posted on May 31, 2001 07:25:32 PM new
What Clinton did with his appendage has nothing to do with what he did while in office for our country. I think he did a great job, and I dont really care what he did with that "low class" woman who thought nothing of opening her face for what was not hers. Yes, he's just as bad for cramming it in there, but it still has nothing to do with his ability to run a country, have the knowledge to conduct himself properly while representing what is best for us and having the class to not make every country hate him at first meeting by thinking hes an idiot.
He used his brains, not his loins doing that. Whats Bush's excuse?
posted on May 31, 2001 11:15:58 PM new
If this was a small town and the mayor's daughter or son got caught doing something 'illegal' ---even if everyone else's son or daughter were doing the same thing---it would be front page news in the local rag and the barber shop and the beauty salon would be talking about nothing else.
Bush is 'mayor' of a bigger town---and even though it is a private matter, it is not gonna stop the gossip or reporting.
posted on June 1, 2001 10:22:22 AM new
The XXII Amendment
No person shall be elected to the office of 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.
But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of president when this article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of president, or acting as president, during the term within which this article becomes operative from holding the office of president or acting as president during the remainder of such term.
posted on June 1, 2001 11:22:47 AM new
I was a wild child at her age too.
But I didn't drink and drive ,I had sense enough not to do anything in public places (like drinking and smoking) where I could be arrested for it. I was no angel,but..if I were the presidents daughter I would have had more sense than to try a
FAKE I.D. That has got to be the dumbest stunt I ever heard. Did she really think
she would go unrecognized....IN TEXAS!!!!!
Hopefully her dad will have sense enough to let her take her punishment so she might learn the error of her ways before she hits 40.
To much shielding leads to late maturing in my book.
posted on June 1, 2001 11:25:40 AM new
What should happen? Well here is the law in TX:
CHANGES TO OTHER ALCOHOL RELATED AGE LAWS
Senate Bill 35 also significantly strengthened other minor related laws and added automatic driver's license suspension to the penalties. Minors who purchase, attempt to purchase, possess, or consume alcoholic beverages, as well as minors who are publicly intoxicated or misrepresenting their age to obtain alcoholic beverages face the following consequences:
Class C misdemeanor, punishable by a fine up to $500
Alcohol awareness class
8 to 40 hours community service
30 to 180 days loss or denial of driver's license
If a minor is seventeen years of age or older and the violation is the third offense, the offense is punishable by a fine of $250 to $2,000, confinement in jail for up to 180 days or both, as well as automatic driver's license suspension.
posted on June 1, 2001 11:38:27 AM new
Everyone in my small town knew who my parents were because they were "well known" and respected. So I made a POINT of being obnoxious, wore my hair super hippie long, outlandish apparel and even got busted behind their business (a baggie of weed, but the speed was not mine..belonged to my boyfriend and I was carrying it). Did I care? Nope. I was "punishing" them. Maybe shes doing the same thing. Looks that way to me. I dont think shes stupid. I think its deliberate.
posted on June 1, 2001 09:24:40 PM new
I was always taught that if you can't say something nice about someone then it would be best not to say anything at all. I think some of you should examine your lives and your heart and find out why there is so much bitterness instead of peace. We just don't seem to be happy unless we are hurting others. Isn't life too short and too precious for this.
posted on June 1, 2001 10:55:02 PM new"I was always taught that if you can't say something nice about someone then it would be best not to say anything at all"
ANGELWOMAN, you probably don't realize the irony in your scolding, but everyone else does.
posted on June 2, 2001 12:17:36 AM new
Just wait until the two girls turn 21 and can legally start to drink alchohol. Their daddy is scheduled to still be president then and the girls wil really become fair game!
Since I was asleep while my response to your issue of remaining silent was discussed, I would like to point out that I am not among the confused mentioned by jt.
When I was a little child, my Momma taught me this little technique of remaining silent when there was nothing good to say, but
then I grew up and learned that it was nonsense, only to be used in trivial
conversation about trivial people discussing trivial topics.
So, I was taught by my Momma, just as you were.
I have no bitterness in my heart...only deep concern and compassion.
I have no peace in my heart though, because of my concern and compassion.
And, hurting others is not my goal.
Neither is happiness.
I hope that you can understand my position better, now.
posted on June 2, 2001 08:12:44 AM new
This thread has my mind really spinning. I dont' get it. If I understand most of your correctly, you are saying "If you are a Democratic president and do something wrong that is a personal choice, it is no bodies business and doesn't affect his job. But if you are a Republican Presidents daughter and do something wrong that is a personal choice it should be plastered all over the news, and it will affect her dads job"
Do you people even read what you write? Or are you just all brainwashed by the Socialist lies?
posted on June 2, 2001 08:34:40 AM new
As far as I'm concerned, the refusal of the Bushs to address their children's actions amounts to little less than faith-based hyprocrisy. The incident reflects specifically upon the so-called family values issue, which Bush and the Republican party chose to embrace politically and a basic tenet of which is the assertion that most of today's social ills result from inadequate and secular parenting, and therefore the solutions to these problems lie within the scope of the family and church to correct rather than relying upon government programs. In fact, so the thinking (?) goes, churches/religious organizations can so much more effectively handle these problems that the government should financially underwrite a socio-religious agenda.
If that belief is sincere, then why wouldn't the Bushs set an example, by virtue of being the first family, to explain how they may have gone wrong in providing parental and spiritual guidance to their own children? God knows W has not been reluctant to imply that others are shirking their responsibility. In fact, he could go further to analyze what it was in his own parents' derelictions of duty that resulted in his widely known problems since they must have somehow failed to instil the proper moral and spiritual values which caused him to err.
Or could the Bushs be pleading the privacy issue, which traditionally does not relate to illegal activities, because the incidents, especially the second one, is a no-win political football? Certainly, bringing the daughters' behavior to light as an issue for public discussion and education would be embarrassing to them but it would hardly inflict irreparable harm. But it could, of course, also spotlight how minor deceptive behaviors begin which could lead to others of the magnitude of attempting to create an energy crisis to fleece an entire nation and undo prudent environmental policies to benefit oneself, friends, and financial backers.
spelling
[ edited by Antiquary on Jun 2, 2001 08:38 AM ]
posted on June 2, 2001 09:00:19 AM new
Antiquary-how do we know what Bush has said to his daughter? Should any 'scolding' be done publicly? And made known to the press what exactly he has said to his daughters, or what he has plans on doing to her about this matter.
She has been, as far as I've read been to court in TX over this, and 'sentenced' and fined. I do know from reading she is currently doing community service.
If it be, say a person working with him on national issues that went and broke the law, then yes, he might have to let it be known to everyone what his plans are for that person.
Someone brought up Clinton and his 'adultery'. It wasn't about the adultery! Sure they made it sound like he was being 'condemned' with immorality.
When a person holding high office, the President, is having that intimate relationship with someone, is about national security. Laugh? No I did not look at it at all as being 'immoral'. (guys do this all the time, and women)
Everyone that is close to the President, is usually checked out thouroughly, and even then things slip by. (Obvious things can slip by, look at the FBI agent that was working with Russia and was still a U.S. FBI agent for what? 20 some years)
The President is breifed daily on national security issues, stuff we never even hear about.
We do know now that Monica, and some others were ok, meaning they were not some kind of 'spy'. BUT the problem is they COULD HAVE BEEN.
When they went into their private conferences with Clinton on this, the question of immorality was not the issue, it was a question of National Security. If no one else see's this, I don't know...
The press came out with Republicans comments on the 'immorality issue', of course they are going to say that. They are not going to make comments to the press that its a National Security issue.
I could care less what the man does intimatly with someone. But when you are with someone else privatly, how do you know what they DO talk about. Sure he could let things slip, a dozen things could have happened.
posted on June 2, 2001 09:26:39 AM new
Even crummy parents who devote themselves to their own selfish pleasures and pursuits, giving little or nothing to their children when they're growing up and have to have it, can be heartsick later when their children hit late adolescence and have exactly the sorts of problems that anyone could have forseen would have resulted from such poor behavior that fell far short of what we'd think of as proper parenting. Even crummy parents who didn't do right by them love their children, and they still cry when they see their childrens' demons, and they still spend sleepless hours and tortured days heartbroken over them. I don't think much of Bush for the most part, but as a crummy parent myself, I feel for him.
posted on June 2, 2001 09:35:01 AM new
That is the all time most confused post I've ever had the displeasure to witness.
When ever was a national security problem espoused concerning a daliance with Monica by Clinton, and what in the world has it got to do with this clearly problematic first child.
There is no doubt that Bush is attempting to stifle discussion of his daughter's follies, and to do that makes a lie of all of the family value platform upon which he campaigned.
There is a statement by the restaurant owner that he was pressured to 'look the other way' in this matter of the illegal alcohol activities of the daughters. Who made that pressure? Apparently the Dallas (or whichever) city police did. What does such a thing mean? I'd say that it means that there are attempts being made to cover and gloss over this arrest. If true, then antiquary's post is relevant to the political makeup of the resident as well as to his credibility as an example in leadership toward the sorts of values that he has said are needed to solve the problems of the country.
Either he's a liar, a hypocrite, or he doesn't know what he's talking about.
posted on June 2, 2001 10:02:20 AM newWe do know now that Monica, and some others were ok, meaning they were not some kind of 'spy'. BUT the problem is they COULD HAVE BEEN.
LOOK OUT MONICA!!! DONT LICK THAT BUTTON! YOU WILL BLOW US ALL UP!
posted on June 2, 2001 10:17:46 AM new
It was brought up, because someone said something to the effect if 'a Dem. does something, nothing is made a big deal about, or is defended, but if a GOP President has trouble, its all over the place and talked about, or some such sh*t.
If you do not think that behind secure private doors, in private conference with the President, after it was found out about his intimate relationship outside his marriage, that it wasn't a national security issue, I don't know what to think.
Do you know what DOES go on in private conferences in the White House. Are we privy to all the daily briefings of Nstional Security? Has the public ever been? Is the President not guarded 24/7, and everyone he does have contact with is checked out, as his family is also? Why do you think they do that?
In as far as I know, his daughters go to college in different states, and do not live in the White House full time.
What they did or didn't do, is wrong, illegal in most states, IS illegal in TX and they should be subject to the same laws as any other citizen of this country.
If what you say is true, that the police asked the owner to look the other way, I don't believe it was Bush that had them do that, they should not have done that, and should be reprimanded for that action, if that is true.
So, now, I do not see how he is hypocrite, liar or whatever else you did say.
As he did not get the one out of going to court the first time, or doing what the judge ordered... there was even video of her in court, or did you miss that one?
If Bush was trying to cover up, or use his power to get her out of trouble, she never would have gone to the first court date would she?
And it all being on the news, everyone knows about it, so where is the cover up.
If one promotes family values, and one of their own children goes out and blows those values all to hell, the child (in this case she IS an adult at 19) should be held responsible for his/her actions. I'm sure he did not tell them they can do what they want and are immune to any laws. Do you think he told them this?
Good families have bad kids, it happens everyday. And the Presidents daughter may be that 'bad' kid. Any parent doing everything they can to have their kids grow up 'moral' and good and all that, sometimes, it turns the opposite.
I know, I got one kid that can be a little sh*t and in trouble, the other is total opposite. If she gets in trouble now at her age, 19, I won't bail her out. She is an adult and will suffer the consquences if any should incur.
