All of these proclivities are not listed in the bill...
Posted By: Zville MT on 2009-05-06
In Reply to: HATE CRIMES BILL...... - sm
as being protected from hate crimes.
However, I think that if there's any chance that some pedophile or prostitute could twist this to use to their advantage, things need to be made very clear exactly who is being protected by this bill. Is it just homosexuals? If so, it needs to say that.
Personally, I think this hate crime bill is crap. If you beat someone up or kill someone, it's a hate crime, no two ways about it. I guess I don't understand why someone should receive more jail time for killing your average lesbian than for killing your average woman. They're both murder, no matter how you look at it.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Big deal.........he made a joke out of Biden's proclivities....
At least he has quick wit and doesn't embarass our country with some of the STUPID crap that came out of Ws mouth.
no source listed for this
chart. No footnotes. No data to support numbers. Not enough information to verify veracity - disregarded.
also, moderators have instructed us more than once NOT to copy other websites into posts. Must use links. Please abide by the rules.
i saw the link listed below
but it is just way over my head.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/10/01/news/pdf/index.htm
mccain, because i think he will (listed):
*keep this country safer from those who would try to bring the USA down.
*he will bring encouragement and respect to (and from) our troops.
*appointment of supreme court judges that will properly interpret the laws instead of try to make them.
*sincerely work with people of all backgrounds and political persuasions to make a better government (with proven history in this regard) AND a less intrusive/smaller government.
*he will more likely bring us quicker out of national deficits and eliminate pork barrel government waste (which is no minor thing).
*he will fight against anything wrong in the government whether it is politically beneficial or not, and do what is right for the people (proven history here too).
*make healthcare more affordable for all.
*encourage small business growth/jobs and make it not so profitable to send our jobs overseas, thereby boosting the economy in a real sustaining fashion.
*for best helping us become energy independent, using ALL our resources while being mindful of the environmental issues as well.
*because he has proven experience in all aspects that his opponent does not, and because he has chosen a more capable vice president, whereas if Biden were in the white house, he might need his tongue tied to keep him from running off at the mouth and saying something he shouldn't re foreign affairs or something; nevermind the probability of Obama himself causing problems with foreign affairs.
These are starters, but if you really do care, it ought to give you some food for thought.
It is listed,. regarding pedophiles..
Pedophilia -
Sexual activity with a prepubescent child (generally age 13 years or younger). The individual with pedophilia must be age 16 years or older and at least 5 years older than the child. For individuals in late adolescence with pedophilia, no precise age difference is specified, and clinical judgment must be used; both the sexual maturity of the child and the age difference must be taken into account; the adult may be sexually attracted to opposite sex, same sex, or prefer either.
in the first web site you listed it states . .
Most of the difference in giving among conservatives and liberals gets back to religion. Religious liberals give nearly as much as religious conservatives, Mr. Brooks found. And secular conservatives are even less generous than secular liberals.
Wouldn't it be simpler if they listed truths? LOL
ok, it says top match obama 57.14 and then has below McCain listed as 57.14
Whatever, still voting for McCain
Obama got my vote for none of the reasons you listed.
My vote is between myself and the canddiate. He is my voice. On any given subject, I could start a sentence that he can finish the same way I would. This has not happened for me in my entire adult lifetime. I was a few years shy of voting age in 1960. Kennedy was the only other candidate that gave me voice. That is why there is nothing anybody could say to sway me one way or the other and I find it sad that those who would try do not seem be able to understand that I am not the only one who feels this way about supporting this remarkable man.
What's listed here for Iran-Iraq War time
USA (as in us). We already knew about that stuff. In terms of these 2006 links, you might want to try reading up on this subject a little more. There are whole libraries of publications, including exhaustive US govermental studies, that refute your claim and, in fact, WMDs have yet to be found there. Saddam had abandoned this program, but of course, we hung him anyway. This is what we do with uppety puppets that go rogue on us.
Also, did anyone look at the Hardball segment listed on the Conservative board?
It was called "The Truth about Iraqi Freedom," I believe. I THINK it was considered meaningful dialogue supporting the neocons. However, I felt it was damning. The only "Truth" the rather strange and creepy neocon lady reporter seemed to come up with was that the soldiers handed out candy and softballs. The other guest was a former soldier in Iraq who, if only given time, was making some excellent statements regarding the real truth of the war. The whole segment was rushed and, well, kind of weird. As I said, check out the lady reporter - she seemed most disagreeable and offensive. Or maybe it was just my take on it!!!!
When Bill Clinton was in office, OHHH you better believe Bill and Carter have had..sm
their day of mudslinging matches, at the pleasure of a many conservatives. So, no there's not a double standard here.
Bill Maher Takes On Bill O'Reilly
BILL O'REILLY, HOST: In the "Personal Story" segment tonight, political humorist Bill Maher (search), he has a new book out called "New Rules: Polite Musings from a Timid Observer." Of course, Mr. Maher is about as polite as I am and as timid as Dracula. He joins us now from Los Angeles.
You know, you've had some celebrities on your HBO show, "Real Time," which begins again on Friday, talking about policy and war on terror and stuff like that. I get the feeling they don't know very much, but you do. So I'd like to make Bill Maher, right now, the terror czar. Bill Maher, the terror czar. Could be a series.
How would you fight this War on Terror? How would you fight it?
BILL MAHER, HOST, HBO'S "REAL TIME": I think the first and most important thing is to get the politics out of the War on Terror. You know, maybe I'm a cockeyed optimist, Bill, maybe I'm naive, but I thought that 9/11 was such a jarring event that nobody would dare return to business as usual on that one subject after that.
But of course, we found out that nothing could be further from the truth. And your president, my president too, but the one you voted for...
O'REILLY: You don't know that. Were you looking over my shoulder there? I could have voted for Nader. I could have voted for Kerry, but Kerry wouldn't come on the program, so I wouldn't vote. But I could have gone for Ralph. Ralph's a friend of mine.
MAHER: Yes. Anyway, I said the guy you voted for, President Bush, you know, how come this guy, who was supposed to be such a kick-and-take- names kind of guy, how come he has not been able to get the politics out of this?
You know, as a guy who's been accused of treason, I'll tell you what real treason is: Treason is when legislators vote against homeland security measures because it goes against the wishes of their political or financial backers. Treason is the fact that, as a terrorist, you could still buy a gun in this country because the NRA (search) lobby is so strong.
O'REILLY: OK. But you're getting into the political, and I agree with you. I think that the country should be united in trying to seek out and kill terrorists, who would kill us.
But I'd like to have some concrete things that you, Bill Maher, the terror czar — and take this seriously, this could be a series — what would you do?
All right, so you've got bin Laden. You've got Al Qaeda (search). You've got a bunch of other lower-level terrorist groups. What do you do to neutralize them?
MAHER: OK. Well, first of all, you discounted my answer, which is get the politics out, but OK.
O'REILLY: Well, assume you can do that. They're gone.
MAHER: We'll let that go. Keep going. I wouldn't worry that much about bin Laden. I mean, capturing bin Laden at this point, it doesn't really matter whether he's dead or alive. He's already Tupac to the people who care about him and work for him. Capturing bin Laden, killing him would be like when Ray Kroc died, how much that affected McDonald's.
O'REILLY: It would be a morale booster. But I understand. You're not going to send...
MAHER: A morale booster, right. Well, we've had plenty of morale boosting. We've had plenty of window dressing. What we need is concrete action.
In the book I wrote before this one about terrorism, I suggested that we have a Secret Service for the people. I said whenever the president goes anywhere, he has very high-level, intelligent detectives who look around at a crowd. They know what they're looking for. They're highly paid. They're highly trained.
We don't have that in this country. We should have that. We should have a cadre of 10,000 highly trained people who would guard all public events, bus stations, train stations, airports — and stop with this nonsense that this robotic sort of window dressing...
O'REILLY: OK, so you would create a homeland security office that was basically a security firm for major targets and things like that. It's not a bad idea. Costs a lot of money. Costs a lot of money. It's not a bad idea.
MAHER: Costs a lot of money compared to what? If you paid 10,000 people a salary of $100,000 a year, that would, I think, cost $10 billion or something. That's nothing. There's that much pork in the transportation bill before you get...
O'REILLY: Yes, 10,000 wouldn't do it, but I get your drift.
MAHER: Whatever it costs.
O’REILLY: You would create a super-security apparatus. OK, that's not bad. That's not bad. How about overseas now?
MAHER: What we need to do is what I call get Israeli about this. Because the Israelis are not afraid of profiling. The Israelis are not afraid to bury politics in the greater cause of protecting their nation. We don't act that way. You know, I'm afraid 9/11 really changed nothing.
O'REILLY: Boy, your ACLU (search) pals aren't going to like that. You're going to lose your membership card there.
MAHER: I'm not a member of the ACLU.
O'REILLY: Oh, sure you are, just like I voted for Bush. You're a member of the ACLU. I can see the card right in your pocket there.
MAHER: Bill, I'm not a joiner. I'm not a joiner. I don't like organizations.
O'REILLY: They won't have you, Maher, let's be honest about that. All right, now, in your book, which is very amusing, by the way — if you want a few laughs buy Maher's book.
MAHER: Thank you.
O'REILLY: You take some shots at FOX News, which is your wont, and I just want to know why you think we're so fabulously successful here.
MAHER: Well, I think that question has been answered many times. It's because the conservative viewer in this country, or on radio the conservative listener, is very predictable. They like to hear what they like to hear. They like to hear it over and over again.
O'REILLY: All the surveys show that the viewers are all over the map. They're not conservative in a big bloc. Some of them are moderate. Some of them are Democrats. Some of them are Moroccans. I mean, they're everywhere. That's your analysis? That just the conservatives watch us?
MAHER: Well, I think mostly the conservatives do watch you. That's not to take anything away from what you guys have achieved over there. It's a very well-produced broadcast, and they have excellent personalities like yourself, Bill. Who could resist watching you when you get home from work at night?
O'REILLY: Whoopi Goldberg, maybe? I don't know.
MAHER: Yes.
O'REILLY: Anyone who doesn't watch here is misguided. We identify them as such.
But look, I think there's more to it than — you're in TV. You know the ratings game. I mean, if you don't provide a product that is satisfying people, no matter what your ideology, they tell you to take a hike.
There's a guy over at MSNBC. He's a very conservative guy. He was hired and nobody's watching him. They hire liberals. Nobody watches them. Air America (search). Nobody's listening to it.
I mean, there's got to be a reason why we're No. 1, a punch line for you, and No. 2, you know, becoming the most powerful news network in the world.
MAHER: Well, I think, as I say, it's a well-produced product. You know, your program moves along, always at a clip that never seems to bore. You know, you move along to the next topic, the next guest. It never sort of drags. I don't think a lot of people know how to produce that stuff that way.
O'REILLY: All right. It's bells and whistles and my charming personality. That's what I thought it was.
Last thing: You know, one thing I like about Maher is he's not a hypocrite. He drives a little hybrid vehicle. Right? You putter around there. Does it have training wheels? What's it like?
MAHER: Actually, I had the Prius hybrid for three years. I was one of the first ones to get it right after 9/11. And I traded it in a few months ago for the Lexus hybrid.
O'REILLY: I think we should all cut back on our energy consumption, and I think we should all get these hybrids as fast as we can.
Hey, Bill, always nice to see you. Thanks very much. Good luck with the season on the TV show.
MAHER: Continued success there, Mr. No. 1.
O'REILLY: All right. Thank you.
Watch "The O'Reilly Factor" weeknights at 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. ET and listen to the "Radio Factor!"
Content and Programming Copyright 2005 Fox News Network, L.L.C. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2005 eMediaMillWorks, Inc. (f/k/a Federal Document Clearing House, Inc.), which takes sole responsibility for the accuracy of the transcription. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material except for the user's personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon Fox News Network, L.L.C.'s and eMediaMillWorks, Inc.'s copyrights or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.
Bill Clinton and his ties to India (yes, Bill),...
and China (yes, Bill) sent a lot of our jobs their way. Google it some time. Even I was amazed.
Look, it is simple economics. The big bad corporations everyone hates...first of all, it is not 5 or 6 rich guys and that's it. They employee thousands of people just like us...and when the government puts those huge taxes on them, if they want to stay in business, they are forced to move offshore. Higher taxes are responsible for more jobs going overseas than "greed." The DNC has told its members for years that "corporations" and "the rich" are the cause of all their problems and they have bought that Marxist rhetoric hook, line, and sinker. Corporations are not the cause of ill in this country. They are the backbone of the economy in this country. That is simple economics 101. And I am certainly not rich...and I certainly am not on the upper echelon of a corporation, but I do understand reality and I understand how the economy works. Yes, there is wrongdoing by some upper level folks in corporations. There is wrongdoing in the government. Where there is power, there will be wrongdoing. But for every Enron there are thousands of other good, solid companies that employ thousands of Americans, but the DNC does not share the success stories, because it does not promote their agenda. In order to control people they want them beholden to government and hating free enterprise. They want big government, total power, and control. And following Alinksy's program...you have to instill class warfare. You have to make corporations the enemy. You have to make classes envy the next rung up. Classic Marxist socialism. It is being played out in this country every day.
It is just that some of us have not bought the myth and jumped on the socialism train.
Did you read the bill? It was a regulatory reform bill...
asking them to regulate, not de-regulate. But Democrats blocked it...no wonder. Fannie was greasing a lot of Democratic palms...and Frederick Raines, the Dem CEO at the time...was in the Clinton administration. They were taking care of their own...and we are paying for it.
if abe is on the $5 bill & george is on the $1 bill, what is Obama on?
****censored****
oh no Mr Bill
The communists are coming!!!!!!
Can you say BILL C-L-I-N-T-O-N???? He
xx
I will try this once more....this is a bill
put forth by a VERY unpopular REPUBLICAN president. All we hear ad nauseam from the Obama campaign is McCain is another Bush, we can't afford more Bush, heck, Pelosi said the same darned thing in her little speech before the vote blew up. The Democrats do NOT want to be identified as voting in the majority, against the Republicans, WITH Bush, to pass the bill because if they did, and it does not work, they will be forever identified with voting WITH Bush. Political suicide. Surely you can see that.
What I am saying is, Obama is a far left socialist and the party has become the majority far left socialist. So they will SUPPORT his agenda, and they have the majority in congress to back it up. Surely you can see that they will vote FOR Obama's agenda. You cannot honestly sit there and tell me that you think enough Democrats would vote against him to stop something he wants? You really think that??
I second that bill!
 
There was a bill that they both
worked on together. John McCain's people called Obama's people. It was not the other way around.
But you know something, Bill still came out
smelling like a rose, after all that, didn’t he? A much admired man, makes $$$$ for speeches, welcomed here at home and around the world. Oh, the 2nd Mr. Bush could only wish for so much.
This bill
is a slippery slope and doesn't deserve the slightest considersation. All people should be protected from criminal or harmful behavior. If a homosexual or pedophile deserves protection from someone, doesn't the child or even an adult who may be raped because of a deviants "sexual orientation" deserve the same protection? Having a so-called "sexual orientation" does not give you the right to act on that "orientation" simply because you can't control your "urges." This bill gives deviants free range to imbibe in their "deviant urges" without consequences. Why any president would consider such an atrocity is beyond me. If Obama signs this bill, the damage done will be on his loony head.
bill maher.com
Hey, if any of you want to post on another board, I mean when this one gets overloaded with conservative attacks, Bill Maher.com. It is pretty cool and you can post away however you want, whatever you want. In order to post, you must pick a handle and password and register and log in each time..Check it out.
WHATever and thank you, Bill Clinton
with a thriving economy, an honest attempt at protecting our environment, and peace.
*The bill is about when and not now, meaning NOW* HUH??
Then let's get out of there and let them control their government. Let's take off the *training wheels* (like Murtha has been saying) and let them learn to ride their *bike* while we observe from the periphery, there if they need us to *catch* them. As long as we are there doing it for them, they will never do it on their own. And by agreeing to amnesty, we're publicly telling the world that the lives of our soldiers aren't important, regardless of how you try to spin it.
And, yes, the media is eerily silent about this. The last article I read last week indicated that the Iraqi Prime Minister was AGAINST amnesty for anyone who kills an IRAQI but was in FAVOR of amnesty for anyone who kills AMERICANS. What a wonderful plan. 
I'm a friend of Bill!
from the uber-liberal state of Massachusetts. I was just responding to previous post of why Observer posts on this forum.
Did Bush actually say he was against this bill
Do you have a link to an article or anything where he states that? I agree with you to some extent on that point. My only issue is that within the 6 months it takes to get a different bill ready to go kids in middle-income and lower-middle-income families with be spending another 1/2 year without health insurance, and what if the new bill gets held up for some reason - then it's just more waiting for something I think we should have had long ago - access to affordable heath insurance for America's kids. Poor people are already receiving free healthcare on Medicaid, obviously, but many middle-class children are slipping through the cracks. I just didn't see any articles where Bush said the illegal immigrants were part of the reason he was vetoing the bill. He always seems to be saying positive things about the hispanic community in generaly because he seems to want the hispanic vote (for his party).
I think all presidents are given too much power. Hundreds of representatives that we took the time and effort to vote for can have their bill vetoed by 1 guy with entirely too much power. A decent number of Republicans voted for the expansion to the SCHIP bill as well, and I definitely applaud their courage to go against their leader. If the plan is so seriously flawed, then why did those Republicans feel so passionate about voting for it and trying to talk the President into signing it? If the bill is allowing tons of immigrants onto it, then that is an issue, but aren't illegals getting hoards of free healthcare already just because they are poor? I don't want them to get free healthcare, but it seems like they are already, so is this issue really the best battleground to fight the illegals, or is this just a symptom of a far greater problem that needs to be dealt with on a greater scale? I just don't want the fact that illegals are sneaking onto the SCHIP program to be the only reason we don't pass the bill. If illegals receive a free hospital stay should we close down the whole hospital? Of course not. Maybe not the greatest analogy, but I think you get what I'm saying. If you do have a link to an article I would be happy to read it, as I want to know as much about this issue as possible.
They need to write a better bill
This is a mute point now, because the bill was vetoed by the Pres.and for good reason. Why do we have to accept bad bills? This was a poorly written bill, and that's the reason it was vetoed. Why all the vagueness? $83,000 per year is hardly poverty level. If this bill was truly going to help poor kids then write it that way. I don't understand why it has to be so vague. To me it reeks of dishonesty and pork.
Write a good understandable bill...what's the problem with that?
Bill Maher
Great show last night! Loved David Frost. Couldn't get over West Clark saying that Middle Eastern women are content being forced to cover themselves from head to toe!
Live in San Francisco area so really want to get to LA for the taping of his show.
Does that mean you believe that Bill and Hillary were....
sincere?
Bill Clinton
Any party that could celebrate the presence of Bill Clinton at their convention like he was the second coming has their priorities wrong as far as I am concerned...bizarre!
Brother Bill
Apparently people have forgotten their outrage over Clinton's zipper problem in the White House and now he's revered regardless of the fact that he made us the laughing stock of the world. So why the outrage about Edwards? I'm outraged that he would do this to his gravely ill wife. As for Clinton, I lost all respect for Hillary for "standing by her man."
BILL - I LOVE YOU SO
fire in the hole!!!
Here's another one: Bill Clinton....sm
I don't know how valid this story is, as I have read it too, and don't know the details.
I do know, and you probably do too, that Bill Clinton did this, and I'm sure countless others. But we didn't and don't hear about it because they weren't/aren't SP.
Seems kind of hypocritical to condemn Gov. Palin for this practice, when it's been going on for decades in the good ol' boy system, don't you agree?
Bill Clinton
let this Country down with his behavior. That doesn't mean I don't think he did good things for this Country. Certainly, he did not harm the Country like the present administration has. There are many reasons I don't think John McCain should be the next president. I believe that anyone who is going to cast their vote in November should find out the facts about both candidates and make an educated decision, taking everything into consideration. This is an important election. We are facing many serious problems and we need the best person in there to do the best he can.
senate bill
this is all way over my head... anyone make any sense of it who is willing to share?
I hate the bill as it is, just s you do....
but I think it is too late not to do something to stabilize things. If we don't, and just let nature take its course, I am afraid we will go from recession to depression and nobody wants that. In defense of both Obama and McCain (can't believe I am saying that), they are just 2 votes and they could not make that much difference. It would have passed the senate without either of them, no matter which way they voted. I wish that Congress had stepped up, though, and kept the bill to stabilization ONLY and it should have been a lot less than 700 billion. sigh.
Yes, he did. And it was in the original bill as well...
don't know if it is still in the 850 billion one. I would imagine it is. Because the Dems want to hold onto their voting base.
So we do have a bill to try to prevent
passed and these dates are September 6 and 19, 2008. Scary, very scary. From what I have been reviewing such things as Freedom of Speech and civil defense this morning, and he can be racist himself, Obama's videos seem to target a war with whites, almost like a civil war. I must admit I am tired this morning from working all night, but EVERYDAY more and more things about our economy, Obama, and future seem more and more scary, not peaceful change.
Oh no, Mr. Bill. Another BC die-hard?
No wonder you are so nauseated by the countdown. Suddenly your posts make perfect sense, even though there is no logical connection between the BC blowhards and reality. So much for the open-minded thingy.
The precise reference I was making was "methinks thou doest protest too much," or in some transliterations, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks." I was using the phrase rather loosely in an attempt to avoid the pounding libs often take for being all elite if they quote Shakespeare or try to use his Bardisms. It's from Hamlet. Doth and doest have been used interchangeably in literature, as have you and thou. Like any quotation, it takes on its fullest meaning when it appears within its context.
They are still debating the bill - but it looks like a GO
How can anyone worry about tax cuts when they aren't even working?
Bill Clinton, for one, did not come from........... sm
a wealthy background. His father died when Bill was a baby and his mother, in order to be able to support her children and herself, went away to nursing school, leaving Bill and sibs with their grandparents to raise. They ran a grocery store in Hope, AR, and couldn't have been what you would call well off.
LBJ was born in a farmhouse in a poor area near the Pendernales River and grew up rather poor. He worked his way through college and earned a teaching certificate, teaching mainly Mexican children in Cotulla.
Ronald Reagan grew up without wealth or privilege. He dealt with alcoholic parents for most of his growing up years.
These are a few of our modern day presidents who came from poor backgrounds. I'm sure some of the earlier presidents came from less than wealthy circumstances.
I don't believe I said that Bill was to blame
for everything. I think many many people are partly to blame for this whole mess including Bush and now I'm watching to see what Obama does and whether or not it helps us or screws us over. From where I'm sitting, I'm seeing more screwing over than help but I guess I just have to grin and bear it because this package will pass and there isn't a d@mn thing I can do about it.
who writes the bill?
The furor over this confuses me, since writing bills is the job of the legislature, not the executive. It's obviously not Obama being talked about. The idea of a monkey running things got pretty played out in Bush's day, so it's not like this is funny enough to deserve much defense, but it does deserve a little, I guess.
Ah, just as Bill Clinton
'did not have sexual intercourse with that woman....Ms. Lewinski" ? Still, it was some kind of sex, wasn't it?
And frankly, if you think sex can be done only the way the 'parts fit' um........ zzzzzzzzzzz
Bill Clinton was able to do it
Everyone knows B.C.'s "backyard" needed serious attention that it wasn't getting. If anyone had a messed up personal life it was him, yet you were okay with him as the Prez. This is very hypocritical.
Do I think Gov. Palin would be a good President. No way! There is a lot she needs to learn and be involved in before attempting something like that again, but it has nothing to do with her personal life. It has everything to do with her political life/career.
You cannot compare the two and say she wouldn't be a good President or VP because of her family life, because you don't hold the democrats up to the same standards. You give them a free pass. As we saw with B.C. - what a disaster/disgrace that administration was.
He has already said he would sign this bill
XX
I think the problem with this bill
is the term "protection" for certain classes of people. We should ALL be protected from crime, not HATE. I will hate anything I please, such as perverted acts. It doesn't give me the right to act on my feelings of hate. This bill could lead to other issues and it will eventually. Fifty years ago, we would have never dreamed of having the right to kill our unborn or having the right to marry someone of the same sex. It was unthinkable. Fast forward even 10 years and the "rights" could become even more farfetched. Having "rights" for some can lead to having "rights" taken away from others. My right to even say that I believe your behavior is wrong/sinful could be criminalized. And there is the other, even more sinister, issue. How long will it take before the "rights' of homosexuals, pedophiles, necrophiliacs, zoophiliacs, etc. take precedence merely because they shouldn't have to control their LMAO "natural urges." How long before imbibing in your "natural urges" won't be considered criminal and jail time will be a thing of the past because you can't punish someone for engaging in the "natural urge" they were born with? How long? I dare not even guess.
900 page bill
Hyperbole, anyone? Seriously, if the bill itself is 900 pages long, then how could the Republicans have added "thousands of pages of amendments" to it so it wouldn't pass? Unless you're talking Obama Math, of course....
Hey hey hey...Bill Clinton did not
have sex with THAT woman. LOL! He just got a BJ from her and shoved a cigar up her hooha! Who let's people do that anyway? Of all the things to stick up there.....a cigar? You can buy a dildo for like 10 bucks. I wonder if Monica can sue Bill if she gets vaginal cancer from inserting cigars. LOL!
|
