Offering constructive criticism to the social cripples in our midst since early 2005.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Spanky
If Clinton had been impeached and prosecuted it would have sent a message to the whole country that perjury is not tolerated. Letting Clinton lie and get away with it, just reconfirmed everyones cynicism about the legal system.

Wasn't he impeached?

But seriously, what if he had been prosecuted after leaving office? Wouldn't that have sent a message -- and done so without drawing political battle-lines? (Please, don't say that the Repubs had no consideration of politics in their mind.)

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Spanky
Would have Hammurabi's code been OK? Or what about Justinians Code? I understand the separation stuff, but what about historical stuff? Why is historical stuff OK but not religious historical stuff. Here in California they don't want the state reparing old California missions. As long as stuff is labelled historical, and has influenced todays culture, why is that not fine?

There are two opinions on the issue of 10 commandments in public fora issued today. The press hasn't really been great at explaining that.
McCreary County v. American Civil Liberties Union of Ky. (Souter opinion, commandments in courthouse, goes into discussing purpose of the display, focuses on the Lemon test)

Van Orden v. Perry (Rehnquist opinion, commandments on State Capitol grounds, goes into historical context, Lemon not useful in a "passive" display)

Looks like Bryer was the swing.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Spanky
It is not illegal. It is not a crime. It may cause other problems but is not a crime.

Okay -- but it's not "fine". Right?

(We'll leave out the technical discussion of when lying to get someone to do something is "illegal").

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Spanky
These are the people I don't get. Just because you don't think that the case should have moved forward doesn't change the gravity of the perjury. This is a nation of laws. The Supreme Court ruled that the case was OK, and the Trial judge ruled that the question was relevant, and then Bubba lied. What people may think about it, or what the lie was about is irrelevent. He committed perjury under oath. Lying about sex is fine. A president lying about sex to the American public is fine. A President lying to the American public about anything is fine. Lying under oath, no matter what the subject, is not fine.

Dissent. Lying to subvert a lying, improper investigation is fine. You may stand on principle all day, but if you've been to court, you know the true value of "The Oath," and the maleability of "truth." I wouldn't have done what Clinton did, but I think its hysterical that he did it. Its the perfect lowball response to a lowball witch hunt. It provided exactly the level of respect Starr and those who supported him deserved. I mean, really, what obligation does anyone have to a scumbag who himself ought to be jailed for the most obscene abuse of process and prosecutorial discretion in history?

Many people are calling Deep Throat a traitor. Technically, he defied an oath to his superiors and his job. He broke all sorts of sacred "rules." Sometimes, its OK. I give Bubba a pass.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Wasn't he impeached?

But seriously, what if he had been prosecuted after leaving office? Wouldn't that have sent a message -- and done so without drawing political battle-lines? (Please, don't say that the Repubs had no consideration of politics in their mind.)

Justice delayed for Jones would have been justice denied. The guy is a serial sexual abuser, and further used the taxpayer dollars to assist him in his abuse (state troopers and secret service picking women up for him and covering it up). It was time he was called to task.

Thankfully, it's doubtful he learned his lesson, which almost certainly assures a bimbo eruption during Madame Hillary's campaign.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I think you are patronising me.

Not at all. But I've never read Don Quixote, and I think this summer is the time to jump into the new translation.

Apropos of none of that, I honoured Australia this weekend and my tip to you is anything from this place is great:

http://www.twohandswines.com/

I categorically decline to drink wines from Oz and NZ, for arbitrary and capricious reasons, but you are not the first to tell me to reconsider lately, so perhaps I shall.

Last night we opened a bottle of a Dashe zinfandel, and it was mighty tasty.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
Letting Clinton lie and get away with it, just reconfirmed everyones cynicism about the legal system.

He hardly got away with anything.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Wasn't he impeached?

But seriously, what if he had been prosecuted after leaving office? Wouldn't that have sent a message -- and done so without drawing political battle-lines? (Please, don't say that the Repubs had no consideration of politics in their mind.)

I think a huge opportunity was lost. I think a zero tolerance policy for perjury will insure more justice being done than almost anything else I can think of. Lying under Oath is one of the biggest problems in our system. It causes more innocent men to go to jail than any other problem. The more people are scared to lie the better the system. If every time someone took a deposition or got on the stand, and knew in the back of their mind that a President was taken from office and thrown into jail for perjury, they will be a lot more likely to tell the truth. It would have injected a whole new level of confidence in the system. But instead everyones cynicism has been reinforced.

Tom Campbell voted for impeachment even though he knew it would cost him his congresional seat. I talked to him about it before he took the vote. Seventy five percent of his constituency wanted him to not vote for impeachment, but as a law professor he said that he could not sacrifice the integrity of the system for his own political gain.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
If its in the name of the national defence during wartime, definitely.

Well, thats the only reason Bush hasn't been impeached now, isn't it? That, and the fact that the Dems are impotent chickenshits. Were people not afraid to sink us into a new Watergate during a time of national uncertainty, Bush might find himself under oath, and lying just like Bubba did.

Lying to the American people is not a crime, but its a lot worse than lying under oath about a blow job. Bush might be the greatest thing for Clinton's legacy. If iraq goes badly, people will remember him, not Clinton, as the man who set a new standard for lying.

In the silly, warped minds of people who support Bush but hate Clinton, its ok to lie anywhere but the courthouse. Thats about as cynical and senseless a viewpoint as I've ever heard.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Justice delayed for Jones would have been justice denied. The guy is a serial sexual abuser, and further used the taxpayer dollars to assist him in his abuse (state troopers and secret service picking women up for him and covering it up). It was time he was called to task.

Thankfully, it's doubtful he learned his lesson, which almost certainly assures a bimbo eruption during Madame Hillary's campaign.

I'm sure this was fun for you to type, but the country's need for a president is greater that Jones's need for "justice" (how much justice did she end up with after fees and expenses?). And careful what you wish for - more bimbo eruptions may end up helping Hillary.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Okay -- but it's not "fine". Right?

(We'll leave out the technical discussion of when lying to get someone to do something is "illegal").

It is not fine. Depends on the situation. But lying and lying under oath are as different as renting a car, and abusing it while you have it, and stealing a car.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
I'm sure this was fun for you to type, but the country's need for a president is greater that Jones's need for "justice" (how much justice did she end up with after fees and expenses?). And careful what you wish for - more bimbo eruptions may end up helping Hillary.

If Clinton had been kicked from office we would have Al Gore. The "need" for a president would never have gone unfufilled. The ironic thing is that if Clinton had left office, Gore would have been an incumbent in 2000 and would most likely have won the election.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Spanky
It is not illegal. It is not a crime. It may cause other problems but is not a crime.

So? Is the criminal code your sole moral compass? One instance of perjury is worse than 50 instances of lying to the public to ram through a policy a large portion of the country did not, and if given the true information re: WMD, would not have supported? Is that honestly what you're saying?

Go ahead... Please tell me Bush had to lie to us to get the war going because he truly believed it, or it was the right thing to do. I'd love to hear you play Sherman McCoy here...

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
I think a huge opportunity was lost. I think a zero tolerance policy for perjury will insure more justice being done than almost anything else I can think of.

I'm sorry, but I have a hard time taking anyone seriously when they use the phrase "zero tolerance," which is usually deployed in a sanctimonious effort to sound tough, regardless of the individual circumstances. It's the sort of thinking that leads TSA personnel to confiscate carkeys because they have a mechanism like a switchblade, and to expel a six-year-old from school because some of Daddy's cold medicine is in her backpack.

Lying under Oath is one of the biggest problems in our system. It causes more innocent men to go to jail than any other problem.

I have no idea what you are talking about here.

The more people are scared to lie the better the system. If every time someone took a deposition or got on the stand, and knew in the back of their mind that a President was taken from office and thrown into jail for perjury, they will be a lot more likely to tell the truth. It would have injected a whole new level of confidence in the system. But instead everyones cynicism has been reinforced.

Because a large majority of the country saw the pursuit of Clinton as partisan, and fairly so, I think it's unlikely that cynicism would have replaced confidence.

Tom Campbell voted for impeachment even though he knew it would cost him his congresional seat. I talked to him about it before he took the vote. Seventy five percent of his constituency wanted him to not vote for impeachment, but as a law professor he said that he could not sacrifice the integrity of the system for his own political gain.

I thought he gave up his seat to run against DiFi.

[Replaced_Texan]

Apparently it's the liberals' fault that priests are pedophiles:

"It is no surprise that Boston, a seat of academic, political and cultural liberalism in America, lies at the center of the storm."

So says Senator Rick Frothy Mix of Lube and Fecal Matter (R-PA).

I wonder what happened to that party of personal responsibility?