Clinton steps all over the constitution

r8dmarshall · #11 (**permalink**) 12-26-2006, 08:23 PM

Does anyone else want to make statements in the negative without explaining the wrong they think was done, how and why?

It is easy to stir the pot, but when asked to dip out some facts some don't have a ladel.

Skinny Fatts · #12 (**permalink**) 12-26-2006, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hurricane

What makes you so sure Clinton was 'my guy?' I heard plenty of bitching about Clinton's transgressions when he was in office. It is not like his wrongs went unnoticed. NOT with Newt and Rush around they didn't!

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

It doesn't matter if he was your guy or not, I don't care really. He's gone but the attitude that I am speaking about remains. I'm merely stating that many of those who are angry with GW Bush are not angry with members of their own party when they do the same or similar things...that's all. Were Clinton's transgressions bitched about by members of his party? No, they were not and that is my point. These same chuckleheads spoke about "regime change" in Iraq when Clinton was in office and are against it now...funny how they change depending on the letter behind the name. It's a sad state of affairs that not many are angered by this.

r8dmarshall · #13 (**permalink**) 12-26-2006, 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by r8dmarshall

Question regarding the clasify military installation secrets.

Is there not an exemption for all military and research facilities grounds to protect the secracy of military projects.

To make statements regarding actions of any president without stating the legality and motivation of said action or exemption is simply trying to ensight emotion in the negative.

First establish the reason and legality and pressident of said actions. It may turn out to be simply a practice used by all administrations to protect national security information.

I guess no one is serious other than to make statements without substance.

RASTAMAN · #14 (**permalink**) 12-26-2006, 11:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skinny Fatts

It doesn't matter if he was your guy or not, I don't care really. He's gone but the attitude that I am speaking about remains. I'm merely stating that many of those who are angry with GW Bush are not angry with members of their own party when they do the same or similar things...that's all. Were Clinton's transgressions bitched about by members of his party? No, they were not and that is my point. These same chuckleheads spoke about "regime change" in Iraq when Clinton was in office and are against it now...funny how they change depending on the letter behind the name. It's a sad state of affairs that not many are angered by this.

Clinton's transgression were investigated with Congressional Oversight hearings by the GOP Majority during the 6 years of Clinton's 8 year Presidency.

What goes around comes around. Hopefully, Bush will endure the same Scrutiny and Oversight by a Democratic Majorty.

r8dmarshall · #15 (**permalink**) 12-26-2006, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by r8dmarshall

Does anyone else want to make statements in the negative without explaining the wrong they think was done, how and why?

It is easy to stir the pot, but when asked to dip out some facts some don't have a ladel.

the invisable, but to whom?

cat's meow · #16 (**permalink**) 12-27-2006, 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gixaholic

Look for Presidetnial Docatrine 95-45.................

http://www.ufomind.com/area51/desert...exemption.html

wow talk about a secretive president

This stuff all leads to this Glen Campbell guy (not the singer) that deals with UFOs and area 51...so what point are you making?

cat's meow · #17 (**permalink**) 12-27-2006, 01:41 AM

Wow, look at the nifty pics your source has Gix...Ooooo...wonder what the Mark I flying saucer was like(?).

Skinny Fatts · #18 (**permalink**) 12-27-2006, 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RASTAMAN

Clinton's transgression were investigated with Congressional Oversight hearings by the GOP Majority during the 6 years of Clinton's 8 year Presidency.

What goes around comes around. Hopefully, Bush will endure the same Scrutiny and Oversight by a Democratic Majorty.

Absolutely Rasta...I've got no problem with that. I hope it does happen. If the government is investigating each other then they are not passing new laws to bother us.

We as voters must be happy with the way Washington works because we keep voting the same people in to office. Ultimately WE, the voters, are responsible for what goes on in Washington.

melchizedek22 · #19 (**permalink**) 12-27-2006, 12:54 PM

shouldn't this thread be in ancient history,Clintons gone,Bush is
President,what Clinton did has no bearing on current events

rob · #20 (**permalink**) 12-27-2006, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by r8dmarshall

I guess no one is serious other than to make statements without substance.

r8d, I agree that military secerets should be kept out of the public domain. The problem then becomes who is hiding what. There are jposters here that think that the American citizen needs to be aware of everything the goverment is doing and thusly, the world hears about it.