DESERTER BERGDAHL, 6 DEAD AMERICAN MARINES AND 6 TERRORISTS GO FREE....

[slingblade]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering;1056542034





Would you be so kind as to highlight that part of the wiki article that you stupidly imagine legitimizes or excuses what Hildabeast did with her e-mails while serving as Secretary of State. On first reading, it seems, the article you so graciously cited underscores the illegality of Hildabeast's actions. [/SIZE

[/COLOR]

It seems to me that when a Rep does something its okay with them and the Dems complain, and the when the Dems do something similar its vise versa.

And whats with the " stupidly" bullshit? You should know by now I don't play the name calling game so would you please act normal.

[shanm]

Originally Posted by slingblade

It seems to me that when a Rep does something its okay with them and the Dems complain, and the when the Dems do something similar its vise versa.

And whats with the " stupidly" bullshit? You should know by now I don't play the name calling game so would you please act normal.

IB? act normal? How long have you been here?

[DSK]

Originally Posted by shanm

IB? act normal? How long have you been here?

Can't you read his join date?
By the way, I bought a ShamWow product once off the TV - it didn't work too well.
You are turning out to be an equally disappointing "thing".

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by slingblade

It seems to me that when a Rep does something its okay with them and the Dems complain, and the when the Dems do something similar its vise versa.

And whats with the " stupidly" bullshit? You should know by now I don't play the name calling game so would you please act normal.

Noticed how you didn't or couldn't highlight that part of the wiki article that you stupidly imagine legitimizes or excuses what Hildabeast did with her e-mails while serving as Secretary of State. On first reading, it seems, the article you so graciously cited underscores the illegality of Hildabeast's actions.

Your attempt to deflect towards Bush only serves to underscore the gravitas of Hildabeast's failure to remediate.

Hildabeast is the one who ignored the lesson of historical precedent. It was proved wrong under Bush, but Hildabeast, with malice of forethought, elected to do it again anyway; yet, you deflect in a feeble attempt to justify Hildabeast's criminal behavior.

Originally Posted by shanm

IB? act normal? How long have you been here?

How long did you say you've been a practicing grammarian, shamman?

Originally Posted by DSK

Can't you read his join date?
By the way, I bought a ShamWow product once off the TV - it didn't work too well.
You are turning out to be an equally disappointing "thing".

It's amusing to see you pretentiously imagine that you're not neck-deep in the mire, DickSuckingKlown.

[shanm]

Originally Posted by DSK

Can't you read his join date?
By the way, I bought a ShamWow product once off the TV - it didn't work too well.
You are turning out to be an equally disappointing "thing".

That's interesting, because I don't know a shamwow.
what happened? that 10 Inch thick dildo wasn't big enough? It's like throwing a hotdog down a hallway isn't it?

[JD Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by slingblade

It seems to me that when a Rep does something its okay with them and the Dems complain, and the when the Dems do something similar its vise versa.

And whats with the " stupidly" bullshit? You should know by now I don't play the name calling game so would you please act normal.

I think you're wrong. When a republican (conservative or otherwise) does something wrong I see people here either waiting for the evidence to make itself known or if admitted then most people here think it is time for them to resign...unless of course it is something that is not illegal but something that the left has deemed to be a thought crime i.e., saying the wrong thing or the wrong way.
However, it is pretty much universal that when a democrat is caught up then the outcry against punishment is near unanimous among the lefties. Bob Menendez of New Jersey, Epstein/Clinton on orgy island, Hillary on her servers and Benghazi, Obama on his constitutional violations (which the left agrees have happened), and (I could go on for a long time) Jesse Jackson Jr. recent release from prison. The left here defended JJJ against his corruption charges.

Compare that to Mark Foley of Florida (he had to resign though he had broken no laws) and Schock of Illinois (though we haven't seen any evidence of wrongdoing).

It is standard for the left to go to the template; defend our own, deny the charges, promote the charges as unimportant not affecting their work, claim that it was a conspiracy, cover the whole thing up like a cat in a litter box.

[slingblade]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I think you're wrong. When a republican (conservative or otherwise) does something wrong I see people here either waiting for the evidence to make itself known or if admitted then most people here think it is time for them to resign...unless of course it is something that is not illegal but something that the left has deemed to be a thought crime i.e., saying the wrong thing or the wrong way.
However, it is pretty much universal that when a democrat is caught up then the outcry against punishment is near unanimous among the lefties. Bob Menendez of New Jersey, Epstein/Clinton on orgy island, Hillary on her servers and Benghazi, Obama on his constitutional violations (which the left agrees have happened), and (I could go on for a long time) Jesse Jackson Jr. recent release from prison. The left here defended JJJ against his corruption charges.

Compare that to Mark Foley of Florida (he had to resign though he had broken no laws) and Schock of Illinois (though we haven't seen any evidence of wrongdoing).

It is standard for the left to go to the template; defend our own, deny the charges, promote the charges as unimportant not affecting their work, claim that it was a conspiracy, cover the whole thing up like a cat in a litter box.

I purposely worded my reply to be bipartisan. Yet you interpreted it to fit your perception of my "liberal leanings". I don't see how I can convey my point with that skewed type of reception of what ever I could respond with so I don't really know what to say in response to your assertion.

As for Mark Foley that's an odd example for you to pick in my opinion.
He admitted to doing it so How can you say he was railroaded?

“Once again, I wish to express my sincerest apologies for the inappropriate e-mails I sent, particularly to the recipients. I fully realize that I failed them, my family, my former Congressional colleagues and staff, as well as the community as a whole.”

He resigned and checked in to a clinic on his own. I respect him for owning up to it. The bigger issue to me was his buddies condoning it.

Here is another quote from him. Tell me what you see wrong with it, or not.

"Foley insists he did nothing illegal and never had sexual contact with teens, just inappropriate Internet conversations. Investigations by the FBI and Florida authorities ended without criminal charges.

And while he concedes his behavior was "extraordinarily stupid," he remains somewhat unwilling to accept full public scorn.

These were 17-year-olds, just months from being men, he insists.

"There was never anywhere in those conversations where someone said, 'Stop,' or 'I'm not enjoying this,' or 'This is inappropriate' ... but again, I'm the adult here, I'm the congressman," Foley said. "The fact is I allowed it to happen. That's where my responsibility lies."

Foley had built a national reputation as an advocate for tougher penalties against child sexual predators. As co-chairman of the Congressional Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus, he helped craft a law to protect children on the Internet.

Still, he said, there was no hypocrisy.

"The work I was doing was involving young children ... You know, you hear the term 'pedophile.' That is prepubescent," Foley said, noting a "huge difference" from lurid chats with teens on the brink of adulthood.

"At the end of the day, they were instant messages that were extraordinarily inappropriate," he added, breathing a heavy sigh, his eyes wandering toward the ceiling."

I am sure you can find a better example than Foley.

[slingblade]

Originally Posted by shanm

IB? act normal? How long have you been here?

I am an helpless optimist

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by slingblade

I am an helpless optimist

You still didn't or couldn't highlight that part of the wiki article that you stupidly imagine legitimizes or excuses what Hildabeast did with her e-mails while serving as Secretary of State; especially, since the article you cited underscores the illegality of Hildabeast's actions.

[JD Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by slingblade

I purposely worded my reply to be bipartisan. Yet you interpreted it to fit your perception of my "liberal leanings". I don't see how I can convey my point with that skewed type of reception of what ever I could respond with so I don't really know what to say in response to your assertion.

As for Mark Foley that's an odd example for you to pick in my opinion.
He admitted to doing it so How can you say he was railroaded?

“Once again, I wish to express my sincerest apologies for the inappropriate e-mails I sent, particularly to the recipients. I fully realize that I failed them, my family, my former Congressional colleagues and staff, as well as the community as a whole.”

He resigned and checked in to a clinic on his own. I respect him for owning up to it. The bigger issue to me was his buddies condoning it.

Here is another quote from him. Tell me what you see wrong with it, or not.

"Foley insists he did nothing illegal and never had sexual contact with teens, just inappropriate Internet conversations. Investigations by the FBI and Florida authorities ended without criminal charges.

And while he concedes his behavior was "extraordinarily stupid," he remains somewhat unwilling to accept full public scorn.

These were 17-year-olds, just months from being men, he insists.

"There was never anywhere in those conversations where someone said, 'Stop,' or 'I'm not enjoying this,' or 'This is inappropriate' ... but again, I'm the adult here, I'm the congressman," Foley said. "The fact is I allowed it to happen. That's where my responsibility lies."

Foley had built a national reputation as an advocate for tougher penalties against child sexual predators. As co-chairman of the Congressional Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus, he helped craft a law to protect children on the Internet.

Still, he said, there was no hypocrisy.

"The work I was doing was involving young children ... You know, you hear the term 'pedophile.' That is prepubescent," Foley said, noting a "huge difference" from lurid chats with teens on the brink of adulthood.

"At the end of the day, they were instant messages that were extraordinarily inappropriate," he added, breathing a heavy sigh, his eyes wandering toward the ceiling."

I am sure you can find a better example than Foley.

Where did I say anything about YOUR liberal leanings? I didn't and you read something into what I wrote that wasn't there just as you accused me of doing. I'm just pointing out the history of political scandals. The left has always been quick to launch on the right whereas the right has always been more willing to wait for the case to be presented. The left has launched on personal, non criminal peccadillos as a reason for attack whereas the right usually gets a good laugh at the expense of the democrats.

Just to remind you, Clinton went on trial (and impeachment) for suborning perjury, lying under oath, and obstruction NOT as the left would have you believe for having sex in the Oval Office.

You seem to know a lot about Foley, so you know that he (it was never proved or admitted to) had any sexual contact with any of the pages. They exchanged email for the most part. So no criminal actions but a personal failing for which he fell on his sword. I bring up Foley for a very good reason; Gerry Studds whose death stopped the liberal juggernaut trying to destroy Foley personally. Remember Congressman Studds? He admitted having actual sex with underage boys, congressional pages, while serving in a official capacity. I would like to say that what he did was illegal but that was the loophole that helped him escape justice, the law against statutory rape did not include boys in the definition. He got off and the democrats rallied around him. He was supported by the party who helped him get reelected for years afterwards.

You can not help but notice the differences between Foley (no crime) and Studds (a crime in most states) and the reaction of the party; Foley (you need to resign), Studds (we've got your back).

[slingblade]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

You still didn't or couldn't highlight that part of the wiki article that you stupidly imagine legitimizes or excuses what Hildabeast did with her e-mails while serving as Secretary of State; especially, since the article you cited underscores the illegality of Hildabeast's actions.

There is no reason to highlight anything. The point is why is it okay one time and not the next.

Again you use the "Stupidly" comment. It makes you look like a child when you do that. If I was one to trade insults that would all well and good but I am not going to pulled in to that game. You are wasting your time baiting me. You got my point and that is why you take the low road. have a nice day sir.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by slingblade

There is no reason to highlight anything. The point is why is it okay one time and not the next.

Again you use the "Stupidly" comment. It makes you look like a child when you do that. If I was one to trade insults that would all well and good but I am not going to pulled in to that game. You are wasting your time baiting me. You got my point and that is why you take the low road. have a nice day sir.

You are, in fact, the one who "missed the perennial point" that two wrongs do not make a right. You cited a historical example of wrongdoing that Hildabeast should have known about, and that historical incident should have deterred Hildabeast from doing what she did. Instead, Hildabeast incorrigibly imitated the wrongdoing you cited. Hence, your stupid and rather feeble attempt to defend Hildabeast only served to highlight the malignant disregard Hildabeast has for public law. BTW, you weren't "baited": you were refuted.

[shanm]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

You are, in fact, the one who "missed the perennial point" that two wrongs do not make a right. You cited a historical example of wrongdoing that Hildabeast should have known about and that historical incident should have deterred Hildabeast from doing what she did rather than incorrigibly imitating that wrongdoing you cited. Hence, your stupid and rather feeble attempt to defend Hildabeast only served to highlight the malignant disregard Hildabeast has for public law. BTW, you weren't "baited": you were refuted.

^

Slingblade, you should leave him alone. IBIdiot has already proven that he can argue with emoticons for more than 2 months. Animated dancing opponents are more apt to his intellectual capacity.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by shanm

^

Slingblade, you should leave him alone. IBIdiot has already proven that he can argue with emoticons for more than 2 months. Animated dancing opponents are more apt to his intellectual capacity.

So, shamman, how long have you lived under this delusion that emoticons can post themselves to a SHMB?

[slingblade]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

You are, in fact, the one who "missed the perennial point" that two wrongs do not make a right. You cited a historical example of wrongdoing that Hildabeast should have known about, and that historical incident should have deterred Hildabeast from doing what she did. Instead, Hildabeast incorrigibly imitated the wrongdoing you cited. Hence, your stupid and rather feeble attempt to defend Hildabeast only served to highlight the malignant disregard Hildabeast has for public law. BTW, you weren't "baited": you were refuted.

So you finally get the point and pretend its yours ? Really?