namelesstavern.net

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17527506/

I realize it is futile and pointless now but I found this, a little ironic

EDIT

O and don't call me a hipocrit.

Harrison I think you're our resident hipocrit expert, what say you

I'd call him a very large hypocrite, yes. I'd also call him a raving jackass and a complete shithead, but that's another issue.

-Arlos

Was it Ann Coulter?

arlos wrote:I'd call him a very large hypocrite, yes. I'd also call him a raving jackass and a complete shithead, but that's another issue.

-Arlos

i lol'd

ClakarEQ wrote:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17527506/

I realize it is futile and pointless now but I found this, a little ironic

EDIT

O and don't call me a hipocrit.

Harrison I think you're our resident hipocrit expert, what say you

Where's the hypocrisy? Gingrich didn't admit to perjury and obstruction of justice. Clinton's impeachment wasn't about an affair.

Try again libs.

Lionking wrote:Gingrich didn't admit to perjury and obstruction of justice. Clinton's impeachment wasn't about an affair.

Bush better watch out then.

Lionking wrote:

ClakarEQ wrote:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17527506/

I realize it is futile and pointless now but I found this, a little ironic

EDIT

O and don't call me a hipocrit.

Harrison I think you're our resident hipocrit expert, what say you

Where's the hypocrisy? Gingrich didn't admit to perjury and obstruction of justice. Clinton's impeachment wasn't about an affair.

Try again libs.

so you dont think its hypocritical that the man trying to impeach clinton in fact was guilty of the same indescression?


He who is without sin may cast the first stone.

Oh please. If telling the truth about having an affair were a requirement to be in political office, neither of the houses of Congress would have enough members to reach a quorum. Go on, peddle your bullshit elsewhere.

Lying about whether or not you got a blowjob is *NOT* an impeachable offense. Orchestrating illegal political sabotage, unlawful and illegal wiretapping and surveillance, and other criminal acts such as breakins, etc. and then orchestrating a coverup for said years of illegal activity, which is what Nixon did, *IS* an impeachable offense.

Not to mention, Gengrich is the grandfather of the radical partisanship we're going through today, with his complete bucking of all traditions of bipartisanship and compromise by his actions when he took over in 94. You think the politcal climate is over-polarized now, and there's precious few in the middle ground? Blame Gengrich and his cronies.

-Arlos

well said arlos

arlos wrote:Oh please. If telling the truth about having an affair were a requirement to be in political office, neither of the houses of Congress would have enough members to reach a quorum. Go on, peddle your bullshit elsewhere.

Lying about whether or not you got a blowjob is *NOT* an impeachable offense. Orchestrating illegal political sabotage, unlawful and illegal wiretapping and surveillance, and other criminal acts such as breakins, etc. and then orchestrating a coverup for said years of illegal activity, which is what Nixon did, *IS* an impeachable offense.

Not to mention, Gengrich is the grandfather of the radical partisanship we're going through today, with his complete bucking of all traditions of bipartisanship and compromise by his actions when he took over in 94. You think the politcal climate is over-polarized now, and there's precious few in the middle ground? Blame Gengrich and his cronies.

-Arlos

Lying under oath about anything is impeachable. Doesn't matter if you were lying about a blow-job or lying about the color of the sky. Lying under oath is perjury...plain and simple. There are 'degrees' to perjury.

I agree with your last paragraph, though.

arlos wrote:Oh please. If telling the truth about having an affair were a requirement to be in political office, neither of the houses of Congress would have enough members to reach a quorum. Go on, peddle your bullshit elsewhere.

Lying about whether or not you got a blowjob is *NOT* an impeachable offense. Orchestrating illegal political sabotage, unlawful and illegal wiretapping and surveillance, and other criminal acts such as breakins, etc. and then orchestrating a coverup for said years of illegal activity, which is what Nixon did, *IS* an impeachable offense.

Not to mention, Gengrich is the grandfather of the radical partisanship we're going through today, with his complete bucking of all traditions of bipartisanship and compromise by his actions when he took over in 94. You think the politcal climate is over-polarized now, and there's precious few in the middle ground? Blame Gengrich and his cronies.

-Arlos

That's a nice drive-by attempt. I definitely hit your liberal nerve. Your knee-jerk reaction was:

1. Everyone else does it too
2. But, but, but what about Nixon!
3. It's the other side's fault for everything wrong in D.C.

Classic.

Clinton got a blowjob. Ok, whatever. Clinton perjured himself. Clinton obstructed justice. Not Ok. Those ARE impeachable offenses. I understand that he's your golden boy, but facts are facts.

Maybe you'll get lucky and the bitch will become el presidente and slick willy will have another chance to fuck around his old stomping grounds.

Evermore wrote:

Lionking wrote:

ClakarEQ wrote:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17527506/

I realize it is futile and pointless now but I found this, a little ironic

EDIT

O and don't call me a hipocrit.

Harrison I think you're our resident hipocrit expert, what say you

Where's the hypocrisy? Gingrich didn't admit to perjury and obstruction of justice. Clinton's impeachment wasn't about an affair.

Try again libs.

so you dont think its hypocritical that the man trying to impeach clinton in fact was guilty of the same indescression?


He who is without sin may cast the first stone.

Did Gingrich lie under oath about it? Show me his perjury. Gingrich is an ass, but Clinton broke the law.

His lie wasnt to the public it was to his wife. I would say thats under oath but a different kind. It's nice how you try to redirect, funnier how you fail and miss the whole point. this post was not about clinton's perjury.


and we have another patheticly malformed conservative viewpoint struck down.

"The president of the United States got in trouble for committing a felony in front of a sitting federal judge," the former Georgia congressman said of Clinton's 1998 House impeachment on perjury and obstruction of justice charges. "I drew a line in my mind that said, 'Even though I run the risk of being deeply embarrassed, and even though at a purely personal level I am not rendering judgment on another human being, as a leader of the government trying to uphold the rule of law, I have no choice except to move forward and say that you cannot accept ... perjury in your highest officials."

I think that right there about covers it.

He's a shitbag, but he's right. He didn't commit a felony.

I like lionking, many of his posts make me chuckle.

Bush is guilty of war crimes that he'll never be (well I hope he will be) prosocuted for. I know what clinton did wasn't right, but you make it sound as if Bush and his buds are saints.

Rove and Cheney both lied AND broke the law, this came out in the libby trial, let me predict your next response, prove it, where did they lie under oath. It is funny about that, rove and cheney weren't required to testify under oath, hmm makes you wonder.

EDIT
This post is really a bit pointless, I don't feel like taking the time to back it up, but I won't delete it either way. Just thought I'd throw it out there

Yes, he lied under oath, I'm not arguing that. But, the matter was about as trivial a subject as you can possibly imagine, and it was one that ANY person, regardless of circumstance would be prone to do, especially a public figure. You go up to 100 random people in affairs and ask them on camera if they're having an affair, and see how many say yes. Even under oath. Bet you it wouldn't even be half. In any case, while it may be a crime, it was highly, highly trivial. Commencing impeachment proceedings over that is like arranging a firing squad for a jaywalker.

Oh, and LK, I think you'd be hard-pressed to convince me that Martrae is a liberal, and we are, apparently, in agreement about the after-effects of herr Gengrich's term in office as Speaker.

-Arlos

WTF...I'm liberal!









/snicker

this reminds me of when the preacher I got counseling from during my marriage appointed his then-mistress to counsel me privately. a few years after my divorce they ran off together and everyone found out about it. my ex husband and I laughed about it.

arlos wrote:I'd call him a very large hypocrite, yes. I'd also call him a raving jackass and a complete shithead, but that's another issue.

-Arlos

Gingrich or Harrison?

Evermore wrote:His lie wasnt to the public it was to his wife. I would say thats under oath but a different kind. It's nice how you try to redirect, funnier how you fail and miss the whole point. this post was not about clinton's perjury.


and we have another patheticly malformed conservative viewpoint struck down.

From the article:

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich was having an extramarital affair even as he led the charge against President Clinton over the Monica Lewinsky affair

The article brings up the Clinton/Lewinsky ordeal. The only reason to mention it is to paint a picture of hypocrisy. Bill Clinton was not impeached for having an affair, he was impeached due to lying under oath about it. Gingrich's involvement in bringing about the impeachment of Clinton is not a hypocritical act on his part, quite the contrary considering unlike Clinton he told the truth when the issue came out even without being under a judicial oath that compels one to tell the truth.

Now that being said yes I think it's very hypocritical of him to stand up and represent an ideology of family and Christian values while he's having an affair and lying to his wife.

arlos wrote:Yes, he lied under oath, I'm not arguing that. But, the matter was about as trivial a subject as you can possibly imagine, and it was one that ANY person, regardless of circumstance would be prone to do, especially a public figure. You go up to 100 random people in affairs and ask them on camera if they're having an affair, and see how many say yes. Even under oath. Bet you it wouldn't even be half. In any case, while it may be a crime, it was highly, highly trivial. Commencing impeachment proceedings over that is like arranging a firing squad for a jaywalker.


-Arlos

Do you view the Libby case in the same light? In both cases charges were brought for lying under oath, but the lie's were related to actions that were not themselves violations of the law.

Jay wrote:

arlos wrote:I'd call him a very large hypocrite, yes. I'd also call him a raving jackass and a complete shithead, but that's another issue.

-Arlos

Gingrich or Harrison?

Yes

I think Newt is a moron and a hipocrit to the fullest extent. He has no right to run for any kind of office.