WTF? Talk About Changing Stripes!

[DrMaddVibe]

Thursday, March 10, 2005 10:37 a.m. EST

Hillary: Too Much Sex on TV

New York Sen. Hillary Clinton, whose husband's affair with a 23-year-old intern prompted saturation news coverage for a year, complained on Wednesday that children were exposed to too much sex in the media.

Calling the proliferation of adult entertainment "a silent epidemic," the top Democrat said, "Just a decade ago, we made great strides to keep children away from inappropriate material."

In 1994, Clinton noted, she and her husband hosted the Children's Television Summit at the White House and worked for passage of the Children's Television Act, which led to the implementation of the V-Chip in every new television over 13 inches.

It was also the year Mr. Clinton was sued for sexual harassment by Arkansas state worker Paula Jones - which led to the discovery that he was using the Oval Office for sexual trysts.

Soon the evening news was saturated with reports chock full of R-rated material, forcing parents to deal with uncomfortable questions from children as young as 5 years old.

Surveys now credit Sen. Clinton's husband with making oral sex an acceptable practice among the impressionable teenage population.

Still, in her remarks on Wednesday, the top Democrat made no mention of her husband's role in desensitizing an entire generation to sexual topics that were previously taboo.

Instead the former first lady called for parents to be more responsible, saying they "need to keep up with this multi-dimensional environment."

"All of us need to rise to this challenge," she urged.

[blueturk]

Originally posted by DrMaddVibe


Still, in her remarks on Wednesday, the top Democrat made no mention of her husband's role in desensitizing an entire generation to sexual topics that were previously taboo.

What sexual topics did Clinton desensitize an entire generation to? Blow jobs? Whatever! When I was a teen-ager in the '70's blow jobs weren't taboo by any means, and the fine art of muff diving was pretty popular too. Does this mean that Dubya inspired an entire generation to start fights based on lies?

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by DrMaddVibe
Surveys now credit Sen. Clinton's husband with making oral sex an acceptable practice among the impressionable teenage population.

Come on Doc, this is a bunch of bullshit right here. And even if it's true, I say it's a mark of distinction.

[DrMaddVibe]

It's not bullshit. My own kids asked what oral sex was at the dinner table! I asked them where they heard that and they said they saw the President on tv and someone said that.

I never imagined I'd have to explain to a 4 and 9 year old what it was at that age.

Where you come off with a mark of distinction I'll never know, but when you have kids of your own be sure to explain oral sex to them when they're 4 so you can have the same mark.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by DrMaddVibe
It's not bullshit. My own kids asked what oral sex was at the dinner table! I asked them where they heard that and they said they saw the President on tv and someone said that.

I never imagined I'd have to explain to a 4 and 9 year old what it was at that age.

Where you come off with a mark of distinction I'll never know, but when you have kids of your own be sure to explain oral sex to them when they're 4 so you can have the same mark.

Probably because all those filthy Republican sites you go on that are fixated on the ex-Presidents sexual habits. Funny, but did't FORD post one of his Top Ten Conservative idiots that listed a right wing "religious site" that supposed contained graphic images of gay sex? And who was talking about the blowjob nonstop?

[DrMaddVibe]

It's the Sex, Stupid

By Andrew Ferguson

(TIME, February 2) -- So there we are, my seven-year-old son and I, sitting on the couch last week, watching the evening news. I flatter myself that it's a scene from the civics textbooks: Dad introducing Junior to the wide world of public affairs. My son knows something is up with President Clinton, but he's not sure what, precisely, and I'm not sure I want to explain it to him. Suddenly the words Oval Office pop out from the newsreader, and then President, then oral sex, and my son's brow furrows. He looks up at me, thoroughly puzzled. I reach for the mute button and kill the sound from the TV. This is not what the civics books had in mind.

I mention my homey vignette because already among the pundit class a consensus has emerged about the role of sex in the latest Clinton scandal: it is not, at the deepest level, about sex; the truly damning allegations are about possible perjury, and about the subornation of perjury, and about the obstruction of justice, and about other matters of law.

No. This thing is about sex.

On its face that statement may sound so banal as to be meaningless. Everyone knows sex is involved. My point is different. Sex is the whole ball of wax. If the scandal mortally wounds Clinton, it will be because the public understands the relationship he is alleged to have forged with Monica Lewinsky. It will be because they had sex and because of the kind of sex they had.

In the knowing, irony-drenched world of baby-boomer culture, no one wants to be thought a prig. So let's stipulate that simple adultery would not have endangered the President politically or created the lurid spectacle before us. He's been accused of that before and survived. People seemed not to believe his denials in 1992 about Gennifer Flowers -- in fact, according to leaks from his recent deposition, the President seems not to have believed them himself -- but the public apparently forgave him. An implicit bargain was struck, and it's hard to imagine a national convulsion erupting from disclosures that, say, he had stashed away somewhere in the Old Executive Office Building a cabaret singer roughly his own age.

The tapes of Monica Lewinsky, though, tell a story that is, shall we say, more complicated. If the tapes are correct -- and Bill Clinton, of course, says they are not -- the President of the United States is a sexual predator. The story line is boy-meets-girl, with a twist. The boy is 50 years old, married, and the most powerful and famous man in the world; the girl is by many definitions still a girl, a few years older than his daughter: 21, fresh from college, away from home, working for him without pay at her first real job. He is her boss; she is starstruck. He travels in motorcades; she works as a clerk. She is flirtatious and pretty and willing, and he takes her.

Much has already been made about the manner of sex described on the tapes. Not to put too fine a point on it, it is strictly one-way, designed for the maximum pleasure of the recipient. The pleasure of the giver is incidental. The act itself summarizes the relationship, as the tapes reveal it: someone is the supplicant, and it's not the President. Those of us unlucky enough to remember the late 1960s and early 1970s -- before Monica Lewinsky was born -- recall the radical-feminist critique of sex as purely a matter of power and exploitation. Under some circumstances the critique seems not so radical. It explains why, for example, professors are enjoined from dating their students. Immaturity and infatuation make you vulnerable, even if you yourself aren't aware of it, and decent people in positions of power do not exploit the vulnerable for kicks. Here the logic of common morality is inexorable, and the conclusion is harsh: If the President had sex with her, he is not a decent man; he will be understood as such; and his public life will be over.

Why? Maybe no one wants to be thought a moralist these days, but most people are moralists at heart; their standards might be flexible and forgiving, but they're not infinitely elastic. It is possible, and in the view of some people likely, that the tapes will be exposed as the quite elaborate fantasies, 20 hours' worth, of an unstable young woman. But if the tapes are true, that wobbly moralism will reassert itself, for many of those irony-drenched boomers are now parents of their own Monica Lewinskys. One of two things will follow. The public will demand that Clinton go; or, tired of watching the news with their fingers on the mute button, they will turn away not only from the President but also from the very idea of public responsibility. And that, needless to say, isn't what the civics textbooks had in mind either.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/.../ferguson.html

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by DrMaddVibe
It's not bullshit. My own kids asked what oral sex was at the dinner table! I asked them where they heard that and they said they saw the President on tv and someone said that.

I never imagined I'd have to explain to a 4 and 9 year old what it was at that age.

Where you come off with a mark of distinction I'll never know, but when you have kids of your own be sure to explain oral sex to them when they're 4 so you can have the same mark.

Clinton only copped to that shit after the repubs beat it out of him. It's their fault for airing dirty laundry that's no one's god damned business!

If you're the leader of the most powerful nation on the planet, you deserve some perks man! I sincerely believe that. And any president these days going on a morality trip is super-hypocritical in the first place.

[DrMaddVibe]

Oral Sex

"I regret to say that we of the FBI are powerless to act in cases of oral-genital intimacy, unless it has in some way obstructed interstate commerce."
-- J. Edgar Hoover

Dicks
aka fellatio, sucking cock

Pussies
aka cunnilingus, carpet munching
Asses
aka analingus, rimming, tossing salad

Timeline
11 Jun 1972 The film Deep Throat, starring Linda Lovelace, debuts at the New Mature World Theater on 49th Street in New York.
spring 1977 Newt Gingrich receives an extramarital blowjob from Anne Manning, who was herself married. She explains later: "We had oral sex... He prefers that modus operandi because then he can say, 'I never slept with her.'"
8 May 1991 In a room at Little Rock's Excelsior Hotel, Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton exposes his penis to state employee Paula Jones and propositions her to perform fellatio. In her civil deposition, Jones will later claim to have witnessed certain "distinguishing characteristics" of the governor's genitalia, the precise nature of which soon becomes the subject of much speculation. For her trouble, Jones eventually receives an out-of-court settlement for $850,000 and a nude pictorial in Penthouse magazine.
27 Jun 1995 The LAPD arrests streetwalker Divine Brown for prostitution after she is discovered giving British film star Hugh Grant a blowjob in a white BMW parked on Hawthorn Ave. To be fair, they also arrest Grant for receiving said blowjob.
15 Nov 1995 In the Chief of Staff's office, White House intern Monica Lewinsky pulls down her pants to show President Bill Clinton that she is wearing black thong underwear. In response, Clinton verbally indicates his approval. Later that evening, Bill fingerbangs Monica and plays with her tits. Then she gives him a blowjob while he talks on the phone.
17 Nov 1995 President Bill Clinton plays with Monica Lewinsky's tits, then she gives him a blowjob while he talks on the phone with Congressman H.L. "Sonny" Callahan.
31 Dec 1995 President Bill Clinton plays with Monica Lewinsky's tits, then she gives him a blowjob.
7 Jan 1996 President Bill Clinton offers to go down on Monica Lewinsky but she demurs, telling him that she's menstruating. Then she gives him a blowjob and a rimjob.
21 Jan 1996 President Bill Clinton plays with Monica Lewinsky's tits, then she gives him a blowjob.
4 Feb 1996 President Bill Clinton plays with Monica Lewinsky's tits and pussy, then she gives him a blowjob.
7 Apr 1996 President Bill Clinton plays with Monica Lewinsky's tits, then she gives him a blowjob.
28 Feb 1997 President Bill Clinton plays with Monica Lewinsky's tits, then she gives him a blowjob. This time, Clinton spurts on her navy blue dress she bought at the Gap.
29 Mar 1997 President Bill Clinton plays with Monica Lewinsky's tits and pussy, then they briefly touch genitals and she gives him a blowjob. Again, Clinton spurts. It will be their last sexual encounter.
Sep 1997 In an interview with Esquire magazine, The Daily Show host Craig Kilborn jokes: "There are a lot of bitches on the staff, and, hey, they're emotional people. You can print that! You know how women are -- they overreact. It's not really a big deal. And to be honest, Lizz does find me very attractive. If I wanted her to blow me, she would."
20 Jul 1998 Time magazine contributor Nina Burleigh declares: "I would be happy to give him (Bill Clinton) a blowjob just to thank him for keeping abortion legal. I think American women should be lining up with their presidential kneepads on to show their gratitude for keeping the theocracy off our backs."
30 Jan 2004 While a substitute teacher screens a video in a darkened West Port High School classroom, a 15-year-old girl gives a blowjob to a 14-year-old classmate. The pair receive suspensions a week later.


http://www.rotten.com/library/sex/oral-sex/

[ODShowtime]

how about gw's buddies and their god-damned cialis and enzite ads during football? That's TRULY offensive.

[DrMaddVibe]

High School Oral Sex Article Stirs Controversy
Is Oral Sex Really Sex? That's What Montrose High Newspaper Asks

POSTED: 9:57 a.m. MDT May 19, 2003

A high school newspaper article that claims 40 percent of the students have had oral sex has stirred controversy in Montrose, Colo. The Montrose High School Chieftain published the story in its April 30 edition.

The article, written by MHS student Katherine Smith, questions whether experts and students consider oral sex as "having sex." The school paper published the column, story and information box on the subject.

SURVEY
Do you think an article on students' opinion of oral sex is appropriate for a high school newspaper?
Yes. Teens that age are thinking and talking about it anyway.
No. It is not the appropriate forum.


Results | Disclaimer

The story begins by citing a "survey" of Montrose high school students which determined that 60 percent of the students do not consider oral sex to be "sex."

An accompanying column, written by Smith, is even more graphic.

"A lot of times teens do not consider oral sex to be sex because they want to be able to be satisfied without losing innocence of respect," Smith wrote. "Forty percent of 274 students polled are having oral sex but not having sexual intercourse. For some reason this generation thinks that saying 'so-and-so went down on me last night' sounds a lot more innocent than 'so-and-so and I had sex last night.'"

MHS principal Richard Hagen has defended the publication and said the articles were intended to give students information informing them that oral sex is not safe.

"Unfortunately, the use of the language and the topic itself was offensive and got in the way of that message," he told the Montrose Daily Press. "I regret that it is a such a divisive issue. I regret that it offended anyone. I regret that the real issue was clouded, and I regret that we didn't handle this better."

It was unclear how the article made it into the newspaper as it was. The paper's faculty advisor did not attend a school board meeting last week to discuss the issue.

According to the Montrose School District's publications policy, "advisors will not act as censors." The policy also warns that school publications cannot distribute information that is considered obscene.

Montrose High School

A number of parents are upset that the article was published in the high school paper.

"There was poor judgment, poor leadership and poor decisions were made," said Mark Freeman, a parent with two children attending MHS.

Another parent said the "survey" was useless and actually did more harm than good.

"The people who are least qualified and least experienced were asked their opinions and it was reported, and we gained nothing more than what we could have learned by spending a half-hour in the boy's locker room," Russ Turner told the Daily Press.

The Montrose school board said it would look into the controversy.

The debate about oral sex appeared to have been fueled with the statement by then-President Bill Clinton who told reporters that he did not have "sex" with intern Monica Lewinsky and later said that oral sex was not "sex."

He also denied having sex with Paula Jones, and offered the same argument in her case during a deposition over a lawsuit she filed.

In the Jones case, U.S. District Judge Susan Webber Wright ruled that "for the purposes of this deposition, a person engages in 'sexual relations' when the person knowingly engages in or causes contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with an intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person."

The editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association was fired in 1998 after publishing a study about college students' attitudes toward oral sex that coincided with President Clinton's impeachment trial. The article quoted from a 1991 Kinsey Institute report in which 59 percent of college students surveyed said that they don't consider oral sex to constitute having 'had sex.'

A 2002 survey by Ansell Healthcare, manufacturer of LifeStyles condoms, found that one-third of teenage girls said oral sex is not sex. Twenty percent of teens had oral sex by age 15, half by age 17. In some circles, oral sex is almost obligatory, like a goodnight kiss, the San Antonio Express-News reported in August. LifeStyles sells flavored condoms, designed for oral sex.

According to a survey by the Henry J. Kaiser Foundation, 20 percent of 12- to 17-year-olds believed that oral sex is safe sex. Even more -- 36 percent -- of 15- to 17-year-olds thought so.



http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news...86/detail.html

[DrMaddVibe]

I could keep going too. This isn't from some right wing religious site either.

I saw the article and recalled exactly what I had been through and saw the sheer hypocrisy!

It's more important when you have kids that become desensitized by the media and create situations that normally parents don't have to deal with until they feel that their kids are old enough to know, or ask about the "birds and the bees".

Don't defend bad behavior.

[DrMaddVibe]

I don't recall oral sex being a perk of ANY job!

The CEO of Boeing was just fired for the same thing.

[Figs]

It's all just the packaging of "centrist" Hillary. When's she doin' Oprah?

[DrMaddVibe]

Exactly Figs!

[FORD]

Originally posted by DrMaddVibe
I don't recall oral sex being a perk of ANY job!

The CEO of Boeing was just fired for the same thing.

The CEO of Boeing was fired because he broke his own fucking policy. Not that anybody really liked Stonecipher that much anyway.

Oh, and what was this thread about again?

Hillary selling out to the right wing... yeah what else is new

[diamondD]

No, she's selling herself to the middle and getting away from Howard Dean and the far left in order to make her run. She knows she can't win otherwise.

[DrMaddVibe]

Boeing chief ousted over 'personal relationship'

Boeing abruptly forced its president and chief executive, Harry Stonecipher, to resign Monday after discovering that he was having a "personal relationship" with a female Boeing executive that the company said violated its code of business conduct.
.
The surprising move leaves the U.S. aerospace giant adrift for the second time in less than two years - and at a time when it is just starting to recover from the procurement scandals that led to the resignation of Stonecipher's predecessor. Just last Friday, the company's share price hit a three-year high on the news that one of its divisions was again free to compete for U.S. Air Force contracts.
.
Boeing officials were vague about the exact nature of Stonecipher's violation, since the company's code of conduct does not specifically ban affairs between employees. They stressed that the affair did not involve any illegality or contacts with other companies or government agencies.
.
But a well-connected industry lawyer, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said Boeing's board felt that the recovery of the company's military business was at such a crucial point that it was necessary to avoid any hint of scandal.
.
Lewis Platt, Boeing's nonexecutive chairman, said that Stonecipher had been adamant about running a tight ship.
.
"He let everyone know that even minor violations would not be tolerated, and when one does that you have to look at that standard," Platt said.
.
When asked if it was simply that Stonecipher had an affair that was the problem, Platt responded that having an affair was not a violation of the policy.
.
"But as we explored the circumstances surrounding the affair, we just thought there were some issues of poor judgment" that "impaired his ability to lead," Platt said.
.
James Bell, 56, was named interim president and chief executive while the search for a replacement is conducted. Bell has been chief financial officer and a member of the company's executive council since November 2003.
.
He will continue to handle financial matters.
.
In late trading in New York on Monday, Boeing's share price was down 31 cents at $58.07.
.
According to Platt, an internal investigation began 10 days ago after the receipt of information sent from an anonymous, internal female source. The investigation revealed a consensual relationship between Stonecipher, 68, and the executive that had begun in January.
.
The executive, who was not identified, did not report directly to Stonecipher. Platt described her as a "longtime Boeing employee," and said she was still working at the company while considering her options, indicating that she was not subject to dismissal.
.
Platt said Stonecipher was totally honest about the affair when approached by Boeing officials.
.
"You could not have expected anyone to be more open and honest," he said.
.
Paul Nisbet, an independent aerospace analyst who follows Boeing closely, called Stonecipher's departure "a shocking surprise."
.
He suggested the board may have overreacted because of the turmoil that surrounded Boeing in 2003. In one case, Boeing had obtained improper information on a competitor's bid. In another, a U.S. Air Force procurement officer eventually pleaded guilty to steering business to Boeing, which had given a job to her daughter and was in the process of hiring her when the scandal erupted.
.
The former chief executive, Phil Condit, resigned Dec. 1, 2003, as a result of those scandals.
.
"They will have to find some squeaky-clean candidate," Nisbet said.
.
The "depth" in Boeing's management means no lack of possibilities, he said, although the board has set such a high standard that it may be difficult to persuade top managers to take the job.
.
Stonecipher is entitled to what Platt called a "standard retirement package."
.
Stonecipher has been a member of the Boeing board since joining the company from McDonnell Douglas when the companies merged in 1997. He is also is one of its largest stockholders.
.
He was brought in from retirement as chief executive at the depth of the company's troubles, with a mandate to repair relations with customers in the Pentagon and in the airline industry.
.
On Friday, the company got the good news that the U.S. Air Force had lifted a 20-month suspension of Boeing's launch systems group, which had been involved in one of the scandals that led to Stonecipher becoming chief executive, although an investigation by the U.S. Justice Department is continuing.
.
Also under Stonecipher, the new Boeing 787 Dreamliner, formerly called the 7E7, began selling at a stepped-up pace.

[Big Train]

Why and how is this issue a repub/dem thing? As someone in the sex and violence industry, I find it comical that we go to these great lengths to blame other groups for creating the "Cesspool of society".

Truth is, both parties are filled with people who consume these items with vigor. So for all the high minded talk, until society as a whole, not the FCC, not Senator Clinton, not Ken Starr...when we ALL decide that it's more than we want (via voting with dollars, which tends to get the industries attention), until then we are just having a discussion about nothing.

[Satan]

Originally posted by diamondD
No, she's selling herself to the middle and getting away from Howard Dean and the far left in order to make her run. She knows she can't win otherwise.

Howard Dean is about as close to the Far Left as I am to the Pope.

[blueturk]

Originally posted by Big Train
Why and how is this issue a repub/dem thing? As someone in the sex and violence industry, I find it comical that we go to these great lengths to blame other groups for creating the "Cesspool of society".

Truth is, both parties are filled with people who consume these items with vigor. So for all the high minded talk, until society as a whole, not the FCC, not Senator Clinton, not Ken Starr...when we ALL decide that it's more than we want (via voting with dollars, which tends to get the industries attention), until then we are just having a discussion about nothing.

Exactly. People of ALL political persuasions are watching "Desperate Housewives", "The Bachelor", "Girls Gone Wild",etc..It's not a political issue at all.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by DrMaddVibe
I could keep going too. This isn't from some right wing religious site either.

I saw the article and recalled exactly what I had been through and saw the sheer hypocrisy!

It's more important when you have kids that become desensitized by the media and create situations that normally parents don't have to deal with until they feel that their kids are old enough to know, or ask about the "birds and the bees".

Don't defend bad behavior.

Because her husband cheated on her, she's a hypocrite?

[Satan]

As a long time expert on morals (and encouraging people not to have them) take it from the Devil that there is no more morality on the Pharisee right than there is on the Liberal left.

The Clinton blow job episode is a prime example. In the right wing's effort to bring down the President over something which had nothing to do with his job duties, it was learned that a number of congressional right wingers had committed sexual sins far worse than Bill had.

I mean seriously kids..... on Judgment day, who do you think is going to have a worse time of it. Slick Willy for getting a hummer? Or Newt Gingrich for serving his wife with divorce papers while she's in the hospital with cancer. As one who has known JC and his Dad a lot longer than most of you, I can guess who's more likely of the two to show up on my doorstep.

Take it from the Devil, kids. All mortals are hypocrites to one degree or another when it comes to morality.

But the true hypocrisy kicks in when you look at what is being tolerated right now in your country by Bush supporters from this administration, and the insane idea that depiction of sex on TV is somehow more damaging to society than glorification of senseless war and perpetuation of fear.

[DrMaddVibe]

Nick...she on one hand wants attention and credit for installing the v-chip and wants sex off of tv for the sake of the kids.

She makes no mention of the fact that her family put it square in the middle of America for all of us to see.

Doesn't say sorry for smearing the screens with her families antics...don't apologize for blaming this on a right-wing conspiricy...oh no..."We have to make the tv safer!"...no, Ms."I-ain't-no-Tammy-Wyanette" wants it for the kids.

This isn't a left-right, dem-rep thing. For those of you that can't see it for what it is...don't go outside. The black helicopters are out...run to your shelters...now!

[Big Train]

Good Dr.,

I usually agree with you, but here I think your logic is faulty.

#1. The last thing Clinton or his family wanted was to put this out there in the public..I'm sure they wanted nothing more than for it to go away.

#2. The senators and such who were hounding him were riding blue elephants at the time

#3. If you gonna use the argument that he "put it out there", the people you should really blame would be in order:

Linda Tripp-for recording the details then selling them to the highest bidder-that's PUTTING IT OUT THERE.

Monica Lewinksy-For doing the deed that started the whole thing. Secondly, for selling out her story repeatedly to make a buck.

Kenn Starr for composing the most unneccasarily graphic "report" America has ever read, which ultimately did nothing to help anything along.

[DrMaddVibe]

By not admitting and stringing this matter along HE did put it out there.

I suppose its Lewinsky's fault for keeping the dress that Clinton spunked on?

Lets put the blame squarely where it deserves to be.

If you want to make Monica and Linda accomplices then I can agree with that, but as the leader of the Free World...I would expect and deserve more than what I got with that guy. He disgraced himself, his family, the Office and his nation by not being able to control himself for a piece of ass! Ever wonder "what if" the Chinese or Soviets would've trained a real fine looking woman to seduce a President with the intention of blackmail?

Now we have to hear from Hillary about how there's too much sex on tv? Who opened up the floodgates and put it on the evening news? From what I've seen, heard and read about the 2 of them...she's the "braintrust" of the operation. I'm wondering what other sensational headlines and statements will we hear bellowing from her jowls that are contrary from the truth!

[Satan]

Originally posted by DrMaddVibe
Ever wonder "what if" the Chinese or Soviets would've trained a real fine looking woman to seduce a President with the intention of blackmail?

Maybe that IS what happenned, AssVibe. Only it wasn't the Russians or the Chinese.

So who was it? Consider the timing. Who was trying to sell President Clinton an agenda for world fascism around that same time? And who do they work for?

One thing is for sure - Monica bragged to her friends in Portland how she was "taking her presidential kneepads to Washington". Clearly, her agenda was pre-planned.

What are the odds that she could have gotten such access to the President without a little help?

Something for you mortals to think about.

[Warham]

Originally posted by ODShowtime
Clinton only copped to that shit after the repubs beat it out of him. It's their fault for airing dirty laundry that's no one's god damned business!

If you're the leader of the most powerful nation on the planet, you deserve some perks man! I sincerely believe that. And any president these days going on a morality trip is super-hypocritical in the first place.

They get enough perks with free air travel and more postage stamps than they could ever use.

They don't need some heffer under a desk gobbing their knob.

[Warham]

Originally posted by Satan
As a long time expert on morals (and encouraging people not to have them) take it from the Devil that there is no more morality on the Pharisee right than there is on the Liberal left.

The Clinton blow job episode is a prime example. In the right wing's effort to bring down the President over something which had nothing to do with his job duties, it was learned that a number of congressional right wingers had committed sexual sins far worse than Bill had.

I mean seriously kids..... on Judgment day, who do you think is going to have a worse time of it. Slick Willy for getting a hummer? Or Newt Gingrich for serving his wife with divorce papers while she's in the hospital with cancer. As one who has known JC and his Dad a lot longer than most of you, I can guess who's more likely of the two to show up on my doorstep.

Take it from the Devil, kids. All mortals are hypocrites to one degree or another when it comes to morality.

But the true hypocrisy kicks in when you look at what is being tolerated right now in your country by Bush supporters from this administration, and the insane idea that depiction of sex on TV is somehow more damaging to society than glorification of senseless war and perpetuation of fear.

Yep, definately FORD.

[Warham]

Originally posted by Satan
Howard Dean is about as close to the Far Left as I am to the Pope.

YEAAARRRGHHHH!

[DrMaddVibe]

Originally posted by Satan
Maybe that IS what happenned, AssVibe. Only it wasn't the Russians or the Chinese.

So who was it? Consider the timing. Who was trying to sell President Clinton an agenda for world fascism around that same time? And who do they work for?

One thing is for sure - Monica bragged to her friends in Portland how she was "taking her presidential kneepads to Washington". Clearly, her agenda was pre-planned.

What are the odds that she could have gotten such access to the President without a little help?

Something for you mortals to think about.

They didn't need to blackmail him...they were steamrolling right over him and his party by PRODUCING for the people!

Anyone can make campaign promises but did you ever take a look at what they promised and what they did?

Dig there and you'll discover why I vote the way I do.

[Cathedral]

Parents are the one's responsible for what their kids are exposed to.
In my house NEWS programs are off limits to the kids.
If the school they go to is full of sex, violence and drugs then the parents need to make a responsible decision to place them in a better school.
My youngest daughters 1st grade experience was horrible, it was a public school and it was in a really well respected district which shocked me.
Her mother and I placed her in a private school and they don't put up with immoral activities by any of the students at all.
problem kids get one warning, and then expelled, and i like that policy.

If you sit around and wait for the government to do something about this stuff you are seriously warped cause it will never happen, and as i said above, the parents are responsible for what their children are exposed to.
Take them out into public, and you will be answering questions by the end of the night, so answer them, but don't keep them locked up away from society or they'll be rebelling against you after puberty.

The truth is, they are going to learn things that most parents would rather they didn't at such a young age.
But the key in all of it is not to ignore their curiosity or give them bullshit answers like "You'll find out later, when you're older", because that immediately sends them on a quest for that answer by someone else that you absolutely don't want them learning from.

Open and honest relationships with your kids is the single most important goal of a parent, or at least it should be.
the dynamic of parenting is 100% different than it was 30-40 years ago when society was not so open and accepting of explicit materials and programming, as it is now.
But still, It is the parents job to monitor what they are watching and doing and trust me, it's easier than you think as long as you do your job as a parent and actually give a damn.

Just don't over do it and create a prison type atmosphere or you'll lose them from the start.
Arm the kids with the information they need while behind the closed doors of home before you let them step outside into the real world.

And if they ask a tough question, think it through and be as gentle as you can with the answer, don't start sweating and give them a generic explanation or get angry because they asked a tough one.

A parent only has 18 years to build a solid moral foundation.
Take it seriously and keep on track and your chances of success will be greater than the alternative.
And even at that, there are no guarentee's, but in life there never have been any guarentee's beyong Death and Taxes.

There is nobody else to blame outside of the parental unit, and that is a cold hard fact of life.

[scorpioboy33]

are you still done with this place