3
0

Republicans say "Fuck you unless my own son or daughter is just like you!"


               
2013 Mar 16, 5:41pm   23,903 views  156 comments

by Dan8267   follow (4)  

Yet another Republican who has campaigned against an issue has switch sides when the issue affects his own family. All Republican politicians are against abortion and gay marriage until their daughter gets pregnant or their son or daughter comes out gay. Then, all of a sudden, they have a life-changing change of heart. And all it takes is for one of their own family to be subject to the suppression they were dishing out.

Republican senator Rob Portman is now for gay marriage since his son came out of the closet. Gee, I guess all we need is for every Republican Congressman to have
- a gay child
- a Muslim child
- an atheist child
- a black child
- a child on Social Security
- a pregnant child
- a child targeted by a drone strike
- a child in Gitmo being waterboarded
- a child denied access to healthcare because of corrupt and greedy hospitals and insurance

Then we'll see real reform. Because unless it personally affects a family member of a high ranking Republican, it doesn't matter for crap.

http://www.sbsun.com/breakingnews/ci_22802150/gay-marriage-senators-shift-gop-soul-searching

#politics

« First        Comments 152 - 156 of 156        Search these comments

152   Dan8267   @   2013 Apr 2, 3:32am  

Meccos says

Dan8267 says

And just because a person is found guilty doesn't mean that person did commit the crime, either.

So do you honestly think that he didnt engage in any sexual activity????

As your reading comprehension skills are obviously deficient, I'll repeat myself. I have no doubt that Clinton had lots of sexual activity with lots of women. That doesn't make Clinton guilty of perjury as the dumb-ass Republicans using the courts in contempt did not ask, "Did you have sexual activity with Monica Lewinsky?". Had the conniving Republicans asked, "Did you donkey punch Monica Lewinsky?", Clinton could also have truthfully answered "no" even though a donkey punch would most likely be construed as sexual activity.

Meccos says

Exactly, this is exactly the technicality I suggested, to which you clearly have nothing else to say but the lawyers did a bad job.

Actually, I've added quite a bit explaining to you that a defendant, even Clinton, has no legal or ethical obligation to provide answers outside the scope of the questions asked in questioning. Any fucking lawyer worse his salt will tell his client, answer the question asked and nothing more, and keep your answers short. This is exactly what Clinton did.

The Republicans were violating the ethics of the court system by attempting to entrap the president and by fishing for materials that had nothing to do with the case being heard and only would serve as political propaganda in the next election. The court would have been in its right and in its duty had it disbarred all the prosecutors for their unethical actions.

But I'll add something else. The prosecutors committed a crime by failing to disclose evidence (the Lewinsky cum-stained dress). This is a fucking serious offense.

The government has a continuing duty to disclose evidence after a request for disclosure has been made. It must promptly disclose additional evidence whenever it discovers it, even during trial.
...
The defendant is guaranteed the right to a fair trial. The government must follow the law and respect the rights of the defendant. If it fails to do so, it commits misconduct. There are many different types of misconduct. One of the most common is the withholding of evidence.

If the government fails to disclose relevant information, the court may impose a punishment on the party

The act of violating full disclosure laws goes against the very founding principles of this nation, and there is no excuse for it. All the Republican lawyers should have been disbarred and jailed for contempt of court and obstruction of justice. The only victim in this case was Clinton.

153   Dan8267   @   2013 Apr 2, 3:33am  

So Meccos, now that I've answered every single one of your questions several times, do you think you could grow a pair and answer these questions honestly and sincerely?

Or are you too afraid?

154   Tenpoundbass   @   2013 Apr 2, 5:20am  

Dan8267 says

but torture, false imprisonment, and drone assassination does not.

"Well tell them to stop doing that shit, and we wont bomb them!"
G.W. Bush

155   Dan8267   @   2013 Apr 2, 5:56am  

CaptainShuddup says

Dan8267 says

but torture, false imprisonment, and drone assassination does not.

"Well tell them to stop doing that shit, and we wont bomb them!"

G.W. Bush

The retard Bush was lying when he said that. Notice that we don't bomb, torture, or assassinate Syrian President Bashar Al-assad, who is way the fuck worse than Saddam was.

Bush chooses his targets like any other predator. He picks the weakest ones. Bush and Obama don't have the balls to go after Al-assad, but they have no problem attacking a near defenseless country.

156   Meccos   @   2013 Apr 2, 10:50am  

Dan8267 says

So Meccos, now that I've answered every single one of your questions several times, do you think you could grow a pair and answer these questions honestly and sincerely?

Or are you too afraid?

Hahahah you have answered about 10% of my questions. Feel free to browse through the MULTIPLE questions which you havent answered. I refuse to waste my time to link each one again. In regards to your question, why would I be afraid to answer your silly questions?

Dan8267 says

1. What punishment should Clinton get for his answers about Lewinski?

2. What punishment should Bush get for his lies about Iraq having WMDs?

3. What punishment should Bush get for starting the Iraq war?

4. What punishment should Bush and Obama each get for using torture?

5. What punishment should Bush and Obama each get for illegal wiretapping?

6. Is there anything else that Clinton should be punished for?

1. he should have been impeached
2. he should have been convicted of war crime and sentence to whatever punishment fits that conviction
3. same answer as #2
4. same answer as #2
5. whatever the courts would consider fair for illegal wiretapping
6. what other laws did he break?

Silly questions... the question you should have asked is do you think these idiots should have been convicted for these crimes first...

« First        Comments 152 - 156 of 156        Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   users   suggestions   gaiste