking by conservatives.
Liberals refuse to condemn Bill Clinton for perjury. "He lied about sex" they say. No big deal they say.
Then they want Conservatives to condemn something they do not like.
I will say what I think of the comment.
"Meh."
Quote: AZDuffmanLiberals refuse to condemn Bill Clinton for perjury. "He lied about sex" they say. No big deal they say.
If they made a perjury charge against El Chapo lying about cheating on his wife and nothing else, I'd say, great but so freakin' what!!!
You were able to box someone in on a non-illegal issue most people don't like to make public so they end up lying. Big Whoop. You proved zip as far as anything of real importance.
Quote:WASHINGTON — Donald Trump is “a small man” for accepting $150,000 from a federal fund for small businesses hurt by the Sept. 11 attacks and should return the money or donate it to charity, a New York Democratic congressman said.
“In grabbing that money with both fists, you took it out of the pockets of small business owners in New York who were truly hurting,” Rep. Jerrold Nadler wrote in an open letter to the presumptive Republican presidential nominee.
[...]
Citing previous reports, Nadler said that Trump company had $26.8 million in annual revenue. The federal definition of small businesses is those that have earned less than $6 million, Nadler said.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ny-democrat-trump-should-return-money-to-911-recovery-fund/2016/05/27/b24eaabe-2443-11e6-b944-52f7b1793dae_story.html
Quote: TwoFeathersATLIllegal immigrant families receive welfare?
Otherwise, I liked some numbers being in the thread rather than just adjectives ;-)
GAO noted that: (1) in fiscal year (FY) 1995, about $1.1 billion in Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) and Food Stamp benefits were provided to households with an illegal alien parent for the use of his or her citizen child.
There are an estimated 4 million anchor babies. Hard to get accurate numbers on illegal immigrants. 11 million or 20 million. Who knows ? Might be 30 millions. Care to guess or provide real numbers.
Quote:Nadler said that Trump told an interviewer that none of his properties was damaged in the attacks on New York.
More of this kind of stuff in the next 6 months, Trump won't have to worry about losing the Presidency for the Republicans, but also ending up tarred and feathered and riding on a rail as well.
(yeah, I don't think they do that anymore but I'm old enough to remember reading about it)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riding_the_rail
Quote: MrGoldenSunBut I suppose it's much easier that way.
That's the heart of it. That and fear.
Quote: MrGoldenSunRepublicans typically refuse to acknowledge the reality that America's legacy of racism continues to have an impact today. And they have zero ability to think of a perspective outside themselves, or to consider that maybe subconscious bias is a real concept. It's incredible that huge portions of the population are so readily dismissed. But I suppose it's much easier that way.
That is because the "impact" today is not what you think it is. Conservatives believe in equality of opportunity. Liberals desire equality in outcome. Slavery is not the reason black America is the disaster it is today. 150+ years ago. Irish, Polish, German, Jewish, Aisan, and now to a certain extent Hispanics. They all came to the USA mostly after 1865. Their first generations did rough work and lived crammed into small apartments. The next a bit better, and by the third they were assimilated. They went out and worked because they knew they needed to do so to succeed.
Blacks have success stories. George Washington Carver and Dr. Charles Drew to name two. But by any measure, black culture has collapsed in the USA. Who gets celebrated? Freddie Gray, Michael Brown, Travon Martin, and Rodney King. Not to mention the rappers who never leave the gang culture. Clarence Thomas? Well, he's a sellout and an Uncle Tom. Let a black try to succeed and he is "Acting white." I have seen this happen.
As is often said, they are still waiting for their 40 acres and a mule, 151 years later now.
It is easy to blame racism for all of the ills of society. But it is inaccurate. However, it is an easy charge to make. Which is why those who cannot make an intelligent point or counterpoint make it at the drop of a hat.
Quote: rxwine
You were able to box someone in on a non-illegal issue most people don't like to make public so they end up lying. Big Whoop. You proved zip as far as anything of real importance.
Perjury is not illegal? When did that happen? Why did he lose his law license over it then?
Quote: AZDuffmanPerjury is not illegal? When did that happen? Why did he lose his law license over it then?
Not what I said. The not-illegal issue is having an affair.
Quote:]If they made a perjury charge against El Chapo lying about cheating on his wife and nothing else, I'd say, great but so freakin' what!!!
You were able to box someone in on a non-illegal issue most people don't like to make public so they end up lying. Big Whoop. You proved zip as far as anything of real importance.
Quote: rxwineNot what I said. The not-illegal issue is having an affair.
But the affair itself was not the issue. Lying about it under oath when being sued for sexual harassment of another woman was the issue.
Quote: AZDuffmanBut the affair itself was not the issue. Lying about it under oath when being sued for sexual harassment of another woman was the issue.
More revisionist history from the bubble. The issue was entirely, for years, trying to "get" Bill on scandalous grounds. The perjury was a by-product, and I doubt to this day Clinton thinks he LEGALLY perjured himself, but others think otherwise, and their views prevaled.
Quote: AZDuffmanBut the affair itself was not the issue. Lying about it under oath when being sued for sexual harassment of another woman was the issue.
They are still trying to act as if that doesn't matter...it helps the Clinton defenders just in case Hillary follows suit and continues to lie about the server/email issue when questioned by the FBI. Her best bet is to take the fifth, IMO, because I don't think she can talk herself out of the issue and I do think she is lying right and left about it. The only good thing for her is that politics may protect her. that shouldn't be right on either side; lefties rarely agree with me on that point, though.
Quote: RonCThey are still trying to act as if that doesn't matter...it helps the Clinton defenders just in case Hillary follows suit and continues to lie about the server/email issue when questioned by the FBI..
Oh, so you think we excuse people lying in court about actual potential misdeeds or crimes then?
If RonC went up on serious murder charges and all they got was that he perjured himself, because he didn't want to admit he went into people's home's and would go in their bathrooms, filled the bathtub with water and played with rubber bath toys. I would say big deal. RonC has not been proved a murderer. But yeah, he did commit perjury.
Bill had a consensual affair.
Quote: rxwineOh, so you think we excuse people lying in court about actual potential misdeeds or crimes then?
If RonC went up on serious murder charges and all they got was that he perjured himself, because he didn't want to admit he went into people's home's and would go in their bathrooms, filled the bathtub with water and played with rubber bath toys. I would say big deal. RonC has not been proved a murderer. But yeah, he did commit perjury.
Bill had a consensual affair.
Bill did commit perjury. He knew, as a lawyer, that perjury is a crime. Just as it would have been had the example above be a real situation.
Bill committed a crime.
Bill had sex in the White House with a woman not his wife. In the old days, before the press got into the bedroom, it would not have been a story. Bill knew it would be an issue if it was reported; he knew it as sure as anything...because he already had been accused (not convicted or proven) of many affairs. Bill was too stupid to do the right thing. Then Bill lied about it under oath.
Yes, Bill had consensual sex. That would have been it, save the lie.
When in doubt, the Clinton's lie.
Democrats want things to be the old way when it comes to what Bill did. Democrats accuse Republicans of being backwards when they want things the old way... Overly simplistic? Of course! No more than about half of the liberal stuff written here, though.
Quote: beachbumbabsMore revisionist history from the bubble. The issue was entirely, for years, trying to "get" Bill on scandalous grounds. The perjury was a by-product, and I doubt to this day Clinton thinks he LEGALLY perjured himself, but others think otherwise, and their views prevaled.
Of course he doesn't. There are thousands of innocents in prison, too. Just ask them.
Bill lied.
He did not have to lie.
He did it anyway.
Quote: RonCThen Bill lied about it under oath.
.
And the man you seem to be supporting is proving to be less than your average saint x 100. You're going to try to put Trump in office? Preach on, bro. I'm giving your complaints as much attention as they deserve.
Quote: rxwineAnd the man you seem to be supporting is proving to be less than your average saint x 100. You're going to try to put Trump in office? Preach on, bro. I'm giving your complaints as much attention as they deserve.
You obviously have not been paying attention here--I did not support Trump initially and I remain unimpressed by him. I think he and Bernie are bad candidates that gained momentum being anti-establishment. Neither has been in their respective party very long and neither satisfies the "establishment" of either party. The people are pissed at the parties and politics as usual and the two candidates furthest from the establishment have benefited.
As my 19 year old daughter said when asked who she would vote for..."this election is a shit show"...
I bet she leans towards Hillary...but I am not sure.
I will vote for Trump. I will vote against Hillary. I am not "trying to put Trump in office" as much as he is the better choice of the two left in my opinion. I'd rather have different candidates on both sides.
When I say that Bill lied and I believe Hillary did, you do not defend Hillary...you attack Trump. Your commitment to her sounds from that about as solid as mine of Trump.
Quote: beachbumbabsMore revisionist history from the bubble. The issue was entirely, for years, trying to "get" Bill on scandalous grounds. The perjury was a by-product, and I doubt to this day Clinton thinks he LEGALLY perjured himself, but others think otherwise, and their views prevaled.
Speaking of revisionist history, did you review the information on who passed the laws that you blamed on Republicans forcing Clinton to sign the law?
I may have missed your comments on that.
Quote: RonCYour commitment to her sounds from that about as solid as mine of Trump.
Well, if Abe Lincoln were running I could vote Republican.
(Of course EB would be going on how ugly Lincoln was because that's what's important. And Duffman would probably find him too pc and not alpha male. He had a shrill voice. And everyone else on the right would point out he;s too anti-states rights and for "Unions"(.pun) and how he doesn't bring everyone together as a leader /civil war.)
Consensual or not, the approval of sexual relations between superiors and subordinates is noted.Quote: rxwineBill had a consensual affair.
: "Others" can think whatever they want. The fact is the subject lied under oath and then incontrovertible forensic evidence was produced, leading to the legal finding of perjury and the ensuing fine and disbarment.Quote: beachbumbabsMore revisionist history from the bubble. The issue was entirely, for years, trying to "get" Bill on scandalous grounds. The perjury was a by-product, and I doubt to this day Clinton thinks he LEGALLY perjured himself, but others think otherwise, and their views prevaled.
Quote: AZDuffmanThat is because the "impact" today is not what what you think it is. Conservatives believe in equality of opportunity. Liberals desire equality in outcome.
Your claim is debatable about what groups want. But the big thing you don't get is that the opportunity is not equal anyway. For example, what group benefits from the legacy preference in college admissions? What about the studies showing bias against "black" names on resumes?
What about if I go to a terrible school and you go to a terrific one...how do we think about whether our opportunity is actually equal? Tough question, I think.
There's a brilliant piece in the Atlantic by Ta-Nehisi Coates about how government-sponsored housing discrimination continues to impact black America today. Very long, but very illuminating.
Quote:Slavery is not the reason black America is the disaster it is today.
I said nothing about slavery. This is your assumption about what I and others believe.
Quote:Let a black try to succeed and he is "Acting white." I have seen this happen.
So in your mind, black people in America WANT to suffer. The black people I know love successful black people and celebrate them as inspirations and role models.
Quote:As is often said, they are still waiting for their 40 acres and a mule, 151 years later now.
Maybe that is "often said" by people you know. Again, I don't think that's what people are saying, but I don't think you are totally open to listening.
Quote:Which is why those who cannot make an intelligent point or counterpoint make it at the drop of a hat.
But there are "intelligent" points to make, and they can't just be dismissed because they're uncomfortable to consider. Your whole post is full of straw men and to me betrays a very shallow level of thinking about this. Which is understandable and very common. But that doesn't make it okay. And I think it might be worth considering that some of the things you hear have merit even if they are unpleasant.
Quote: onalinehorseDon't have time to read the whole thread. Has JFK been mentioned yet in defense of Bill not having sexual relations with that woman ?
I think I alluded to it in that, before the press decided not to look the other way, it did happen.
It is a flimsy defense, kind of like Powell and Rice handling email in a cavalier manner not quite as severe as Clinton's being a defense for her actions. In the case of Hillary, neither one of the other two is the nominee of the party. In the case of JFK, no one let us know it was happening. Things hidden don't get much attention--right or wrong. Bill was known as a womanizer and proceeded to have sexual relations with a subordinate (a big no-no for a superior in any case) in the White House.
He did nothing wrong. I am as sure of that fact as I am sure of the fact that I would pass a breathalyzer right now.
Time for Margaritas!!
Quote: MrGoldenSunYour claim is debatable about what groups want. But the big thing you don't get is that the opportunity is not equal anyway. For example, what group benefits from the legacy preference in college admissions? What about the studies showing bias against "black" names on resumes?
The group that benefits are the kids of people who went to the college. What group benefits when they know someone who works at a place they want to work? But we all have an equal chance of who we are born to. Obama's daughters will have more benefit as to who their parents were than I will. Should I go out and cry that someone else "had a better chance?"
As to "black names" the answer is simple---CHANGE YOUR NAME!!!!
Dino Martin got more work as Dean Martin. Lido Iacocca changed his name to Lee. Many Germans changed their names during WWI. Russians in particular Americanize from say Mikal to Michael, Go by a professional name instead of whining and waiting for someone to "fix" it.
Quote:What about if I go to a terrible school and you go to a terrific one...how do we think about whether our opportunity is actually equal? Tough question, I think.
Then go to a better school. Or pursue employment where less college is needed. You can make six figures a year as a welder in many cases, You have an equal opportunity to go to the better school, It has actually been shown that when you put someone in a "better" school based on skin color you set them up for failure. Heck, I am not ashamed here. I would have easily failed out at a MIT or CMU. But a mid-tier school let me get a degree and a good job after. The path was there, but I took the better path for me.
Quote: AZDuffmanThe group that benefits are the kids of people who went to the college.
Not shocked you missed the point that legacy preference is a systemic bias against minorities.
Quote:As to "black names" the answer is simple---CHANGE YOUR NAME!!!!
Of course you think this is the solution. You are so determined to avoid doing ANYTHING to consider maybe America is not some post-racial utopia. You hear "America is biased against black people" and your answer is "black people, pretend you're not black."
Do you understand how insane that is? How completely ridiculous you sound? The idea that the victims of racism are responsible to fix the problem is absurd. How about maybe the lesson is bias still exists?
Quote:Then go to a better school.
I meant pre-college school, where you typically have no choice. But I have no doubt it wouldn't matter to you anyway, because you seem to have no interest in thinking beyond the most superficial level about this stuff.
Quote: rxwineOh, so you think we excuse people lying in court about actual potential misdeeds or crimes then?
If RonC went up on serious murder charges and all they got was that he perjured himself, because he didn't want to admit he went into people's home's and would go in their bathrooms, filled the bathtub with water and played with rubber bath toys. I would say big deal. RonC has not been proved a murderer. But yeah, he did commit perjury.
Bill had a consensual affair.
This is closer to the cultural truth, but still not why I say what I do about it.
Bill and Monica did not have an affair. They did not have sexual relations. They did not have sex. Because they did not have intercourse .
I grew up about 10 years behind Bill,.but started very early, so relatively contemporary. The culture of that time was everything short of vaginal/penile sex was not sex, it was petting, or a "base", or foreplay. Everything.
That was the line many married men drew for themselves in the 60s and 70s, even well into the 80's as the cultural pendulum swung from free love to condemnation of same. Bill was far from the only one. It was accepted, at least in the Midwest where he and I both grew up. Not talked about, not taught. But it went on everywhere.
He didn't lie; they didn't have sex by his standards. They did some harmless fooling around, but he didn't cheat on Hillary by the standards of their marriage. But other people had other standards and definitions, and theirs prevaled.
Quote: beachbumbabsThis is closer to the cultural truth, but still not why I say what I do about it.
Bill and Monica did not have an affair. They did not have sexual relations. They did not have sex. Because they did not have intercourse .
I grew up about 10 years behind Bill,.but started very early, so relatively contemporary. The culture of that time was everything short of vaginal/penile sex was not sex, it was petting, or a "base", or foreplay. Everything.
That was the line many married men drew for themselves in the 60s and 70s, even well into the 80's as the cultural pendulum swung from free love to condemnation of same. Bill was far from the only one. It was accepted, at least in the Midwest where he and I both grew up. Not talked about, not taught. But it went on everywhere.
He didn't lie; they didn't have sex by his standards. They did some harmless fooling around, but he didn't cheat on Hillary by the standards of their marriage. But other people had other standards and definitions, and theirs prevaled.
Oh dear...this is one of the most ridiculous posts attempting to excuse Bill Clinton's behavior that I have ever read. Bill Clinton did WHATTHEHELLEVER you want to call it; that is unacceptable for a married man to do with anyone that is not his wife. Get/give as many blow jobs, etc. as you want before you are married; marriage is supposed to mean you get them from your one partner from then on. Sex, drugs, and rock and roll do not change right and wrong...and it isn't like Hillary said that he could get blown by whoever he wanted to go down on him. I doubt she considered it "okay" for him to fool around with Monica.
Besides that...he knew what the question was and what the correct answer was. He lied anyway.
I disagree. Especially for the POTUS. We have no idea what his sex life was with his wife. The world hires the most virile men in the world to lead, and then act surprised when they find out they have sexual needs.Quote: RonC... Bill Clinton did WHATTHEHELLEVER you want to call it; that is unacceptable for a married man to do with anyone that is not his wife.
Bill was accused of several rapes, which had some merit. He wasn't bragging about having pleasure with his willing intern, he was being discreet about it. I don't want the most powerful man in the world frustrated with his finger on the big red button.
Of all the things he was rotten about, Nafta, giving patents to China, real estate deals, etc., that I dislike about him, this isn't one of those things. CEO's, senators, lawyers and on and on, are known for extra sex. You don't have a stud bull on the farm and expect him not to service the cows, that isn't how high testosterone works. Ridiculous that people think they have the right to determine other adults sexual choices.
Well it certainly appears that you are wrong about this. We have no idea what their marital agreement is/was, and it is none of our business.Quote:..and it isn't like Hillary said that he could get blown by whoever he wanted to go down on him.
That is an excusable lie, for several reasons. Why should the pres. have to convict himself?Quote:Besides that...he knew what the question was and what the correct answer was. He lied anyway.
