Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

come spank this op-ed writer --- grrrrrr!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
grasswire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-15-06 12:36 PM
Original message
come spank this op-ed writer --- grrrrrr!
Edited on Tue Aug-15-06 12:40 PM by grasswire
The columnist is Bruce Kauffmann, who writes a syndicated piece called "Bruce's History Lesson." His email is bruce@historylessons.net.

His column on Sunday was all about Clinton and Lewinsky -- a rehash of Clinton's misrepresentations to Congress and the humiliations he endured.

Then he ends with this:

"Ironically, in the trial's wake, Clinton's job approval rating remained strong, while the Republican Party took a public relations beating for "going after" Clinton about something as trivial as sex. Food for thought for those Democrats who are thinking of impeaching President Bush for 'lying'"

It's outrageous to make a moral equivalent out of the lies Bill Clinton told about his sexual relationship AND the lies told by George W. Bush that have drained the U.S. Treasury, caused world chaos, and cost the lives of thousands of American men and women and tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis. OUTRAGEOUS. And to have the word "lying" in parentheses means he doesn't even believe that Bush has lied.

This guy used to work for Dan Rather. He oughta know better. Please help me spank him with e-mails. Grrrr! Clinton lied, no one died!

Here's a link to his web site. http://www.historylessons.net/brucebiography.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
northzax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-15-06 12:41 PM
Response to Original message
1. there's your major problem
since Bush was never under oath, he didn't, as far as I know, commit any high crimes or misdemeanors for lying. a lot of other things, perhaps, but a politician lying on the stump is not an impeachable offense (or we'd have no politicians left at all)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mz Pip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-15-06 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Since the State of the Union speech
is mandated by the Constitution wouldn't lying in that be a serious offense?

I want to see BushCo held accountable. Maybe the Dems retaining the House and Senate will ultimately be enough for me. Elections are one way to have accountablitly.

Mz Pip
:dem:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northzax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-15-06 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. not under oath
the president is required to give a statement to the Congress, I don't think that it has to be 100% true (otherwise every President would be impeachable for something)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrCoffee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-15-06 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. The State of the Union speech is not mandated by the Constitution
Article 2, Section 3: He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient;

The prez can email Congress and satisfy the Constitutional requirement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidDvorkin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-15-06 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Clinton was under oath but was given a legal definition of sex
According to which definition, he had not had sex with Monica Lewinsky.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Teaser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-15-06 12:47 PM
Response to Original message
2. well his assessment may be correct
it may be that americans wouldn't like to see another impeachment trial. Should that, however, weigh more heavily on our decision to bring * to account for his crimes?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-15-06 02:59 PM
Response to Original message
6. If Bruce thinks lying about sex is trivial
Then he apparently thinks lying about going to war is equally trivial? I'm not sure I understand his point. Something two adults mutually consent to do in private is somehow equivalent to billions squandered, thousands dead, and our national credibility ruined for a generation or more? What is he trying to say? And does he get paid to write? Seems like someone's being taken for a ride here by Mr. Kauffmann, but I don't think it's the discerning reader.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 10:15 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC