aps said:Monica Lewinsky was an adult, and she has admitted that she came onto Bill Clinton (she flashed her thong at him). It would be one thing if he were preying on her, but that clearly was not the case.
talloulou said:Completely different. Clinton was brought before a grand jury and his relationshiop with lewinsky was made part of the questioning as it related to his relationships with employees so to speak. He lied in front of the grand jury and that is where all his problems came from. His affair with Lewinsky was never made "criminal" in and of itself.
Navy Pride said:Bottom line with any major corporation in this country if a married man has and affair with a subordinate or and employee they are fired........
We had that happen with the Boeing Company out here in Seattle.........If your "Slick Willie' though I guess EEO rules and regulations don't apply to you......
Kandahar said:Umm I don't think corporate rules apply to ANY president. Any CEO who was as fiscally irresponsible as George W Bush would've been fired long ago.
TurtleDude said:not if the board of directors approved the fiscal irresponsibility.
Kandahar said:They would be fired by the stockholders as well.
TurtleDude said:perhaps-sorry there were no other potential officers who would spend less though.
Kandahar said:Studies have shown that the federal government spends less money when there's gridlock than they do when one party controls everything.
TurtleDude said:perhaps but I liked the GOP rolling back taxes, the death confiscation tax and passing the law that prevents anti gun cities from suing legitimate gun makers for criminal misuse.
Kandahar said:Any CEO who was as fiscally irresponsible as George W Bush would've been fired long ago.
DeeJayH said:wrong
happens every day on wall st
one example is called LBOs
leveraged buyouts
they take on massive amounts of debt to buy another company which will make the original stronger for the future, in principal
where the income derived from the acquisition, offsets the debtload taken on in the purchase
companies go into debt every day, all day long
and yes, it is only the fiscally responsible ones that survive these strategies
I would even go so far as to say that most companies have more debt than cash on hand
now back to your regularly scheduled program
Kandahar said:Umm I don't think corporate rules apply to ANY president. Any CEO who was as fiscally irresponsible as George W Bush would've been fired long ago.
Kandahar said:Having debt doesn't mean that they're fiscally irresponsible. Having debt because they waste money on stupid crap (like our federal government) means they're fiscally irresponsible.
Kandahar said:They would be fired by the stockholders as well.
doughgirl said:I agree Navy. How old were those pages that Foley is accused of messaging do you know?
It got me to thinking about Clinton. How old were the interns he tried to seduce?
Navy Pride said:Yeah but letting the democrats take over is like putting the fox in the henhouse........
talloulou said:Completely different. Clinton was brought before a grand jury and his relationshiop with lewinsky was made part of the questioning as it related to his relationships with employees so to speak. He lied in front of the grand jury and that is where all his problems came from. His affair with Lewinsky was never made "criminal" in and of itself.
doughgirl said:I agree Navy. How old were those pages that Foley is accused of messaging do you know?
It got me to thinking about Clinton. How old were the interns he tried to seduce?
Navy Pride said:I think the youngest was 16 and up to 18.......As far as Monica she was 22 but Clinton wass 55 old enough to be her Grandfather......
CaptainCourtesy said::ranton:When I notice conservatives or so-called white racialists (supremecists) post a pointless, only-intention-is-to-incite poll, I always try to point it out, and expose the senselessness of said poll. Here we have a good example of a liberal verison of a meaningless, agenda-driven, flaming poll. There is no point here other than to attack Republicans, certainly not to discuss the issue. This poll was not presented in good faith, nor is honest.
I'm sure some will claim that this poll's intention was to not be honest...and no, that point didn't get by me, so don't claim I wasn't bright enough to see the sarcasm. That fact, however, makes this even more ridiculous. Making a serious sitiuation into nothing more than partisan idiocy is sinking to the same level that it is often claimed that the other side sinks to.
Do y'all think it's possible to discuss an issue as serious as a member of congress having innapropriate contact with young congressional aids without resorting to the same innane, redundant, moronic, partisan mudslinging that is shown by politicians, whom we often condemn for doing just that.
It is also irksome that many of the same posters who are so quick to attack conservatives when a stupid conservative poll is presented are the same to jump on the liberal bandwagon when a like-minded liberal poll is also presented. IMO that is called being hypocritical.
As a liberal (though not an extremist) the more I watch the partisan BS of both the Dems and the Reps the more I am disgusted by both.
:ranton:
dsanthony said:Since you left Foley off your list of choices, I assume you're a liberal democrat.
Navy Pride said:Yeah but letting the democrats take over is like putting the fox in the henhouse........
aps said:Desperation. I love it!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?