1. What president has done more to
destroy the US Military since WWII than Poor Billeeee???
2. What President has raise taxes
more than any other president than Poor Billeeee???
3. What other President has increased
the size of Government more than Poor Billeeeee???
4. What President has lied more than
Poor Billeeee???
5. What President has done more against
the black race than Slick Willeeee and did not get credit for it???
6. What other President has used drugs
in the Oral Office more than Sir William of Hope???
7. What other President has done more
to destroy the Constitution than Boy Clinton???
8. What other President has move us
toward One World Goverment with the United Nations than Twinkle Toes
Cllinton???
9. What other President has had more
people around him drop dead than Sir Bacula of Little Rock???
10. What other president has almost
started a war anytime attacked in the media than Ole Billeee boy,
ole Billeee boy we love you SO???
Morsh
* * *
That Man
It makes me want to upchuck every
time I hear that man say he "has to do the business of the people."
He should have been doing the business of the American people instead
of having an affair with Monica Lewinsky.
Norman
* * *
David Neuman on WJR 760 in Detroit
at his 11am hour today had a guest who was starting a movement to
rescind the 22nd amendment to the Constitution because she feels that
President Clinton should have the privilege of running for a third
term. She said that Maxine Waters, Norman Lear, etc. were
involved with this movement. She said the Clinton is the
best president this country has ever had and his strengths have been
prosperity, peace, good for children. People called in and
all but one were outraged. At the end of the hour, David
said to his listeners, "April Fool early!" He
put this lady up to this because he cannot understand the undying
support that the President is supposed to have. It was great.
Thought you would like to know.
Bob
* * *
Clinton the chicken thief
I am not the typical Hispanic, why
should I be? I am a citizen of the United States by birth and I realize
what a great country we have. I can not believe how so many Hispanics
think that a person who has never worked in a free trade market, never
even had a newspaper route can be considered a total expert in the
world economy? I will tell you why. Three factors: Stupidity, stupidity,
stupidity. At least my brown brothers have an excuse that being lack
of an education but how about those others? What is there excuse for
their judgment in dealing with this Arkansas back porch chicken thief?
Clinton should be run out town only
wearing his shorts like a chicken .... that he is. It can't be any
clearer.
Moe
***
RE VIEWER WARNING FOR ALL CLINTON
TELEVISION APPEARANCES
THIS WARNING TO BE ISSUED PRIOR TO
OR DURING ALL FUTURE APPERANCES BY WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON. (SIMILAR
TO WARNINGS APPEARING ON CAR COMMERCIALS WITH SPEEDING SWERVING CARS)
"This performance is done by
a Professional Perjurer in a rigged political environment. DO NOT
TRY THIS AT HOME. YOU must always obey the law or YOU are likely to
be put into jail!
Submitted by
ALLAN
* *
LONDON DAILY TELEGRAPH article on
SLEAZEBAG CLINTON..
Dear Rush,
While I was in Amsterdam ,just before
Christmas I came across an article in the Daily Telegraph issue DEC
22,1998 page 18 titled "HE MAY BE A SLEAZEBAG,BUT HE'S THEIR
SLEAZEBAG.. I believe it is something everyone in this country need
to read.. I have email the paper and its author JANET DALEY to ask
for permission to either retype it and fax or email to as many people
I can reach..
I would be really interested in you
opinion on this article.. Do you have access to the past issues of
major newspapers?? I would be glad to send it to you or retype it
and fax it..
Here is an excerpt.. So politically
illiterate are most Americans now - so untutored in the meaning of
their constitution and the significance of the rule of law- that they
translate all political crises into personal terms. This is an electorate
of daytime television junkies : lying to a grand jury , misleading
the country and committing perjury are forgiven in the same spirit
as the transgressions of confessed adulterers and drug addicts who
feature on the endless stream of confessional talk shows/ The sacred
principle of equality now amounts to treating the president as just
another emotional wreck who is parading his pain on the airwaves.
What it use to mean. as recently as a decade ago , was that all citizens
had to be treated equally under the law and, therefore , a President
who perjured himself must be as indictable as anyone else.. That a
considerable majority of Americans should be oblivious or utterly
unaware of the more abstract sense in which " all men are created
equal " had to be the death of American political culture as
I had known it.
I rang an old friend in Washington
at the weekend and asked my dumbfounded question: " What on earth
is going on?" I particularly wanted to know why there seemed
to be no Democrats of sufficient integrity and political wisdom to
condemn Mr. Clinton. Why were they colluding in the strict party political
split that reinforced this absurd Washington myth that the President's
critics were engaged in nothing more than an opportunistic, self seeking
" partisan war?" The benighted public might not be able
to distinguish between confessing to a grand jury and confessing to
Oprah Winfrey, but surely there were at least a few senior Democrats
on Capitol Hill who knew that the sleazebag in the White House was
degrading his office and their country.
She goes on to explain with great
insight...... I thinks it an eye-opening explanation to all the Kool-aid
drinking that is going on right now.. With your encouragement I would
like to send it to every Senator and Representative.. I would also
like to see it reprinted her in this country..
Thank you for your time and interest..
Respectfully
John
* * *
Ponder From the Pole
Here is something to ponder as Clinton
takes to the Presidential Podium to deliver the State of the Union
message
TO BILL: THANKS FOR THE MEMORIES...
As I was making my daily journey to
the Post Office the other day, I patiently waited for a car to vacate
a parking space near the door. As the rear of the vehicle came toward
me, I noticed a bumper sticker which read, in big, bold letters, "THANK
ME. I VOTED CLINTON-GORE." Of course, the bumper sticker was
printed in response to an earlier sticker which adorned some automobiles
some six years ago. Back then, as Bill and Hillary were attempting
to nationalize health care and play havoc with the discipline and
fiber of the military, "Don't Blame Me. I Voted For Bush,"
was the message on many bumpers. Hence, the "Thank Me."
message came in response.
Pondering the message of the brave,
stubborn soul in the car ahead of me, I considered all the things
I could be thankful for as a result of the Clinton-Gore regime. Indeed,
I discovered the list was long and varied. So, to my friend who has
not yet discovered a razor blade and Goo-Be-Gone, I offer a hearty
"Thank you!" for the following:
Thank you for reminding us that the
government that gave us the Internal Revenue Service and welfare also
lusts for control of the greatest healthcare system in the world.
Thank you for reminding us that the
FBI, who has a file on millions of Americans, including myself, can
give those files to people powerful enough to demand them.
Thank you for introducing us to Gennifer
Flowers, Paula Jones, Monica Lewinski and about two dozen other names
that we might not have met and known otherwise.
Thank you for allowing a war hero
and the author of one of the most successful military campaigns in
military history to leave the presidency; because, no matter how successful
he was, we, in all our moral outrage, just wouldn't tolerate someone
who would lie to the American people by promising "no new taxes"
and then going back on his word. We certainly can't have a liar in
the White House, now can we?
Thank you for giving us a president
who discusses his choice of underwear with teenagers. We always wondered
if presidents wore boxers or briefs.
Thank you for installing a man who
reminds us of those good old days of pot smoking (without inhaling,
of course) and war protesting.
Thank you for showing us that the
ridiculous plot of the movie, "Wag the Dog," could really
be plausible after all.
Thank you for showing us the truly
horrifying dangers of cloning someone's DNA. (After this is all over,
BURN the blue cocktail dress... Please!).
Thank you for showing all the men
and women in America that sexual harassment in the workplace, and
on the job, is okay as long as it involves powerful middle-age executives
and the young women half their age under their power. It is, after
all, a "private matter."
Thank you for revealing that the agenda
of the National Organization of Women only includes some women. Women
like Anita Hill and not women like Paula Jones, Monica Lewinski, et.
al.
Thank you for allowing us to come
to the realization that "sexual relations" is not clearly
defined after all. And all these years, I thought that "oral
sex" really had something to do with sex. Imagine! Or is it oral
sex when you talk about it...?
Thank you for re-introducing the concept
of "impeachment" to a new generation that missed the discussion
surrounding it the last time it was brought up.
Thank you for curing me of my addiction
to the evening news.
Thank you for reminding us that, when
all is said and done, character really, really, does matter. And,
in comparison to recent days:
Thank you for making Dan Quayle look
like the Rhodes Scholar.
Thank you for making Jimmy Carter
look competent. Thank you for making Gerald Ford look graceful.
Thank you for making Richard Nixon
look honest. Thank you for making Lyndon Johnson look truthful.
Thank you for making John Kennedy
look moral. Thank you for making Al Gore look positively presidential.
Thank you for reminding us of the importance of term limits.
And really, thank you not once but
twice! Why, if not for you, instead of the current, interesting discussion
all over the television networks and newspapers, we would be focused
on a whole slew of trivial matters such as global defense, the economy,
nukes in North Korea, genocide in Africa, the containment of terrorism,
and all those other boring topics.
So, thank you, thank you, thank you!
Oh, and if you voted for Ross Perot, thank you, too. You deserve just
as much of the credit as my friend with the bumper sticker.
Since Bill Clinton took office, here
are some of the good things that have happened:
72 House and Senate witnesses have
plead the fifth.
17 witnesses have fled the country
to avoid testifying.
19 foreign witnesses have refused
to be interviewed by US investigative bodies.
19 charges from Whitewater
investigations.
14 convictions from Whitewater investigations.
8 imprisonments from Whitewater investigations.
55 total charges in all Clinton scandals.
32 total convictions (so far) in all
Clinton scandals.
14 total
imprisonments (so far) in all Clinton scandals.
938 overnight stays at Whitehouse
for Clinton supporters.
62 House of Representative seats that
have changed from Democrat to Republican.
12 Senate seats that have changed
from Democrat to Republican.
13 Governorships that have changed
from Democrat to Republican.
1,200 state legislative seats that
have changed from Democrat to Republican.
353 elected Democrats who have switched
parties since Clinton took office.
Yes, it's been an interesting 6 years
for "the most ethical administration in the history of the Republic".
But then ...everybody knows it's all the fault of the "vast right-wing
conspiracy".
Go figure!
(Written by an Episcopalian Minister
in Georgia)
* * *
5. Get away by using his popularity
as an excuse
6. Get away by using polls as an excuse
(my vote not in there)
7.Gets away by using his brainwashing
or spell on the general public which accounts for his popularity or
votes
8. GETS AWAY BY LYING!!!! (I don't
care if he admits to having sex or not, its his not admitting he lied
9. Gets away with witness tampering.
True or not other people are involved other than Monica Lewinsky
DEMOCRATS
The democrats are getting away with
1. No witness as an excuse. (they
spent their energy putting a time limit which accounts for no witness.
They in fact had time for withness if not for that.)
2. They in fact spent time complaining,
whining and other objections instead of getting down to business.
General Public.
I'm tired of their lack of attitude
for this pitiful incidence.
1. No importance. Hogwash. Its just
as important as brushing your teeth and remembering your name.
2. Takes too much time. Hogwash. Its
gone this long. See it through the end.
3. The public wants Clinton to stay
in office because if he can get away with these things, the public
wants to be able to get away with these things also.
Now as for the economy being good.
HOGWASH!!
1. I have been out of work since the
beginning of Clinton era as president and haven't found on person
to hire me.
2. My husband hasn't been able to
find permanent work without having to go to temp agencies.
Thank you
Judy
* * *
Look at what European Papers are saying
about Clinton
Get a copy of Roger Cohen's New York
Times article published in the Houston Chronicle Jan. 19, 1999 titled
"In Clinton's trial, Europe glimpes strange new world".
Note Russian and British paper comments.
Pravda said "America's image
had suffered. It declared that Clinton's problems undermined the image
of "citadel of law, high morals and morality that America pushed
on the world for decades."
My comment. Let us look at what we
are doing today with a longer view into the future. The world has
been looking at America for world leadership.
They want this organization, we call
America, to provide the leadership that the world can respect to keep
chaos under control in the world. They do not want to see this leadership
weak and preoccupied with sex and all sorts of corruption. The world
is very concerned that they have lost their leader.
Our actions from now on need to be
focused on the long view and focused again on re-establishing the
leadership in America that the world need. America needs to maintain
the highest standard of leadership from this point forward and a system
that assures this happens. We need to work on fixing the system.
Thank you,
Don
* * *
You can find CLINTOONS and opinions
at
http://www.geocities.com/Baja/Trails/7667
See you there!
Tom
* * *
FLN--pardoned? They killed an unarmed
Navyman and wounded More...
At Sabana Seca, P.R. there is a bloodstained
tile in the Navy clinic. As the Navy medics worked frantically to
save the wounded--they had to put aside the enlisted man who could
not be saved on the spot that shows the stains to this day. The FLN
attacked a Navy bus of unarmed enlisted personnel that day.
The FLN also was to blame for shooting
an army man who was riding to work on his motorcycle.
The FLN was also suspected in the
murder of a woman swimming in the ocean -- just off the beach from
her condo. She was the wife of the man in charge of the F.B.I. They
ran her over with a motorboat. She bled to death before she could
get to the hospital.
We were stationed at Sabana Seca.
We knew the people. They aren't important to Bill Clinton. They are
important to us.
This is outrageous!
Cheryl Elledge
celle610@gte.net
* * *
Clinton's Tours
Washington Times
September 21, 1999
Pg. 6
Clinton Africa Tour Costs $42.8 Million
GAO study details list of expenses
By Julia Malone, Cox News Service
President Clinton's tour of Africa
last year brought along American military and civilian officials,
13 helicopters and enough gear torequire 98 air cargo missions, all
at a cost of more than $42.8 million. Military cooks from the White
House "mess" also went along to prepare some meals for first
family, says a study by the U.S. General Accounting Officescheduled
to be released later this month.
The report, an advance copy of which
was obtained by Cox Newspapers, unlocks some of the long-held secrets
surrounding the costs of presidential travel. The GAO, the investigative
arm of Congress, examined Mr. Clinton's six-nation visit to Africa
as well as his trips last year to China and Chile. Among the findings:
* The Africa tour, billed largely as a goodwill mission, required
10 separate advance delegations to arrange the itinerary. More than
200 White House aides either accompanied Mr. Clinton or traveled on
an advance trip,
and more than 900 military personnel were deployed.
* A 10-day trip to China in the summer
of 1998 cost at least $18.8 million.
* A four-day trip to Chile to attend a regional summit in April 1998
wasestimated at $10.8 million.
The expense totals do not include
security costs, which are classified.However, drawn from federal agencies
and U.S. embassies, the study is probably the most authoritative estimate
of how much it costs when a president goes abroad.
Republican Sens. Jeff Sessions of
Alabama and Craig Thomas of Wyoming askedthe accounting office for
the report."You have President Clinton asking the military to
do more with less andcutting the defense budget to the bone,"
said Jerry Fritz, an aide to Mr.Craig. ''And we find that he's spending
defense money to travel the world with little or nothing to show for
it." Of the $72.1 million total for thethree trips, 84 percent
was charged to the Defense Department.
Most of the expenses came in airlifting
people and gear. White House spokesman David Leavey said that the
president takes overseas trips "that he deems to be in the national
interest" and added, "I reject any notion that somehow we're
taking erroneous trips."
For the Africa trip, the military
flew 98 air cargo missions for equipment such as the president's bulletproof
limousine, sophisticated communications gear and motorcade vehicles.
The cost was more than $29 million. Tanker aircraft flew 110 aerial
refueling missions to transport 13 Army and Marine helicopters to
sites in Africa, at a cost of $1 million. And flying passengers aboard
Air Force One and other military aircraft cost $2.5 million.
The State Department
assumed the second largest share of the cost for all of the trips.
It paid for lodging, car rentals and phone services for its own
personnel and White House staffers as well as members of Congress.
Sixteen lawmakers accompanied Mr. Clinton to Africa, while six went
to China and five to Chile.
* * *
High Crimes and Misdemeanors
The following is from David Barton,
a Constitutional Scholar and author of Original Intent. David Founded
Wallbuilders (On the web). Thought it insightful--Gray Abercrombie,
Ft. Mill, SC
High Crimes and Misdemeanors
In the midst of the debate surrounding
a potential presidential impeachment, the phrase "high crimes
and misdemeanors" has become a focal point. This phrase is found
in Article II, Section 4, Par. 1, of the Constitution, and sets forth
the reasons for the removal of a President: The President, Vice-President,
and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from
office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or
other high crimes and misdemeanors. Supporters of the President argue
that what has been uncovered-thus far-does not amount to "high
crimes and misdemeanors" like "treason [and] bribery."
While they admit the President's actions to be disgusting and reprehensible,
they claim that nevertheless they are not sufficiently serious felonies
so as to constitute impeachable offenses.
Those who offer this argument are
guilty of two errors: (1) they are ignorant of (or ignore) the clear
declarations both of our Founding Fathers who authored this clause
and of those who for a century-and-a-half afterwards enforced this
clause, and (2) they group words together in the clause which should
be kept separate that is, they talk of "high crimes and misdemeanors"
as if they are they same thing; they are not. The clause should be
read "high crimes" and "misdemeanors"-two separate
categories. No one can logically argue that a "high crime"
is the same as a "misdemeanor." What the Founding Fathers
did in this clause was to offer a broad scope of impeachable offenses
ranging from serious felonies (high crimes) to much lesser categories
of misbehavior (misdemeanors). This is further confirmed by the two
specific examples the Founders included in the Constitution: treason
and bribery. Treason was a serious capital offense, resulting in execution,
while bribery-even though it was considered a moral wrong-was not
yet a statutory crime when the Constitution was adopted!
Clearly, then, what the Constitution
specifies is a wide range of impeachable offenses, from high crimes
(such as treason) to misdemeanors (such as bribery-not then illegal).
The definitions of "misdemeanor" confirmed this. For example,
Alexander Hamilton and Justice Joseph Story (placed on the Supreme
Court by President James Madison) defined a "misdemeanor"
as political "malconduct," and Noah Webster (responsible
for the copyright and patent protection clause of Article I, Section
8 of the Constitution) defined "misdemeanor" as "ill
behavior, evil conduct, fault, or mismanagement." Professor John
Randolph Tucker (a U.S. Congressman, constitutional law professor,
and early president of the American Bar Association) explained in
his 1891 Commentaries on the Constitution that "misdemeanor"
was "a synonym for misbehavior" and that "[t]he words
'high crimes and misdemeanors' cannot be confined to crimes created
and defined by a statute of the United States."
Realizing, then, that the constitutional
scope of impeachable offenses ranged from serious felonies down to
misbehavior and evil conduct, Joseph Story, in his classic 1833 Commentaries
on the Constitution, declared: The offences to which the power of
impeachment has been and is ordinarily applied as a remedy are. .
. . what are aptly termed political offences, growing out of personal
misconduct, or gross neglect, or usurpation, or habitual disregard
of the public interest. And Professor John Randolph Tucker, in the
1891 Commentaries mentioned earlier, declared: The process of impeachment
is a political proceeding, against the accused as an officer of the
government, to protect the government from the present or future incumbency
of a man whose conduct has proved him unworthy to fill it. . . . The
impeachment power was intended to cleanse the government from the
presence of worthless and faithless individuals. That this had been
the intent of the Founding Fathers was irrefutable. For example, James
Iredell (an original Supreme Court Justice appointed by President
George Washington) succinctly declared:Every government requires [impeachment].
Every man ought to be amenable for his conduct. . . . It will be not
only the means of punishing misconduct but it will prevent misconduct.
A man in public office who knows that there is no tribunal to punish
him may be ready to deviate from his duty; but if he knows there is
a tribunal for that purpose, although he may be a man of no principle,
the very terror of punishment will perhaps deter him. Therefore, in
the current raging debate over what constitutes an impeachable offense,
do not be misled by those who would define "high crimes"
and "misdemeanors" as being the same, and then who raise
the bar for impeachment so high that it protects an individual from
being accountable for his conduct.
Zinger
RushOnline.com Index
* Hall Of Fame Index
Cartoons *
Visitor Debates
* War
On Terror * Topic
Index* Political
Jokes
Ballcaps.com
* BridalShops.com * CarAccidents.com
* ChristianMusic.com
HomeVideos.com * MovieActors.com
* Nightmares.com * RomanceNovels.com
RushOnline.com
* Hall Of Fame * Topics * War On
Terror * Bumper Stickers