Is he running for 2012?

reply to post by Bicent76


You know who else makes sense, Ron Paul. Not telling you what to do, but if you still beleive voting does something vote for him...

reply to post by agentofchaos


I would say the most honest, forthright (IMO) and politician that actually voted his positions, to be about a thousand times the better candidate.

Could you imagine what the country may be like if politicians voted what they said, instead of the back door deals they created?

Originally posted by whatukno
Clinton was impeached however he was not removed from office. (There is a difference)

Clinton cannot run for POTUS again, unfortunately. In my opinion he was one of the best presidents in my lifetime.

Clinton had Bin Laden in his grasp and he failed to act. The consequences of this blunder cannot be downplayed. It is without doubt one of the biggest mistakes ever made by a political leader in the history of the world.

reply to post by Bicent76


i guess term limits dont mean crap to you people
i guess impeachments only counts if its a republican
i guess you want the man who let bin laden go and another 9-11


i thank god he cant run.


you people are the biggest hypocrites i have ever seen in my entire life.

Originally posted by Janky Red

Even stranger, that a blow job is an impeachable offense.

I know some unmentionable people that've done worse than Clinton.

We should start a Bring Back Bill campaign and give the 2 terms rule the finger.

Anything is possible.

reply to post by neo96


We didn't want to go to war for a lie and an inside job that killed thousands.

Thank our former republican president for that one.

reply to post by ohsnaptruth


dont you even try to talk to me about war

world war 1 wilson
world war 2 fdr
korean war truman
vietnam johnson
bosnia clinton
somalia clinton

ALL DEMOCRATS

let us not forget whop dropped the bomb on nagasAki and hirsohima.

democrats have killed more people and have more blood on their hands than george bush ever had.

sorry Willie
but this election belongs to Ron Paul.

Originally posted by neo96
world war 1 wilson
world war 2 fdr
korean war truman
vietnam johnson
bosnia clinton
somalia clinton
ALL DEMOCRATS

You have an incomplete list there, let me help you: The War on Drugs. Military funding, training and action in Central and South America, most of it through illegal and unethical means (Iran-Contra anyone?). The first Gulf War. The Iraq and Afghanistan War. Why didn't you mention those? Oh wait, they were started by Republican Presidents.

let us not forget whop dropped the bomb on nagasAki and hirsohima.

Do you disagree with America's participation in World War 2? Do you disagree with the use of those atomic bombs to end the war? And why?

Originally posted by neo96
dont you even try to talk to me about war

world war 1 wilson
world war 2 fdr
korean war truman
vietnam johnson
bosnia clinton
somalia clinton

ALL DEMOCRATS

let us not forget whop dropped the bomb on nagasAki and hirsohima.

democrats have killed more people and have more blood on their hands than george bush ever had.

I think you're stats are skewed.
WW2 we were attacked
and everything afterward was started
by the CIA and they have no party
affiliation other than the criminal mafia.
Criminals without borders and total immunity !!!
And let's not forget JFK was assassinated
cuz he left the CIA out to dry at the Bay of Pigs.
your point is moot

reply to post by KerbDune


i guess the only wars that matter are only the ones that what a republican does.

they are the only ones being constantly being vilified and called war mongers and murders.


anything and everything can be twisted .

thats to you boondock too there was a method to my madness.

Originally posted by CynicalM
He was impeached, then his mates got him off...
Strange system when his "own" party can vote to acquit IMO..

I'll take the bait.

As an abstract idea, I suppose it is weird that you can be impeached, then your "mates" get you off ... so to speak. However, equally curious, is the entire opposing party toeing the line and voting against you. I dunno, but when it's a rock solid, party-line vote, it indicates to me that the issue isn't the issue ... it's politics that's the issue. And we know this to be the case because all the Republicans (since Clinton was a Democrat) who've been doing boys, or strangers, or people who aren't their wives, don't seem to upset these same folks that had such enormous, world-shattering issues will Bill. Curious, indeed.

Originally posted by neo96
i guess the only wars that matter are only the ones that what a republican does.
they are the only ones being constantly being vilified and called war mongers and murders.

No, all wars matter and that's the point. You make up these strawman arguments about what "leftists" do or say to, in your mind, justify your blatant partisan position and bias, when you should address what members here are actually saying.

In my view, Obama is almost as bad as Bush for continuing the war in Afghanistan. Do you object to anything Bush did? Are you OK with torture? Are you OK with going to war in Iraq over lies?

I would certainly vote for him. Forget about his non-impeachment. Seriously, it's not like he committed espionage or treason. He lied about getting a BJ to keep his wife from finding out...what guy wouldn't have. I'm not so certain it was anyone's business but His, his wife's and and Monica's.

Of course, there is the 2-term limit thingy, but that's been circumvented before. I could see him running with Hillary, as her vice president. That would be cool with me. I think that he is more in touch with the average American than anyone else anywhere in the entire political spectrum.

Originally posted by Aggie Man
I would certainly vote for him. Forget about his non-impeachment. Seriously, it's not like he committed espionage or treason. He lied about getting a BJ to keep his wife from finding out...what guy wouldn't have. I'm not so certain it was anyone's business but His, his wife's and and Monica's.

Of course, there is the 2-term limit thingy, but that's been circumvented before. I could see him running with Hillary, as her vice president. That would be cool with me. I think that he is more in touch with the average American than anyone else anywhere in the entire political spectrum.

I have to respond to this. William Jefferson Blythe III (Bill Clinton) was impeached. Only the house of representatives can impeach, and they did; For grand jury perjury. The senate then holds a "trial", where he was not convicted. He didn't just lie about getting a blowie, he lied to a grand jury. Lying to a grand jury is perjury. Perjury is an impeachable offense. This is all explained in the constitution Article 1, Sections 2 and 3 and Article 2, Section 4.

The 2 term limit "thingy" has never been circumvented before. You'd have to repeal the 22nd amendment.

No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.

Originally posted by METACOMET

Originally posted by Aggie Man
I would certainly vote for him. Forget about his non-impeachment. Seriously, it's not like he committed espionage or treason. He lied about getting a BJ to keep his wife from finding out...what guy wouldn't have. I'm not so certain it was anyone's business but His, his wife's and and Monica's.

Of course, there is the 2-term limit thingy, but that's been circumvented before. I could see him running with Hillary, as her vice president. That would be cool with me. I think that he is more in touch with the average American than anyone else anywhere in the entire political spectrum.

I have to respond to this. William Blythe (Bill Clinton) was impeached. Only the house of representatives can impeach, and they did; For grand jury perjury. The senate then holds a "trial", where he was not convicted. He didn't just lie about getting a blowie, he lied to a grand jury. Lying to a grand jury is perjury. Perjury is an impeachable offense. This is all explained in the constitution Article 1, Sections 2 and 3 and Article 2, Section 4.

The 2 term limit "thingy" has never been circumvented before. You'd have to repeal the 22nd amendment.

No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.

edit on 20-9-2010 by METACOMET because: to add amendment

Yeah, I know the impeachment procedure. Still, I call it a non-impeachment because the whole set-up was ludicrous to begin with. Who's business was it that he was getting a "blowie"? Why did it even get to a grand jury? Was he passing national secrets encoded in his DNA? He was acquitted, and rightfully so.

I regards to the 2-term limit. It was more of an unwritten rule before the 22nd amendment. And YES, it would have to be repealed in order for someone to serve a 3rd term. However, I merely said I would vote for him and that I would be fine with him as vice president.

reply to post by KerbDune


strawman not hardly

as to how i respond in a thread its my business if you dont like what i have to say read over or put me on ignore.

iraq and afghanistan since islamic fundamentists have been at war with for decades and by the leftist inactions and actions that lead TO IRAQ AND AFHGANISTAN.

i do not have any problems with either one of them. simple fact saddam got what he deserved and the taliban got what they deserved

saddam tried to kill george bushes father he tried to kill a us president.

the taliban was harboring those people who attacked us on 9-11

before that those were the same kind of people who planned and tried to execute the first world trade center attack, the kobar towers, the uss cole, somalia.

AND THATS WHERE THEY WERE instead of blood shed on american streets they took the fight to them.

bush did everything a president who took the oath to protect and defend this country its people and your way of life so you can sit there and whine about what i write.

am i ok with torture yes i am for the simple fact what you call touture aint jack compared to what a fundamentalist does and has done to americans and other people.

beheading some isnt considered torture, cutting off womens noses isnt considered torture, killing gays and stoning women isnt torture using women as human shields isnt torture

but then again i can sit here and say if rush limbah,sean hannity,,glenn beck, or bill o'reilley and right winger be tortured or waterboard you wouldnt being saying crap.



only a moron will not recognize the fact that we can sit here right now and run our mouths like we do has been and always been paid for price and more often than not its a price people just cant stand.

the alternative to not paying it is death for you and me and this way of life

Originally posted by neo96
am i ok with torture yes i am for the simple fact what you call touture aint jack compared to what a fundamentalist does and has done to americans and other people.

That's your justification? Because terrorists do it we can do it? Wow really? You think the standards America should live up to are those set by terrorists? It's people with mentalities like yours that are actually hurting America and what it stands for.

reply to post by KerbDune


i think its delusional to think americans standards are what you believe them to be simple fact they never have been


they are what you have been brainwashed to think


morality and ethics are on display in american politics every single day and if people beleive those" ideals"

the left right paradigm would never treat each other they way they do


if you or the left is just so oppose the the thought of torture well there are other forms of it

and agian its is on display ever single day in american politics.

the form of which i am referring to is mental, verbal and nonstop vilifcation

I am with you OP. I'll take Clinton back in a heartbeat.

Although I believe he is guilty of collusion with TPTB (CFR, Trilateral Commision
and Bilderburg), he was the best fiscal president in many years.

Too bad he lied about a BJ...

He should've confessed...."It's none of your business. My personal life
and issues like this are between me and my wife...BUTT OUT!!"

Instead he did what countless men have done...lied.