Actual Quotes from OBAMA book

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"VZ/res0zhra" wrote

People have totally misinterpreted what he was saying here. He was
actually speaking about HRC as he was addressing that comment to Ms. L.
A little cryptic, but hey, I would have been, too! When you're in deep
doodoo it don't matter whose doodoo you're standing in.

Notice the OT added in the subject line. It should have been included in
this tread from the beginning. Now back to the thread.

And that is exactly the kind of attitude that is the root of many of our
problems, today.

Avoid unpleasant consequences, at all costs. Cover your ass. Look out
for number one.

The _honorable_ thing to do would have been tell the truth. The whole
truth. Nothing but the truth.

That _is_ part of the instructions, part of what we swear to, before
giving testimony or evidence in a court of law, isn't it?

That one famous (infamous?) quote does not hold to the spirit of the law.
Far from it.

That one line is why I condemn Clinton. I dislike his behavior. I
dislike many things he did, and approved of, but this one line clearly
shows what kind of man he is. A man without honor. A man that is willing
to evade the truth, rather than face the consequences. A man that did not
deserve to be in the high office he was in, representing the people of
this land, representing the ideals that many have fought and died for.

He may have had the law on his side, but he sure did not have honor on his
side.

He lost any respect I had ever had for him, instantly. He deserved far
worse than what ever happened to him.

Please. I seriously doubt you had any respect for Clinton in the first
place, so why pretend as much and then profess to remove such respect? Do
you call that being "honorable"? Clinton mislead a court about a meritless
civil case that was funded by his political enemies to begin with. So your
definition of "honor" is to voluntarily give legal foder in a case that
never should have seen the light of a courtroom to begin with? His biggest
mistake was trying to mislead the public in the same manner, but in the end
it was a private matter if he wanted to get an extra-marital hummer in the
first place. Most Americans didn't really give a crap about it anyway as he
had higher approval ratings than President Reagan ever did as the
impeachment proceedings were going on in congress. Those that pretended to
be offended by it never liked him in the first place, just like you.
Several members of congress who led the charge against Clinton were cheating
on their own wives at the time or later called Libby's actual perjury
(during a federal criminal investigation no less) a "technicality". In the
end the entire matter was a blight on American politics, and neither side
ever took the high road.

Furthermore, since when have we had an "honorable" President? Nixon? He
was a tax cheat, dishonest to the core, and completely corrupt. Reagan? He
never came clean once on Iran-Contra and even Goldwater never believed him
on the matter. He also presided over one of the most corrupt
administrations in history and when asked about it by the press pretended to
be oblivious to it all. H.W. Bush? He was just as dirty on Iran-Contra and
he pardoned all those who sandbagged the investigation to protect himself.
He also pardoned a known terrorist for no other reason than to further the
political career of his son. Bush the 2nd? No explanation needed there.
So in more than 30 years the most "honorable" Presidents we've had are Ford
and Carter, and both were mediocre Presidents at best.

"Jim Logajan" wrote

The OP is a worn tread indeed. ;-)

I guess I wanted to get the "H" out-a-there! g

You mean like Grover Cleveland did in response to the Halpin scandal? Well
look what happened to him!

He is not alone in his "almost the whole truth" attitude.

It seems to be far to prevalent among politicians.
--
Jim in NC

"Mike" wrote

Please. I seriously doubt you had any respect for Clinton in the first
place, so why pretend as much and then profess to remove such respect?

You know what I feel about him, How???

Don't presume or assume to know my feelings about the man, or his
accomplishments. You know what happens when you assume.

Hint: There were things that he did while he was president that I felt were
very good.

What he did with that one statement I still feel were worse than all of the
other presidents, even when you look at them with the worst possible slant.
Does that give you an idea how I feel about that particular deception? No
answer needed; I just wanted to let you know how I DO FEEL about this one
thing. It wasn't the act, it was the lie, and most of all, where and how it
was given.

Another hint. Nothing you or anyone else can say, or do, or compare to
others, will ever change my mind on this subject, so save your breath,
unless you just want to see your words in writing.
--
Jim in NC

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

What book and page number?

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Mike" wrote

Please. I seriously doubt you had any respect for Clinton in the first
place, so why pretend as much and then profess to remove such respect?

You know what I feel about him, How???

Because your response is typical and I've seen it dozens of times from those
who try to "condemn" the man based on one act that had practically zip to do
with the job.

Don't presume or assume to know my feelings about the man, or his
accomplishments. You know what happens when you assume.

My assumptions have a pretty good track record. I'm not going to pretend
they are correct all of the time, but in your case I'm still convinced and
your previous post only reinforces what I already suspected.

Hint: There were things that he did while he was president that I felt
were very good.

So what? I could say the same about Nixon or any other president throughout
history. One would have to be a universe away from the mainstream to say
any president had no good accomplishments whatsoever throughout their term.

What he did with that one statement I still feel were worse than all of
the other presidents, even when you look at them with the worst possible
slant. Does that give you an idea how I feel about that particular
deception? No answer needed; I just wanted to let you know how I DO FEEL
about this one thing. It wasn't the act, it was the lie, and most of all,
where and how it was given.

I will answer your question whether you feel it was needed or not. It gives
an excellent idea about how you feel about that particular deception and it
reinforces exactly what I've been saying. Everyone lies, and yes, that
includes presidents. To say Clinton has the all time worse deception would
be funny if it weren't so sad. It means you think deceiving the public
about a hummer is worse than deceiving the public into a baseless war.

Another hint. Nothing you or anyone else can say, or do, or compare to
others, will ever change my mind on this subject, so save your breath,
unless you just want to see your words in writing.

I could care less whether I change your mind or not. Everyone is entitled
to their opinions. Some are just more relevant than others.

FREEDOM-OF-SPEECH wrote in news:LFzrk.1703$Jk1.690
@newsfe01.iad:

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.'

Snort!


You're a hoot and a half!


Bertie

You know what I feel about him, How???

Because your response is typical and I've seen it dozens of times from
those who try to "condemn" the man based on one act that had practically
zip to do with the job.

Um, it doesn't bother you that a seated (and married, sort of) president
used his power and influence to bop a cute (if slightly plump) little intern
in the Oval Office? If your school board president was caught doing this,
he'd be in prison right now. Yet the president of the United States is
above all that because he "otherwise did a good job"?

What kind of standard is *that*?

It doesn't bother you that a seated president then perjured himself by lying
under oath? If that were a Senator -- or you -- punishment would be swift.

Not only was the guy never punished, he instead wields great influence in
our morally bankrupt political system. Worse, the Democrats still get all
teary eyed about him. It would be funny if it weren't so sad.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:6Zcsk.256820$TT4.147231@attbi_s22...
You know what I feel about him, How???

Because your response is typical and I've seen it dozens of times from
those who try to "condemn" the man based on one act that had practically
zip to do with the job.

Um, it doesn't bother you that a seated (and married, sort of) president
used his power and influence to bop a cute (if slightly plump) little
intern in the Oval Office?

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.

If your school board president was caught doing this, he'd be in prison
right now. Yet the president of the United States is above all that
because he "otherwise did a good job"?

In prison for what? Is sex illegal in your world? I don't know if you
realize it or not, but scarlet letters went out of fashion quite some time
ago.

What kind of standard is *that*?

The kind that are applied equally to both sides.

It doesn't bother you that a seated president then perjured himself by
lying under oath? If that were a Senator -- or you -- punishment would be
swift.

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.

Not only was the guy never punished, he instead wields great influence in
our morally bankrupt political system. Worse, the Democrats still get all
teary eyed about him. It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

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.

In article LSesk.685$lf2.108@trnddc07, "Mike" wrote:

There was no perjury.

He lied under oath. That, by definition, is perjury.


Clinton was never convicted or even so much as
indicted for any such crime, or any other crime for that matter.

which does not mean he didn't lie.

If you're
not familiar with the facts of the situation, you should better educate
yourself before you comment.

indeed.

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

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

There was no perjury.

He lied under oath. That, by definition, is perjury.

No it's not.

However your definition does demonstrate why you don't posses the knowledge
to argue such points.

Clinton was never convicted or even so much as
indicted for any such crime, or any other crime for that matter.

which does not mean he didn't lie.

It means he's innocent of perjury.

If you're
not familiar with the facts of the situation, you should better educate
yourself before you comment.

indeed.

Glad you agree.