These are the arguments being presented by the two sides of the corrupt system. I'm not misstating the argument. This is the argument that is being made.

Seeing as no one here said those things, and seeing as you provide no names for people who said that, I call "straw man". The only ones that I've seen put forth anything looking like this crapola have been Rethuglicans excusing their hypocrisy and 'explaining' why Scooter's ... umm, 'different'.

Cheers,

He [Clinton] did, in fact, lie under oath.

Arguable, but even if so, SFW? I explained this in the first reply to you. See, e.g. 18 USC § 1621 et seq..

Cheers,

Repudiate the neo-Nazi racist Hoppe that you urged us all to read or go back to Stormfront, OK?

Certainly 9/11 remains the primary source of Bush's power as a cult leader. He became our "Commander in Chief" instead of our President. No matter that the American public does not need nor should it have a Commander in Chief - a role limited to leadership of the military, but who can quibble when there's a war on.

Anyone who calls Bush America's Commander in Chief in a way that does not limit that role to merely directing the military does not really believe in democracy or our constitution -- they want a daddy dictator to tuck them in at night and keep the bogeymen away.

Meanwhile the Democrats were all - "Wait a minute. There wasn't even a crime committed here. He lied about cheating on his wife. Big deal."

That characterization of the Democratic position is not correct.

The Democratic argument was not merely about there being "no underlying crime"—it was about there being no underlying crime that rose to the level of an impeachable offense. (In fact, there was no underlying crime at all.)

If Clinton had jay-walked and lied about it under oath, the Democratic position about there being "no underlying crime" (that is, one rising to the level of an impeachable offense) would have been identical, assuming that jay-walking does not rise to the level of an impeachable offense.

One could argue, as the Republicans did then, that perjury per se, irrespective of any other circumstances, was an offense warranting impeachment. Those same Republicans cannot now argue that the absence of an underlying crime somehow vitiates the charge of perjury.

The Republicans are the party of Bush, wishing they were the party of Reagan. Speaking of which. How ironic is it that Mike Huckabee said June 5th was Reagan's birthday, when actually it was the day he died.

El Cid...
They had power. They had ultimate power. They had complete power. And they tried every one of their crazy ideas and failed openly, publicly, embarassingly.

Sorry bud, but Democrats had control of the Senate for the War Authorizations, the Tax Cuts, and I believe the No Child Left Behind act among other things. While I'm sure a Republican Senate would have done the same thing, Democrats get the credit. Just as they will for the continuation of the war, Amnesty, corrupt Congressmen, and whatever else happens between now and 11/08.

On Richard Nixon

MILTON FRIEDMAN: Nixon was the most socialist of the presidents of the United States in the 20th century.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/shared/minitext/int_miltonfriedman.html

Boy you are hot tonight. First all your enemies are rapists; now a respected profesor is a Nazi? I wonder if that comment could be actionable on his part? I have no idea, as I do not understand modern law.

However:

Following in the tradition of Murray Rothbard, one of Hoppe's most important contributions has been analyzing the behavior of government using the tools of economic theory. Defining a government as "a territorial monopolist of jurisdiction and taxation" and assuming no more than self-interest on the part of government officials, he predicts that these government officials will use their monopoly privileges to maximize their own wealth and power. Hoppe argues that there is a high degree of correlation between these theoretical predictions and historical data.

This does not seem to be "neo-Nazism" as I understand it. Hmmm. Perhaps you just do not know his work and are so mad at me that you will say anything. Or, perhaps you just can not read with understanding.

In fact:

In June 2005, Hoppe granted an interview in the German newspaper Junge Freiheit, in which he characterized monarchy as a lesser evil than democracy, calling the latter mob rule and saying, "Liberty instead of democracy!" In the interview Hoppe also condemned the French revolution as belonging in "the same category of vile revolutions as well as the Bolshevik revolution and the Nazi revolution," because the French revolution led to "Regicide, Egalitarianism, democracy, socialism, hatred of all religion, terror measures, mass plundering, rape and murder, military draft and the total, ideologically motivated War."

I tell you, that just does not look like the words of a fellow who is a neo-Nazi. Even if I did not know that he came to this country to study under the Jewish intellectual Murray Rothbard (himself a student of Jewish von Mises), I would see that he is no Nazi.

You do not know his work, do you?

By the time Bush was running for reelection much of the handwriting was on the wall regarding Bush's, well, villainy - from even a conservative perspective. But Bush was then still stonewalling and covering up so many bright conservatives (who could read the handwriting) held their noses backed their man and helped with the whitewash. Why? Because he was - take your choice - a neo-con hawk, a no tax guy, a guy who'd appoint the "right kind" of man to the Supreme Court, a free enterprise/no regulation free marketer or a man who prayed to Jesus. It was all about keeping their kind of guy in power. And make no mistake - they got the man they wanted. It just turned out that his warts have now overwelmed all those "good" things he was and is.

Or is it the needle?

Sorry bud, but Democrats had control of the Senate for the War Authorizations, the Tax Cuts, and I believe the No Child Left Behind act among other things.

Whatever it is you are taking, it's an hallucinogen.