|
|
|
||||||||
Selected
Posts to the RRC
Subject: Re:President Clinton KNOWS what the American People Want; to help others
Date: Fri, Jun 13, 1997 22:09
From: HAVEACOW69
Message-id: <19970614020900.WAA25085@ladder02.news.aol.com>
Hyatt33, BLJ221, WRITERHORN, TElliswsu, OneEyedJon, BV80, Panzer95, REM169, Manta22, Goodspkr, K Donelan, Thorolf26, RGrif2000, NAVY57, JTrowbr212, and all other red-neck right-wing republicans..I pray for you that the fat Newtie Gingrich, and the hand waving Trent Lott don't let you down in the future as fast as they did over the Disaster Relief bill. How long was it? Was it even 24 hours after President Clinton vetoed it? They are scared to death of President Clinton because he has the guts that Reagan and Bush never had to veto those big spending bills. If next fall, the republicans plan to go back to the Reagan and Bush years of all of those Big Deficits and our HUGE debt, President Clinton will veto them and the government will shut down like it did in 1995 and the American People will know that it is the fault of the republicans for trying Reagan's BORROW AND SPEND of the 80's. You guys are on the wrong side. President Clinton is the man. It looks like we many get some tax cuts for the middle class, but I will tell you the republicans had better not steal tax cuts from the children, because if they try, President Clinton will VETO THEIR BIG SPENDING BILLS.
If you think Paula Jones is telling the truth, read PAULA JONES: THE FACTS AS KNOWN OUTSIDE THE ROOM, Compiled from Time Magazine, The New york Times, Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Los Angeles Times, and the New Yorker Magazine, then learn real truth
Subject: Re: Re:President Clinton KNOWS what the American People Want; to help others
Date: Sun, Jun 15, 1997 21:31
From: TEllisWSU
Message-id: <19970616013100.VAA17789@ladder02.news.aol.com>
Nickthud,
Congratulations!! After walloping Haveacowchip, you are now a full-fledged REDNECK REPUBLICAN!! :)
Welcome aboard, mate!! We need to assign you an ordinal number...in accordance with the posting, I suggest the #14. The original post is listed below
<<Hyatt33, BLJ221, WRITERHORN, TElliswsu, OneEyedJon, BV80, Panzer95, REM169, Manta22, Goodspkr, K Donelan, Thorolf26, RGrif2000, NAVY57, JTrowbr212, and all other red-neck right-wing republicans.>>
A suggestion to all my red-necked republican brethren: we should affix a signature similar to the one below:
TEllisWSU - Redneck Republican #4
I would suggest the format as listed, using your appropriate place in supreme high redneck potentait Rancher/HaveACow's original redneck posting. The bold type (representative of our bold and innovative ideas), and red italics (special emphasis...and red like our necks) shall henceforth be our calling card, with your approval. Let me know what you think...
You know you're a liberal if you think that sexual harrassment is rampant...and Paula Jones is lying - Don Feder
TEllisWSU - Redneck Republican #4
Selected
Posts by RRC Members
Subject: Re: post ??? abortion
Date: Sat, Jul 18, 1998 22:42
From: Hoffmanton
Message-id: <1998071902424100.WAA16982@ladder01.news.aol.com>
From: CDD 248
Message-id: <1998071821550400.RAA28238@ladder03.news.aol.com>
<<What right does anyone have to judge Amy's right to have a post delivery abortion?>>
<<Um, hello, but there is no such thing as a "post delivery abortion" . So, lets see, she delivers her baby, kills it, and that is a post delivery abortion???? That is murder....so if a person kills there child as age 2, what do you call that, an extended post delivery abortion??
My God, that is just sick.>>
>>>I agree. It IS sick thinking. I guess OJ committed post puberty abortion! LOL - (not because of the murder - because this is a totally ludicrous theory of "post"-anything abortion!!) Abortion happens BEFORE live birth - not after. <<<CCD 248
Abortion of any sort is the cessation of a life. Though I find the idea of a "post delivery abortion" very revolting, I really find no difference in the fact that BOTH a legal abortion and the killing of a born child is the cessation of a human life. Yes, an abortion is "legal" and the other is not, but BOTH are sickening to me.
All this talk about a woman being able to do what she wishes with her body is a good and viable principle. This to me means that she has a choice of getting pregnant or not getting pregnant. It does not mean that she should be able to do whatever she wants with the other human life that she is carrying inside. She made that choice when she became pregnant.
I'm just an old farm boy that knows that life begins at conception. Once human life begins, the taking of that human life is no different from taking it any other time, whether that human life may be in prebirth or 90 years old. Both are the taking of a human life.
Now before anyone jumps on the argument of when the mothers life is threatened, anytime one human life threatens another human life, it becomes self defense. This holds true, no matter the age of the threatening human life. It could be a 20 or 50 year old thief in the night or an unborn human life.
The point about rape is a bit more ticklish. It seems a bit less clear cut, but since the human life began in violence, it would under these circumstances probably be best terminated as the woman's rights were infringed by violence. Under these circumstances, it should be the woman's choice to terminate or not.
The argument of legality, because the supreme court says it is, is ludicrous. The supreme court once ruled that slavery was legal, and their decision was ludicrous then also. Because of the ruling of the supreme court, slavery was legal, but was it moral? Nope, and neither is abortion moral.
Now before any one jumps on the bandwagon and starts with the idiot expression "Religious Wrong", I am not a member of any religion nor do I think much of religions in general. I would even say that I'm a bit anti religion. I do believe that the religious have the rights to believe as they wish, and no, I don't want them cramming their beliefs down my throat.
Since I used the term "moral", I'll explain moral. Being moral has nothing to do with religion. It is nothing but having beliefs and living to those beliefs. It is knowing the difference between right and wrong. Slavery? Right or wrong? The taking of a life? Right or wrong? Stealing? Right or wrong? Violence toward another person? Right or wrong? My rights stop right where I start infringing on another human life's rights. This is the definition of "moral" in the real sense. In the sense of the killing of an unborn human life, or abortion, the rights of a human life are being infringed. Therefore, it is not moral! Legal? Yes. Moral? Nope!
The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it.
H. L. Mencken (1880-1956)
Tony Hoffman RNR #36
Subject: Re: Devestating Revelation!!!
Date: Tue, Jul 28, 1998 15:01 EDT
From: Mr1Meister
Message-id: <1998072819010900.PAA27747@ladder01.news.aol.com>
From: Hal NYC
Message-id: <1998072811260400.HAA13235@ladder03.news.aol.com>
Lewinsky confessed that NOBODY asked her to lie under oath, or to commit any crime whatever. That leaves tinkle-tinkle little Starr with his silly ass waving in the breeze. He'll spread his cheeks and display his insipid grin. He will now spend some six additional months collecting more evidence of NOTHING. What an earth-shaking anticlimax!!!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It could also mean that she decided to lie on her own. Which gives credence why she needs immunity before testifying. But all this still doesn't change the strong possibility that Clinton lied under oath, thus committing a felony called perjury. Since you nor I could get away with it, neither should he. Period!
Subject: Re: Is this democracy?
Date: Tue, Jul 28, 1998 15:14 EDT
From: Mr1Meister
Message-id: <1998072819144100.PAA29684@ladder03.news.aol.com>
From: RUSSWINTER
Message-id: <1998072813443000.JAA22287@ladder03.news.aol.com>
What an embarrassment this whole mess is to American democracy. The US goes around the world trumpeting for our brand of democracy -- condemning China, for instance, for it's lack of what we consider to be human rights -- and then offers this sordid spectacle as an example of what your country can look forward to if it in fact embraces the American model of democracy. What country, what people, would choose our system if this is an example of what it might expect? Nations with real problems that are interested in addressing them could never afford this sort of charade. We weaken our president, and our nation, by insisting on scrutinizing his sex life and turning his every adviser and confidante into a government spy.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Hello? Anybody there? When did Reno say this was about sex? All I heard her say was this investigation is about perjury, suborning perjury and obstruction of justice. All are still felonies in this country. Are you saying that a President should be above the law? Does that mean that we were wrong for holding Nixon accountable for obstruction of justice? Hmmmmmmm.........??????
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
--John Adams
~~Mr1Meister RR#19
Date: Thu, Jul 30, 1998 02:44 EDT
From: Wendell T1
Message-id: <1998073006442000.CAA20396@ladder03.news.aol.com>
Weston was confined against his will to a mental institution. That fact made him ineligible to legally own a gun. First law broken. Weston stole an old-fashioned .38 Smith & Wesson revolver from his Father. Second law broken. Weston knowingly transported that stolen property across state lines. Third law broken. Weston brought that gun into the District of Columbia, the city in the country with the strictest gun laws, illegally. Fourth law broken. Weston took the gun to the Capitol grounds. Fifth law broken. Weston tried to illegally enter the Capitol circumventing the weapons detector. Sixth law broken. Weston assaulted officer Chestnut with that gun and mortally wounded him. Seventh law broken. Weston then wounded the tourist. Eighth law broken. Then Weston assaulted and killed the second officer. Ninth law broken.
The conclusion that I reach from this is that any attempt to regulate criminal behavior through passing more restrictive laws is hopeless. We have all the laws we need on the books. Honest folks will obey the law, and there is absolutely no law that you can make that will force criminals to obey the laws we already have.
Wendell
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms...The strongest reason for people to retain the right to bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
Thomas Jefferson, 1776
Subject: TO ANSWER THE QUESTION
Date: Thu, Jul 30, 1998 23:16
From: NTH233
Message-id: <1998073103165400.XAA01108@ladder03.news.aol.com>
Do you judge Bill Clinton on his private behavior or his public record? Is there a difference between Clinton the President and Clinton the person? One of the most important practices vital to the creation of sound government policy is the election of leaders that posses morals and integrity. Benjamin Rush (signer of the Declaration of Independence) offered a definition of Integrity as being "...a strict coincidence between thoughts, words, and actions." Quite honestly it is almost impossible to seperate the person from the "title" as this question really asks us to do....according to William Penn......"...I know some may say, Let us have good laws and no matter for the men that execute them [ie, if you have good laws, it does not matter who is in office] But let them consider that though good laws do well, good men do better; for good laws may [lack] good men and be abolished or invaded by ill men; but good men will never [need] good laws nor [allow] bad ones.The quality of our government depends far more on the quality and integrity of our leaders than it does upon our laws. Negligent and incompetent men rarely enforce good laws, and a superb constitution is an inadequate guarantee for good government when we lack competent and reliable leaders. A common vein is found in the writings of the Founding Fathers....In order to have a good country...we must elect leaders of good character. The warnings were frequent...Negligence in selecting Godly, moral, principled men with strong characters to lead was a serious mistake. The Leaders of this nation should be men "who rule in the fear of God, able men, men of truth, hating covetousness" It is to the neglect of this rule of conduct in our citizens that we must attribute frauds, breaches of trust, larceny, embezzlement of public property, which tarnish the character of our country and disgrace our government....truly the disgrace falls squarely upon the shoulders ofthose that would vote for an unprincipled man or woman for office. All of the above presumes that there will be a thorough investigation of the private life and personal beliefs of a candidate. As Noah Webster once instructed his students ..."let it be impressed on your mind that God commands you to choose for rulers just men who will rule in the fear of God. The preservation of a republican government depends on the faithful discharge of this duty; if the citizens neglect their duty and place unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted; laws will be made not for the public good so much as for selfish or local purposes; corrupt or incompetent men will be appointed to execute the laws; the public revenues will be squandered on unworthy men; and the rights of the citizens will be violated or disregarded. If a republican government fails to secure public prosperity and hapiness, it must because the citizens neglect the Divine commands and elect bad men to make and administer the laws"
TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS.........
I am duty bound to judge President Clinton on his private behavior as well as his public life....His past words and actions must come into play when I make this judgement.... Clinton the President is only Clinton the Person with a Title....you cannot seperate the two....William J. Clinton was a man who demonstrated on foreign soil against his own country....He decieved a friend in order to avoid service to his country during the Vietnam war...He has friends that are convicted Drug Dealers....He has friends that are suspected of having Mafia ties....He was involved in questionable land dealings in which many people we bilked out of their savings.....He has cheated on his wife....He has used State police to "pimp" for him...he has sexually harrassed more than one woman....He has quite possible sold out his country to the Chinese...He has looked you and me in the eye and LIED....He has lied while under oath...His words do not match his actions....He is IMHO an unprincipled man, lacking in morals, character, integrity, and void of conscience...Unfit to be the leader of this Great Nation....and I say shame on those who are so indifferent to his lack of Character that they would vote him into office not once but twice....YOU ARE OUR FOUNDING FATHERS WORST NIGHTMARES....They repeatedly warned against such negligence because they knew that men like Bill Clinton are always lurking on the edge....hungry for power to the exclusion of the good of the country.
NTH233 RNR #78
Proud Member of the VRWC
"A general dissolution of Principles and Manners will more surely overthrow the Liberties of America than the whole Force of the common enemy. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but when once they lose their virtue they will be ready to surrender theirliberties to the first external or internal invader . . . If virtue and knowledge are diffused among the people, they will never be enslaved. This will be their great security."Samuel Adams,
Subject: DOJ prosecutes for sex perjury!!!
Date: Fri, Sep 18, 1998 22:52 EDT
From: JulieRNR21
Message-id: <19980918225237.28750.00001515@ng-fd1.aol.com>
At the same time the Clinton minions are protesting the seriousness of perjury about sex in a civil case the Justice Department is prosecuting another perjurer in a case similar to Clinton's; but the DOJ doesn't want you & other Americans to know about that!
JulieRNR21
For educational & discussion purposes:
The press release that wasn't there
Washington Times (print edition) 9/18/98 Editorial
It is possible to find all manner of press releases on the U.S. Justice Department's web site (http://www.usdoj.gov). The April 1998 batch includes announcements about everything from Attorney General Janet Reno's upcoming schedule of public appearances to a Justice Department settlement with a Pennsylvania car dealer alleged to have violated federal odometer laws. But what is most interesting is the announcement that isn't there, the one about a California woman named Barbara Battalino.
In April the criminal division of the Justice Department reached a plea agreement with her after charging she had obstructed justice. It seems that Ms. Battalino had served as a staff psychiatrist at the Veterans Administration Medical Center in Boise, Idaho, from February 1991 to October 1991. During that time she was assigned to the VA's psychiatric in-patient and out-patient units where she treated patients who were, in many cases, combat veterans.
In particular she was charged with treating a Vietnam veteran named Edward Arthur, said to be suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder as a result of four years of combat. Ms. Battalino's bedside manner turned out to be a little unorthodox. She began having an intimate affair with Mr. Arthur and, On June 27 of that year, actually engaged in sexual relations (specifically oral sex) with him during an office visit.
The following year, Mr. Arthur filed suit against the Veterans Administration and Ms. Battalino on grounds that sexual relations constituted medical malpractice. She denied doing any such thing. At a subsequent hearing, Mr. Arthur's counsel asked her, "Did anything of a sexual nature take place in your office on June 27, 1991?" Ms. Battalino emphatically denied it. "No, sir," she said.
Unfortunately for her, Mr. Arthur taped some 25 hours of phone conversations with her, including one in which she acknowledged the June 27 incident. Justice officials then charged her with obstruction of justice. "The defendant acted corruptly; that is, she had the specific intent to influence, obstruct or impede the administration of justice." She pleaded guilty and in July was sentenced to six months house arrest with an electric monitor.
In view of ongoing White House spin that lying about sex in a civil case, as Mr. Clinton did in the Paula Jones sexual-harrassment case, is not a serious offense, it's useful to see just how seriously the Justice Department takes it. But the Justice Department web site contains no press release about the Battalino case.
In view of all the other releases there, it seemed an odd omission. In a phone interview, Justice Department public affairrs official John Russell initially suggested that the department hadn't issued any press release at all about thee case. The Washington Times' editorial page subsequently obtained a copy of an April 14 press release on Justice Department letterhead boasting of the Battalino plea agreement. Just by coincidence, it concluded by urging anyone needing more information to contact Mr. Russell (who, by the way, hasn't returned phone calls).
All of which again raises the question of why it isn't available on the Justice Department web site. It might serve as useful reminder that, however the White House downplays the significance of the President's lying about sex in a civil case, the Justice Department would prosecute anyone else for doing so.
Julie RNR21
RedNeck Republican #21
It is tremendous folly to put trashy people in positions of trust and conspicuousness."........ George Will speaking of the Clinton presidency.
Subject: Impeachment=Democracy
Date: Sun, Oct 18, 1998 01:05 EDT
From: TerhuneTCT
Message-id: <19981018010504.01137.00001939@ng36.aol.com>
The process that is taking place in congress is democracy in action regardless of the politics of it all...There is enough evidence to warrant an impeachment proceeding against William Jefferson Clinton... Our system is fair because Clinton would only be the third president in our nation's history to go through an impeachment proceeding and [one has] been impeached thus far... Regardless of the political aspects of the Clinton-Lewinski Sex-scandal, there is a system of checks and balances in our democracy that is at work even in the pending impeachment proceeding.. Regardless of the outcome, one thing is probably for sure and that is Clinton will probably not let his testosterone imbalance get in the way of his duties of president again, and/or Hillary won't nor will the public.. He paid a terrible price and so has the public... I am for the impeachment proceedings and I don't care what happens, but, I do believe in our system of government... Like former President Gerald Ford recently said during a Republican fund raiser in Tucson, Arizona, " I could care less what happens to Clinton, I care about what is best for this country, and we need to get back to business of this country."
TerryRNR#100
Date: Wed, Oct 21, 1998 02:28 EDT
From: OLD TOPPER
Message-id: <19981021022847.17548.00003791@ng100.aol.com>
WHAT IS TREASON?
Did or did not President Clinton force the transmission of top secret missile technology to the Communist Chinese army?
Did or did not the Communist Chinese Army use American technology to update their faltering rocket programs?
Are there or are there not Americanized 7000 mile missiles with atomic war heads pointed at our West Coast from the shores of Communist China?
If the news reports of the Presidents bypassing of the recommendations of two security agencies of our government and if the President gave aid to our greatest potential enemy on this planet..........
Why do we spend time and money on Clintons apparently least consequential alleged crimes?
What is the definition of TREASON?............................................................OLD TOPPER
Subject: HOW DID YOU SPEND VETERAN'S DAY?
Date: Wed, Nov 11, 1998 19:01
From: NTH233
Message-id: <19981111190124.28970.00000398@ng66.aol.com>
My Husband, our six children
and I just arrived home. We spent the morning walking through the local
Veteran's Home with dozens of homemade cards, and a large basket of goodies...(candy bars, lollipops, hard candies, carmels, and home made cookies). My children sang a medley of patriotic songs beginning with You're a Grand Old Flag and Ending with God Bless America in all of the gathering rooms in the Veteran's Home. They sang to rooms full of men and women with tear filled eyes. I cannot tell you how many times we were asked "Who
are you? What group are you with?" We were asked if we were part of the Girl Scouts or Boy Scouts more than a dozen times. They were so surprised when we said we were just grateful citizens who decided to use the day off from work and school to really honor our Vets.
In retrospect I wonder, "Is that it?" Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts, are they the only ones who ever bother to offer the richly deserved gratitude of a Nation? Today my
husband and I promised ourselves and our children that we will make this a yearly
outing. The Joy and Gratitude on the faces of those shocked Veterans was both
heart warming and heart wrenching. It doesn't take much....It took 3 hours a basket full of candy some paper and crayons to say thank you for another year of Freedom.
Today my children learned...they saw men without arms and legs, without sight,
men who were paralyzed. Women in wheel chairs. Commanders, Captains, and
Grunts who still wear their medals on their clothing. Proud Men and Women who
gave their all so that we might be guaranteed freedom. Today my husband and I
learned...it doesn't take much to say "Thank you". It is easy to understand if you just look into their faces...It doesn't take much to make your appreciation known....
.... it just takes a little time.....
NTH233 RNR#78
Proud Member of the VRWC to Bring Down Arkansas...
HAPPY VETERAN'S DAY TO THE MEN AND WOMEN WHO SACRIFICED SO MUCH,
FOR SO MANY, GOD BLESS YOU AND KEEP YOU!
