Declaring war on women predators

[reckless]

Let's hope this is the first of many reminders that the Democrat Party is indeed the party of predators, deviants, sex offenders, and in the case of Hillary Clinton, enablers.

http://news.yahoo.com/rand-paul-bill-clinton-war-on-women-175239980.html

[Greyfox]

I consider myself as an Independent thinker, neither aligning with Democrats or Republicans.
Normally, I enjoy Rand Paul and his Dad's views, whether I agree with them or not.
But in this instance, his comments are plain "outre."
For you reckless to post his comments and then add that they are a reminder
"that the Democrat Party is indeed the party of predators, deviants, sex offenders, and in the c"the ase of Hillary Clinton, enablers."
is, in my opinion absolutely assinine. :ThmbDown:

[Tom]

Memo to any one thinking of running -

If it is not about national security, fiscal responsibility, or limiting big government, shut up about it. It is NOT our platform. Fight the libs on OUR terms, not theirs.


You morons.

[JustRalph]

I read this today and the first thought I had was

" he's off the reservation, just like dear old dad"

[hcap]

Hey "wreck", your might want to rephrase your dreck. :rolleyes:

[Clocker]

Let's hope this is the first of many reminders that the Democrat Party is indeed the party of predators, deviants, sex offenders, and in the case of Hillary Clinton, enablers.



There is nothing partisan about "predators, deviants, sex offenders, and ... enablers." Bill Clinton's problems and dysfunctions are what they are, and the same for Hillary. If that makes the person unfit for office, vote that way. Hillary is who she is, and should stand on her own record. As minimal as that is.

Rand Paul just stuck his foot in his mouth, at the cost of a lot of credibility on the part of independents who don't like painting partisanship with a broad brush. Memo to Paul: stick to the issues.

[Robert Goren]

There is nothing partisan about "predators, deviants, sex offenders, and ... enablers." Bill Clinton's problems and dysfunctions are what they are, and the same for Hillary. If that makes the person unfit for office, vote that way. Hillary is who she is, and should stand on her own record. As minimal as that is.

Rand Paul just stuck his foot in his mouth, at the cost of a lot of credibility on the part of independents who don't like painting partisanship with a broad brush. Memo to Paul: stick to the issues.Too late. He can no more stop himself than I can when NYRA gets me riled. Rand Paul, like his father, is always going to be that "crazy uncle" in the GOP.

[PaceAdvantage]

What was crazy about what he said? It was a bit boring, but I must have missed the crazy part.

[davew]

that is totally uncalled for

I would consider voting for Clinton - Weiner, so Bill could spend more time with Huma Abedin, and they could work out their nonpolitical issues together - a nice foursome.

[hcap]

What was crazy about what he said? It was a bit boring, but I must have missed the crazy part.Post #1. I realize he did not type STF*, and there is no real reason to break out the etiquette police, and it looks looks it has been nipped in the bud, but really.......... :rolleyes:

[reckless]

Rand Paul said nothing that shouldn't have been said by a Republican in every election since 2001.

The Democrats play this 'war on women' crap on the GOP because the Democrats know that the GOP is full of wimps, dopes and cowards and they won't fight back the lame charges hurled at them.

The reality is it is the Democrats that constantly show they hate women by their actions: Bill Clinton raping Juanita Broderick; the same B.J. Clinton sexually abusing a 20-year young intern; Al Gore dumping his frumpy wife after he made his first billion; John Edwards catting around as his dear late wife was dying of cancer, and of course, Teddy Kennedy being responsible for the death of Mary Jo Kopeckne. And that's just off the top of my head.

Democrats all. Liberal icons and lions each and every one of them.

If the left wingers on this board, and elsewhere, wish to defend their behavior and these deviant guys, be my guest.

Blaming Rand Paul is only a diversion tactic and it won't work -- except on CNN and MSNBC and in the Obama White House where men make more money than women despite the ladies doing similar work.

[FantasticDan]

Deviant dems don't just hate women, they hate the environment too. Goddamn hypocrites.

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/tree_humper.gif.pagespeed.ce.Qwu0tt1SgE.gif

[NJ Stinks]

The Democrats play this 'war on women' crap on the GOP because the Democrats know that the GOP is full of wimps, dopes and cowards and they won't fight back the lame charges hurled at them.

The reality is it is the Democrats that constantly show they hate women by their actions: Bill Clinton raping Juanita Broderick; the same B.J. Clinton sexually abusing a 20-year young intern; Al Gore dumping his frumpy wife after he made his first billion; John Edwards catting around as his dear late wife was dying of cancer, and of course, Teddy Kennedy being responsible for the death of Mary Jo Kopeckne. And that's just off the top of my head.

Democrats all. Liberal icons and lions each and every one of them.

If the left wingers on this board, and elsewhere, wish to defend their behavior and these deviant guys, be my guest.




Defend their behavior? :eek: Don't forget all those stinking, rotten Democrats who blow their money on slow horses! Those bastards probably can't even afford to get their honey a Valentine's Day card for crying out loud! :mad:


;)

[hcap]

Blaming Rand Paul is only a diversion tactic and it won't work -- except on CNN and MSNBC and in the Obama White House where men make more money than women despite the ladies doing similar work.
Who is blaming Paul? You are the one who is blowing this all out of proportion.

[mostpost]

Rand Paul said nothing that shouldn't have been said by a Republican in every election since 2001.

The Democrats play this 'war on women' crap on the GOP because the Democrats know that the GOP is full of wimps, dopes and cowards and they won't fight back the lame charges hurled at them.

The reality is it is the Democrats that constantly show they hate women by their actions: Bill Clinton raping Juanita Broderick;
Juanita Broderick's story is filled with inconsistencies and no reputable news organization gives it any credence. She couldn't even remember the month it allegedly happened.

the same B.J. Clinton sexually abusing a 20-year young intern;
That twenty year old intern was of legal age. I do not recall Monica Lewinsky ever claiming that she was forced or coerced into anything. Consenting adults.

Al Gore dumping his frumpy wife after he made his first billion;
The Gore's decision to divorce was mutual. I do not consider Tippi Gore to be frumpy. The fact that you do tells me a lot about your view of women. Al Gore is frumpy.
John Edwards catting around as his dear late wife was dying of cancer,
I'll give you that one. That was even worse than Newt Gingrich telling his first wife he wanted a divorce as she lie in a hospital bed recovering from an operation for uterine cancer. Elizabeth Edwards had the same type of body as Tippi Gore. Why is she the dear wife instead of frumpy?

and of course, Teddy Kennedy being responsible for the death of Mary Jo Kopeckne. And that's just off the top of my head.

Democrats all. Liberal icons and lions each and every one of them.

If the left wingers on this board, and elsewhere, wish to defend their behavior and these deviant guys, be my guest.

Blaming Rand Paul is only a diversion tactic and it won't work -- except on CNN and MSNBC and in the Obama White House where men make more money than women despite the ladies doing similar work.
The people you named are all Democrats. All that means is that you named no Republicans. Here's a few Mark Sanford, John Ensign, Mark Foley, Larry Craig, Ted Haggard.
Here is a gem I found when I googled "Republican Sex Scandals"
Alan David Berlin, He is an aide for Senator Jane Orie of Pennsylvania. He is also a furry who contacted a fifteen year old boy over the internet, and offered to "yiff" the boy in a panda outfit, while his parents weren't home. The parents discovered the graphic emails on the boy's computer and called the attorney general's child predator unit sometime in May. Police raided his home and discovered various furry outfits such as a wolf costume, as well as a cat outfit; all complete with two holes cut out at the undersides of the costumes. He is now arraigned in Dauphin County jail on a $250,000 bail.[26][27][28][29]


A "furry' is a person who dresses up as a woodland creature for sexual gratification. I don't know what "yiff" is but I know a fifteen year old is a minor.

[Robert Goren]

Rand Paul said nothing that shouldn't have been said by a Republican in every election since 2001.

The Democrats play this 'war on women' crap on the GOP because the Democrats know that the GOP is full of wimps, dopes and cowards and they won't fight back the lame charges hurled at them.

The reality is it is the Democrats that constantly show they hate women by their actions: Bill Clinton raping Juanita Broderick; the same B.J. Clinton sexually abusing a 20-year young intern; Al Gore dumping his frumpy wife after he made his first billion; John Edwards catting around as his dear late wife was dying of cancer, and of course, Teddy Kennedy being responsible for the death of Mary Jo Kopeckne. And that's just off the top of my head.

Democrats all. Liberal icons and lions each and every one of them.

If the left wingers on this board, and elsewhere, wish to defend their behavior and these deviant guys, be my guest.

Blaming Rand Paul is only a diversion tactic and it won't work -- except on CNN and MSNBC and in the Obama White House where men make more money than women despite the ladies doing similar work. It works very well in deed. That is why Obama won. Fortunately, the right wingers like you have trouble figure the difference between what works and what you think should work. I hope you never change.

[hcap]

Let's hope this is the first of many reminders that the Democrat Party is indeed the party of predators, deviants, sex offenders, and in the case of Hillary Clinton, enablers.

http://news.yahoo.com/rand-paul-bill-clinton-war-on-women-175239980.htmlLook, it is quite obvious where you stand. This board is very divided, and always have been. We are constantly rehashing dirty laundry. Pretty much your contentions can be applied to just as well to your side, but you seen to paint with a very broad brush expecting others to accept your blanket statements willy nilly. You also go out of your way to insult people personally.

What do you expect?

[reckless]

Look, it is quite obvious where you stand. This board is very divided, and always have been. We are constantly rehashing dirty laundry. Pretty much your contentions can be applied to just as well to your side, but you seen to paint with a very broad brush expecting others to accept your blanket statements willy nilly. You also go out of your way to insult people personally.

What do you expect?

I did not paint with a broad brush. I specifically and pointedly mentioned your liberal icons and lions as the murderers, deviants and bums that they are. These are people you support, don't forget that.

These gentlemen (ha, ha, ha) have spent a career lying to the very women they claim to support. The Democrats also lie when they paint the GOP of having this war on women. I started this thread by saying it is the Democrats who are the ones with the war on women even though they accuse the GOP of such conduct. On this matter, this board isn't 'very divided', I assure you.

Pertaining to women, what do you think is worse: raping and murdering a woman or refusing to pay for birth control pills and condoms??

Finally, you needn't have to ask me but if a Republican rapes a woman, as did Bill Clinton, or drives a woman into a creek and leaves her there to die, as did Ted Kennedy, or even sexually abuses a very young intern, as did Bill Clinton, of course, I will denounce that person and conduct. I happen to know right from wrong.

[reckless]

It works very well in deed. That is why Obama won. Fortunately, the right wingers like you have trouble figure the difference between what works and what you think should work. I hope you never change.

I will never change, and I'll especially never change to your disjointed point of view, I promise you.

If you think people like Rand Paul should keep quiet in reminding the country of the vulgar behavior of many Democrats because we won't win elections that way, then you're mistaken, on both moral and political grounds.

True, the GOP seems to have been following this vapid advice lately -- which is exactly why they've lost more elections in recent years than they should have.

[hcap]

I did not paint with a broad brush. I specifically and pointedly mentioned your liberal icons and lions as the murderers, deviants and bums that they are. These are people you support, don't forget that.As broad as a 16" wide paint roller. Obviously you don't see it, because you start your white washing at a point just above you eyebrows and head on down.

[FantasticDan]

I'm just waiting for that special candidate who's a murderer, deviant, and bum all rolled into one. That's the democrat trifecta, but we're all losers in that bet! :ThmbDown: :lol:

[Greyfox]

If you think people like Rand Paul should keep quiet in reminding the country of the vulgar behavior of many Democrats because we won't win elections that way, then you're mistaken, on both moral and political grounds.

.

It is clear that Rand Paul's strategy is essentially targeting Hillary.
Out of one side of his mouth he is making her a villain - an enabler of Bill.
Out of the other side of his mouth he's making her a victim - for Bill's predatory behavior.
Either way he does not want the Clintons in the White House again.

This is a dangerous path for him to opt down.
Villianizing and victimizing Hillary in the same breath will end up backfiring on him.
He may capture the interests of a few Tea Partiers bringing up old dirt, but large blocks of Republicans and Democrats will turn away.
I thought that he was smarter than that.

[JustRalph]

Rand Paul has no illusions on being President. His dad couldn't do it and he knows he will never be Prez.

He's throwing bombs for the sake of throwing bombs, just like his dad

[reckless]

The people you named are all Democrats. All that means is that you named no Republicans. Here's a few Mark Sanford, John Ensign, Mark Foley, Larry Craig, Ted Haggard.
Here is a gem I found when I googled "Republican Sex Scandals"

Hi mostpost...

Come one now... comparing Kennedy, Clinton, Gore, Obama with Sanford, Foley, Alan David Berlin, and Haggard is like comparing the 1927 New York Yankees with the bad news Bears.

All the Republicans you named, Sanford, Foley and Ensign, are insignificant people, who also resigned their elected positions. Sanford had a promising national career ahead of him when he decided to play with a South American hottie. It was consensual, but wrong nonetheless as he violated his marriage vows. He basically paid a price for his wrongdoing.

Ensign had a consensual affair as well, and resigned his Senate seat too. He was a backbencher; not an icon like Ted Kennedy. Ensign violated his marriage vows, yes, but he didn't commit murder either, like Teddy, who did both.

Foley never engaged sexually with the two House pages until after they left the House and when both were of legal age. Foley resigned his seat too.

Unheard of David Berlin, an insignificant aide to an insignificant Penn. state senator, was a then 40-year-old gay sexual predator. He should have been hung from the highest tree if I had a say. Using him as a GOP example is a stretch even for you :)

The GOP did something, in fact, about these wrong doings. The Democrats never seem to do. Where was the outrage from the left about Clinton's conduct? Or even gay congressman Jerry Studds, who did in fact sexually molest underage House pages and not one Democrat voted for him to be removed.

Finally, per Monica Lewinsky. You and many others fail to acknowledge that the laws pertaining to unwanted sexual harassment in the workplace -- laws and policies deemed to be Democrat issues -- don't make amends for consent, like you tried to do. She was a low level government employee who was sexually harrassed by a much higher level government employee, in this case the highest level, the President of the USA, one B.J. Clinton. His unsavory conduct is against the law, plain and simple.

mostpost, if you had a 20-year-old intern daughter and word leaked that the POTUS or any high-ranking government official was forcing himself onto her, would you really feel the same way, calling it consensual? I doubt you would. Wouldn't you also think that your 20-year-old baby girl was indeed 'young'? I think so.

[reckless]

As broad as a 16" wide paint roller. Obviously you don't see it, because you start your white washing at a point just above you eyebrows and head on down.

It never ceases to amaze me on how a person could post as often as you do, yet make so little sense so many times.

I'll give you an opportunity to make amends by answering this simple question:

What is the very best example of a war on women:

(a) Murdering a woman like Ted Kennedy did and raping and sexually harrassing women like Bill Clinton did; or,

(b) Voting against the US government paying for women's birth control pills?

[PaceAdvantage]

Post #1. I realize he did not type STF*, and there is no real reason to break out the etiquette police, and it looks looks it has been nipped in the bud, but really.......... :rolleyes:I thought we were talking about what Rand actually stated. Now I'm confused...

[PaceAdvantage]

It works very well in deed. That is why Obama won. Fortunately, the right wingers like you have trouble figure the difference between what works and what you think should work. I hope you never change.Who cares. It's not like your life is much better today under Obama compared to the Bush years.

Or is it? And if so, please detail how.

[Tom]

mostpost, if you had a 20-year-old intern daughter and word leaked that the POTUS or any high-ranking government official was forcing himself onto her, would you really feel the same way, calling it consensual? I doubt you would. Wouldn't you also think that your 20-year-old baby girl was indeed 'young'? I think so.

He had better answer that he would not object and that he expects US to pay for the birth control. And that goes if she is 17, too.

[hcap]

I thought we were talking about what Rand actually stated. Now I'm confused...I don't care about Paul, and have said so.
Mr. "Wreckless" has a recent history of "crazy".

Now, I would not even have mentioned this, except it seems unusual that you thought some of us thought only Paul deserved the blame for "crazy" on this thread.

[reckless]

I don't care about Paul, and have said so.
Mr. "Wreckless" has a recent history of "crazy".

Now, I would not even have mentioned this, except it seems unusual that you thought some of us thought only Paul deserved the blame for "crazy" on this thread.

I'll say it again:

It never ceases to amaze me on how a person could post as often as you do yet make so little sense so many times.

[Robert Goren]

Who cares. It's not like your life is much better today under Obama compared to the Bush years.

Or is it? And if so, please detail how.Actually it is, but that has nothing to do with either GWB or Obama.

[hcap]

I'll say it again:

It never ceases to amaze me on how a person could post as often as you do yet make so little sense so many times.I will say it again Crazy!.

I would put you on ignore except for the your rather amusing entertaining assumption that you are absolutely correct, and I am totally wrong. :rolleyes:

[mostpost]

mostpost, if you had a 20-year-old intern daughter and word leaked that the POTUS or any high-ranking government official was forcing himself onto her, would you really feel the same way, calling it consensual? I doubt you would. Wouldn't you also think that your 20-year-old baby girl was indeed 'young'? I think so.
Since I do not have a 20 year old intern daughter I really don't know what I would do. What I think I would do right now might be completely different from what I would do if I faced the actual situation.

I am not the only one who says Clinton's relationship with Monica Lewinsky was consensual. In a 2004 interview with the Daily Mail, Lewinsky said, " This was a mutual relationship, mutual on all levels, right from the way it started and all the way through."

There are laws against a person in a position of authority using that authority to obtain favors from a person under his authority. That does not mean that every case of a relationship between an authority figure and his subordinate is one of duress. Clearly Lewinsky herself does not feel she was coerced,

[johnhannibalsmith]

She's a grown ass woman, fairly ugly, and had a chance to sleep with/blow the President of the United States.

Something tells me they both were pretty happy with the arrangement.

[mostpost]

It never ceases to amaze me on how a person could post as often as you do, yet make so little sense so many times.

I'll give you an opportunity to make amends by answering this simple question:

What is the very best example of a war on women:

(a) Murdering a woman like Ted Kennedy did and raping and sexually harrassing women like Bill Clinton did; or,

(b) Voting against the US government paying for women's birth control pills?
I am beginning to think Hcap is right. Each new post by you exceeds the previous one in bizareness and lack of logic.

Here is the answer to your question.
(a) Ted Kennedy murdered no one. If he had wanted to kill Mary Jo Kopechne I am sure that he could have figured out a better plan than driving a car off a bridge while he was still in it, then having that car turn over in several feet of water. Bringing two friends back to the crash site to help search for MJK also does not seem like a particularly good plan.

(b) There is no proposed or enacted legislation wherein the government is going to pay for women's birth control bills. The fact that you think so shows a pathetic lack of knowledge of the Affordable Care Act.

[Saratoga_Mike]

I am beginning to think Hcap is right. Each new post by you exceeds the previous one in bizareness and lack of logic.

Here is the answer to your question.
(a) Ted Kennedy murdered no one. If he had wanted to kill Mary Jo Kopechne I am sure that he could have figured out a better plan than driving a car off a bridge while he was still in it, then having that car turn over in several feet of water. Bringing two friends back to the crash site to help search for MJK also does not seem like a particularly good plan.


Yeah, he was a real class act - is there any Dem behavior you won't defend?

New York Times Magazine editor Ed Klein had this to say about one of Kennedy’s “favorite topics of humor:”

“I don't know if you know this or not, but one of his favorite topics of humor was indeed Chappaquiddick itself. And he would ask people, ‘have you heard any new jokes about Chappaquiddick?’ That is just the most amazing thing. It's not that he didn't feel remorse about the death of Mary Jo Kopechne, but that he still always saw the other side of everything and the ridiculous side of things, too.”

[mostpost]

Yeah, he was a real class act - is there any Dem behavior you won't defend?
Is there any Dem behavior you won't exaggerate? Calling what happened at Chappaquiddick murder is way over the top. It was an accident. There is a lot of conjecture and speculation but that is all it is.

You can criticize what Kennedy did or failed to do after the accident, but you were not there. You do not know if he dived into the water several times to try to save MJK or not. You do not know whether or not he suffered a cerebral concussion the symptoms of which include confusion and severe drowsiness. Kennedy's doctors say he was suffering from a concussion after the accident and it is certainly possible that a concussion could have occurred in an accident as bad as that one.

[reckless]

Since I do not have a 20 year old intern daughter I really don't know what I would do. What I think I would do right now might be completely different from what I would do if I faced the actual situation.

I guess we are very different because I know exactly what I'd do. I am glad you probably will never have to face a similar situation. I thought for once, you'd toss your liberal ideology aside and use some common sense for a change.

I am not the only one who says Clinton's relationship with Monica Lewinsky was consensual. In a 2004 interview with the Daily Mail, Lewinsky said, " This was a mutual relationship, mutual on all levels, right from the way it started and all the way through."

mostpost, you could line up all your like-minded lefties as you choose. In this matter, it is not a consensual relationship. The sexual harassment laws in the workplace clearly defines this.

There are laws against a person in a position of authority using that authority to obtain favors from a person under his authority. That does not mean that every case of a relationship between an authority figure and his subordinate is one of duress. Clearly Lewinsky herself does not feel she was coerced,

Again, the law speaks for itself. Levinsky was not obligated to feel duress or coercion. Especially in a federal government workplace environment, if a person of a higher standing has sex with someone at a lower level, that constitutes sexual harassment. I didn't write these laws and rules, mostly liberals and Democrats did, as you know.

I am willing to bet if Clinton was a Republican and he said to Levinsky: 'Gee darlin', I just love that thong of yours,' all the phonies in the media would be calling for his impeachment. And, you probably would too, mostpost.

[Clocker]

Technically, I seriously doubt that Kennedy committed murder, which is homicide with malice aforethought. The available facts point to vehicular homicide.

[reckless]

I am beginning to think Hcrap is right. Each new post by you exceeds the previous one in bizareness and lack of logic.

As long as you and hcrap agree about your opinion of me, I know things are going along quite well.

Here is the answer to your question.
(a) Ted Kennedy murdered no one. If he had wanted to kill Mary Jo Kopechne I am sure that he could have figured out a better plan than driving a car off a bridge while he was still in it, then having that car turn over in several feet of water. Bringing two friends back to the crash site to help search for MJK also does not seem like a particularly good plan.

You are making this sound like it was nothing but a simple Murder Mystery Movie. From accounts I read, Teddy Boy drove off the bridge, wedged himself out, then swam to shore then back to the Compound. He knew Mary Jo was still in the car. He then went to bed and when he awakened hours later, the very first thing he did was to call his lawyer! Teddy Boy wasn't worried about saving Mary Jo's life, he worried about getting out of this jam and saving his Presidential aspirations.

(b) There is no proposed or enacted legislation wherein the government is going to pay for women's birth control bills. The fact that you think so shows a pathetic lack of knowledge of the Affordable Care Act.

ObamaCare has nothing to do with my example. Whenever the GOP talk about reducing the size, scope and cost of the federal government, some left wing nitwit on TV seems to always ask some GOP rep about cutting funds for women, you know, women's health issues. The media never mention the words birth control or abortion, but that's what they mean.

So, I'll repeat, what do you think is a better example of a true Declaration of War on women:

(1) Ted Kennedy, murderer?; and,

(2) Bill Clinton, sexual predator and deviant? (I assume you take offense to me calling him a deviant but you do know he shoved a cigar into Miss Levinsky's private area.); or,

(3) The faithful Mitt Romney, who was accused by the lefties of hating women when he said no to a question 'since birth control is a women's right, should it be funded by the federal government'?

[JustRalph]

Technically, I seriously doubt that Kennedy committed murder, which is homicide with malice aforethought. The available facts point to vehicular homicide.

Which he should have gone to prison for.

[mostpost]

Technically, I seriously doubt that Kennedy committed murder, which is homicide with malice aforethought. The available facts point to vehicular homicide.
Vehicular homicide is a death caused by operating a motor vehicle in a negligent or reckless matter. That could certainly be applied to this case. The question is could it be proven in court? Could it be proven that Kennedy had been drinking to the point of intoxication? The only way to do that would be with a breathalyzer test.

I would say vehicular homicide is a possibility but one which would have been impossible to prove given the time that passed between the incident and the authorities being notified. A plain old accident is equally plausible unless one is an irrational Kennedy hater like our friend Reckless.

[johnhannibalsmith]

... The only way to do that would be with a breathalyzer test.

...

Not to nitpick and I know it isn't terribly pertinent to this decades old hypothetical, but before someone else does it anyway, breathalyzer isn't the only way to get a confirmed high BAC.

[mostpost]

Not to nitpick and I know it isn't terribly pertinent to this decades old hypothetical, but before someone else does it anyway, breathalyzer isn't the only way to get a confirmed high BAC.
OK. But however you do it, I don't think you can do it hours after the fact.

[johnhannibalsmith]

OK. But however you do it, I don't think you can do it hours after the fact.

Sure you can, but I'm pretty sure that once you get more than 3 hours out from the incident, you'll need some pretty good expert testimony, scene witnesses, and a judge and/or jury willing to work with you a little.

[Clocker]

Which he should have gone to prison for.

Whatever Kennedy did or didn't do, there can be little doubt that there was a political cover-up and that the "accident" was not investigated in a proper manner. According to Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chappaquiddick_incident#Inquest), the judge presiding at the inquest found:

"There is probable cause to believe that Edward M. Kennedy operated his motor vehicle negligently ... and that such operation appears to have contributed to the death of Mary Jo Kopechne."

That judge could have issued an arrest warrant on the basis of that finding, but didn't. The D.A. could have brought a case for manslaughter, but didn't. Kennedy pleaded guilty to a charge of leaving the scene of an accident after causing injury and received a two-month suspended jail sentence.

A required state fatal accident hearing found that there was "serious fault" on Kennedy's part and suspended his license for 6 months.

[Saratoga_Mike]

1) Is there any Dem behavior you won't exaggerate? Calling what happened at Chappaquiddick murder is way over the top. It was an accident. There is a lot of conjecture and speculation but that is all it is.

2) You can criticize what Kennedy did or failed to do after the accident, but you were not there. You do not know if he dived into the water several times to try to save MJK or not. You do not know whether or not he suffered a cerebral concussion the symptoms of which include confusion and severe drowsiness. Kennedy's doctors say he was suffering from a concussion after the accident and it is certainly possible that a concussion could have occurred in an accident as bad as that one.

1) Where did I exaggerate anything? I said "yeah he's a real class act." And don't try turning the tables on me--I've slammed Reps on here plenty of times. You're bitter partisan.

2) Actually it's all well documented.

[JustRalph]

Sure you can, but I'm pretty sure that once you get more than 3 hours out from the incident, you'll need some pretty good expert testimony, scene witnesses, and a judge and/or jury willing to work with you a little.

Corrector mundo!!!

It's been done before.........it's a felony if "under the influence"

[Tom]

Kennedy was not a murderer.
A coward, yes.
A scumbag, of course.
A real low-life POS who put his political future ahead of young girl's life, undeniably.
A traitor to this country? Not legally, but in reality, the debate is over.

If I knew where his grave was, I would go piss on it.
The world is better off without crap like him in it.

I have no doubt he burns in hell.

[reckless]

Once again, a Democrat, the obnoxious partisan creep, Alan Grayson of Florida, has declared a War on Women -- this time it's against his wife.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/os-alan-grayson-domestic-violence-wife-20140304,0,7338590.story

[NJ Stinks]

Once again, a Democrat, the obnoxious partisan creep, Alan Grayson of Florida, has declared a War on Women -- this time it's against his wife.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/os-alan-grayson-domestic-violence-wife-20140304,0,7338590.story

Maybe you missed this part of the article or maybe you didn't.

Juan Lopez, the congressman's director of constituent services, told the Orlando Sentinel on Tuesday that he was present at the Grayson home Saturday and watched the incident from about 15 feet away.

Lopez said Alan Grayson never shoved or struck his wife: "Absolutely not .... It's just unfortunate that this is happening and that she would say something like this."

[reckless]

Maybe you missed this part of the article or maybe you didn't.

Juan Lopez, the congressman's director of constituent services, told the Orlando Sentinel on Tuesday that he was present at the Grayson home Saturday and watched the incident from about 15 feet away.

Lopez said Alan Grayson never shoved or struck his wife: "Absolutely not .... It's just unfortunate that this is happening and that she would say something like this."


So I guess if you say it didn't happen, then it didn't happen.

And I guess if Grayson's paid flack says it never happened than it never happened.

We'll let all this play out.

What's your thoughts on the continued assault on women by Democrats, NJ Stinks??

[NJ Stinks]

So I guess if you say it didn't happen, then it didn't happen.

And I guess if Grayson's paid flack says it never happened than it never happened.

We'll let all this play out.

What's your thoughts on the continued assault on women by Democrats, NJ Stinks??

He wouldn't be the first guy to lie for his boss but it is unusual that a third party is an eyewitness in these kind of cases.

No thoughts at all specifically about Dems assaulting women. But I am against men assaulting women if that makes you feel a little better. :p

[reckless]

He wouldn't be the first guy to lie for his boss but it is unusual that a third party is an eyewitness in these kind of cases.

No thoughts at all specifically about Dems assaulting women. But I am against men assaulting women if that makes you feel a little better. :p

I know you're a decent guy despite your political leanings :)...

As you might have noticed I simply hate it that the Democrats make this 'War on Women' a political attack against the GOP when example after example point to the real villains and perpetrators of anti-women behavior, Democrats.

[reckless]

Just another recent example of the Obama Administration's War on Women, this time brought to you by his Department of Homeland Security.

(Psst, psst ladies of PA.... please don't discuss your sex life in emails or visit a shrink, the NSA and their storm-troopers just might come after you.)

http://www.infowars.com/homeland-security-used-intercepted-emails-to-quiz-woman-about-her-sex-life/

[JustRalph]

Just another recent example of the Obama Administration's War on Women, this time brought to you by his Department of Homeland Security.

(Psst, psst ladies of PA.... please don't discuss your sex life in emails or visit a shrink, the NSA and their storm-troopers just might come after you.)

http://www.infowars.com/homeland-security-used-intercepted-emails-to-quiz-woman-about-her-sex-life/

Wow!