Offering constructive criticism to the social cripples in our midst since early 2005. - Page 95

notcasesensitive · 06-27-2005, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Way to nitpick. You may as well have pointed out the split infinitives.

Ha! GO! Carry on.

ltl/fb · 06-27-2005, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Way to nitpick. You may as well have pointed out the split infinitives.

You didn't split any infinitives in that post.

sebastian_dangerfield · 06-27-2005, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
The criminal code is not my sole moral compass. Where did you get that? You may detest what Bush did but there is no clear legal solution. You can't prosecute someone for something if they have not broken the law, even if you don't like what they did. Once you start saying that your political beliefs are more important than the system, that is when the system collapses. If you ignore the rules because you don't like the outcome, then you get anarchy. Clinton committed perjury, and in my mind there is no doubt that perjury falls under high crimes and misdemeaners. Those were the rules when Clinton entered office. Maybe the suit should have been dismissed, but that is irrelevent when determining perjury.

As far as what Bush has done, even if what you say is true, I don't see if there are any crimes he has committed. If you don't like that then you can pass laws making what Bush did a crime. But Bush did not break any laws and Clinton did.

So it is OK to lie under oath if you disagree with the validity of the case you are involved in? Of course not because almost any defendent disagrees with the validity of the case brought against them. Once Clinton took that oath of lying under the penalty of perjury everything tha that happened up to that point was irrelevant. He was under oath and had to tell the truth. I can't believe that you can't see that.

Both have committed crimes. The only difference is, one was prosecuted and one hasn't been yet.

If prosecuted, Bush would be found guilty. But circumstances very unlike Clinton's have made his prosecution highly unlikely. What they haven't done is make his lies any less disturbing and wrong than Clinton's. You and I can jack off this issue semantically all day, but a lie is a lie. Bush lied to put Americans in the path of bullets. Bill Clinton lied about coming in some fat girl's mouth. Distinguishing the two based on an oath being administered before one is probably the most cynical and morally vacant viewpoint I've ever heard.

Replaced_Texan · 06-27-2005, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
An original whiff? I don't think so.

I'm officially appointing you chair of the RMWC committee. Clearly the need has been demonstrated. Go assemble the rest of your team and have results for me by the end of the summer.

Spanky · 06-27-2005, 05:02 PM

On a more serious note, the sock (not the internet kind, but the real kind) thing has just gotten out of hand. It was funny for a while but now something has to be done. My Washer and Dryer are about twenty feet from the drawer I keep my socks in. In addition, there is a place where the washer and dryer are kept that socks can hide (no space behind the washer etc.). Yet I have four socks that don't have a match. I just bought these a couple of months ago. With all the tax dollars I pay, you would think that the government could do something about this. For once couldn't the government do something that could really improve the quality of life. I don't know if they have to arrest all the sock gremlins or what - but this situation has gone on too long and it needs to be dealt with. This is an issue that will determine my vote in 2006.

sebastian_dangerfield · 06-27-2005, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Well, according to the good Senator from Pennsylvania, it's not Clinton's fault. When the culture is sick, every element in it becomes infected. We are all at fault.

Don't you worry about that piece of white trash. He's going to get run out of office on a rail next year. The money in this state is betting on his adversary.

Its a bad sign when most state developers are courting your opponent a year before the election.

Sidd Finch · 06-27-2005, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
Do you think perjury should be considered a serious offence?

Yes.

In the case of Clinton, I think that after he left office, the relevant prosecuting authorities (i.e., the AUSA or DA for the appropriate jurisdiction) should have filed charges against him, if their practice was to file charges for perjury in a deposition in a civil case. If that was not their practice, but they wanted to make an example of Clinton for the purpose of deterring perjury in the future, they should have done so but made that very clear.

I also think that the disbarment proceedings, which I believe ended with the equivalent of a plea bargain or settlement, were appropriate.

The problem I have with your theory -- that this was necessary to the integrity of the legal system -- is that I haven't seen anyone call for increased prosecutions of people who lie at deposition, and I doubt that anyone really intends to. I don't think anyone would have read a successful impeachment of Clinton, followed by prosecution, as anything but power politics. No one would have thought "oh, gee.... if I lie at my deposition I might end up in jail like Clinton," because he was so clearly receiving treatment far beyond what anyone else would have received for the same conduct.

And yes, I'm aware that the Repubs found four people who were actually prosecuted for perjury in civil cases. As shifty said, what's the denominator? And in what jurisdictions?

Quote:

What laws did Bush break?

I wasn't having a Bush v. Clinton discussion with you, just questioning your statement that lying is okey-dokey, or at least couldn't possibly be a crime, if it's not under oath. Because that statement was flat-out wrong.

And Monday is too early for the "he lied to Congress" "no he didn't -- he really, really thought there was conclusive, irrefutable evidence of WMDs in Iraq" discussion.

Penske_Account · 06-27-2005, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Well, according to the good Senator from Pennsylvania, it's not Clinton's fault. When the culture is sick, every element in it becomes infected. We are all at fault.

Clinton was a carrier of the virus. He is to blame. His legacy is legitimizing perjury and rainbow parties for our youth. It takes a fucking village to undo the damage this guy did.

Sidd Finch · 06-27-2005, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
On a more serious note, the sock (not the internet kind, but the real kind) thing has just gotten out of hand. It was funny for a while but now something has to be done. My Washer and Dryer are about twenty feet from the drawer I keep my socks in. In addition, there is a place where the washer and dryer are kept that socks can hide (no space behind the washer etc.). Yet I have four socks that don't have a match. I just bought these a couple of months ago. With all the tax dollars I pay, you would think that the government could do something about this. For once couldn't the government do something that could really improve the quality of life. I don't know if they have to arrest all the sock gremlins or what - but this situation has gone on too long and it needs to be dealt with. This is an issue that will determine my vote in 2006.

Blame the Unions.

notcasesensitive · 06-27-2005, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
On a more serious note, the sock (not the internet kind, but the real kind) thing has just gotten out of hand. It was funny for a while but now something has to be done. My Washer and Dryer are about twenty feet from the drawer I keep my socks in. In addition, there is a place where the washer and dryer are kept that socks can hide (no space behind the washer etc.). Yet I have four socks that don't have a match. I just bought these a couple of months ago. With all the tax dollars I pay, you would think that the government could do something about this. For once couldn't the government do something that could really improve the quality of life. I don't know if they have to arrest all the sock gremlins or what - but this situation has gone on too long and it needs to be dealt with. This is an issue that will determine my vote in 2006.

The first necessary step if you want a resolution of this issue is that a thread must be started on the SF Boards about it. With the platform you have there, it is only a matter of time before a Save Spanky's Socks taskforce is assembled.

Spanky · 06-27-2005, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Both have committed crimes. The only difference is, one was prosecuted and one hasn't been yet.

If prosecuted, Bush would be found guilty. But circumstances very unlike Clinton's have made his prosecution highly unlikely. What they haven't done is make his lies any less disturbing and wrong than Clinton's. You and I can jack off this issue semantically all day, but a lie is a lie. Bush lied to put Americans in the path of bullets. Bill Clinton lied about coming in some fat girl's mouth. Distinguishing the two based on an oath being administered before one is probably the most cynical and morally vacant viewpoint I've ever heard.

1) What crime did Bush commit. Seriously?

2) If there is no difference between lying and lying under oath then does that mean we should repeal the perjury law, or prosecute people every time they lie?

Shape Shifter · 06-27-2005, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
On a more serious note, the sock (not the internet kind, but the real kind) thing has just gotten out of hand. It was funny for a while but now something has to be done. My Washer and Dryer are about twenty feet from the drawer I keep my socks in. In addition, there is a place where the washer and dryer are kept that socks can hide (no space behind the washer etc.). Yet I have four socks that don't have a match. I just bought these a couple of months ago. With all the tax dollars I pay, you would think that the government could do something about this. For once couldn't the government do something that could really improve the quality of life. I don't know if they have to arrest all the sock gremlins or what - but this situation has gone on too long and it needs to be dealt with. This is an issue that will determine my vote in 2006.

The market has found a way to make you buy more socks.