With all due respect, I really don't think you want to go there. No sociopath lies with more ease than Bill Clinton. This perjurer is the most vile and disgusting man to ever occupy the White House. Everybody on the left claims to love him now, and remained shamefully silent in 1998. But, when push comes to shove, it is far from "right-wing extremists" who acknowledge this man's chronic lies:

The ironic thing is that Hillary's chances in 2016 would be far improved with a Romney victory (so I am perplexed why Bill is going all out for Obama). Even if the economy if doing decently four years from now, it is always very hard for a party to keep the White House for more than eight years. And if the economy is still in shambles, no Democrat (even one as strong as Hillary) has a chance of winning in 2016. (We saw this in 2008, when McCain was the strongest and most popular candidate the GOP could have nominated, yet he was doomed to lose because of the unpopularity of Bush and the terrible economy; though, if the Republicans had nominated anyone else, that person would have done twice as badly.)

Oh let's go there. I have no problem with a politician lying about his sex life. I simply don't care. I don't care about Clinton's affairs (I did then but now that I'm older I don't.), I don't care about Larry Craig's bathroom trolling, Eliot Spitzer's whoring, Newt Gingrich's open marriage or Anthony Weiner's penis. As long as they do their job I don't care if elected officials want to get their ass tickled with a pink feather while wearing a ball gag. The sex scandals that bother me are:

• Mark Sanford - I don't care if he cheated on his wife but he left the country without telling anybody. He should've been horsewhipped for that.
  
• David Vitter - I have no problem with people availing themselves of sex workers but reportedly he was booking hookers through his phone when he was on the Senate floor. He couldn't wait a couple of hours?!
  
• John Ensign - used his position to hide his cheating and abused the family of his mistress to do it.
  
• Al Gore - If it's true that he forced himself on a masseuse I find that unforgivable. There are plenty of women who will take care of your needs for the right price. (See: David Vitter)
  
• John Edwards - This one actually breaks my rule but I need to cop to the truth. I hate him for what he did to his wife and family. I believed in him once because what he said about two Americas was SO true. I can't describe how betrayed I felt by him. When I think "sociopath" I don't think Mitt Romney, I think John Edwards.
  

Which brings me back to your statement Max. Bill Clinton could be a psychopathic serial killer with a puppy rape dungeon in his basement but that doesn't change the truth about Mitt Romney. Romney is an self-serving, incompetent, entitled pathological liar who looked at the murder of these people who were killed serving our country and humanity and thought to himself, "How can this benefit me?" He's a man who talked about the death of innocents with a smile on his face. If you think Bill Clinton's sex lie is worse than that then...I have no response for that.

As for Hilary's chances in 2016, I believe her when she says she doesn't want to run, even though I hope she does. Personally, I think that Hilary will hang up the professional politics and double down on her work on behalf of women and girls. I don't think she will be the Dem candidate in 2016.

Edited September 13, 201213 yr by marceline

Oh let's go there. I have no problem with a politician lying about his sex life.

Clinton wasn't impeached because he lied about sex. He was impeached because he lied under oath in a court of law. It's very convenient how you forgot that.

David Vitter broke the law, and should have been expelled from Congress. There's no hypocrisy from me on this matter (though it was shameful how the GOP had no problem with his conduct). John Ensign did resign, and almost no Republican came to his defense.

Romney is an self-serving, incompetent, entitled pathological liar who looked at the murder of these people who were killed serving our country and humanity and thought to himself, "How can this benefit me?" He's a man who talked about the death of innocents with a smile on his face. If you think Bill Clinton's sex lie is worse than that then...I have no response for that.

It was reprehensible for Romney to politicize this. But is it not also reprehensible for this tragedy to happen on Obama's watch? Of course, not one peep was made about that today. The economy still sucks? It's Bush's fault. American's get killed in Lybia? It's Romney's fault. Navy Seals take out Bin Laden? Well, that's singlehandely Obama's doing. GM is saved? Again, all credit goes to Obama (even though the bailout began under Bush). I have never f-ucking heard of a president who is so eager to take sole credit for a select few accomplishments yet never admits to having a hand in the things that are wrong with the country.

Edited September 13, 201213 yr by Max

Clinton wasn't impeached because he lied about sex. He was impeached because he lied under oath in a court of law. It's very convenient how you forgot that.

I didn't forget anything. You didn't mention the impeachment or I would've addressed it.

It was reprehensible for Romney to politicize this. But is it not also reprehensible for this fiasco to happen on Obama's watch? Of course, I'd never expect you to acknowledge that, since your lips have always been so firmly glued to his a-ss.

That's a really cheap personal attack. Once again, even though we've disagreed, I always thought you were better than that. Fine. Since you've apparently lost the ability to engage me on the issues how about you and I just agree not to talk to each other? Let's put each other on "ignore" and move on.

That's a really cheap personal attack. Once again, even though we've disagreed, I always thought you were better than that. Fine. Since you've apparently lost the ability to engage me on the issues how about you and I just agree not to talk to each other? Let's put each other on "ignore" and move on.

You've have never criticized this president for failing to turn the economy around. You have even bragged about how you and other African Americans in Ohio are going to fully take advantage of early voting to help Obama. What you say that, it makes me believe that you (and like minded people) are voting for him just because of his skin color. THAT MAKES ME SICK. And you have the nerve to say that Romney voters are racists.

When you have been playing the race card to (1) first get a wholly unqualified person elected president and (2) get a president with a horrendous economic record re-elected, don't expect the other side to sit quietly.

Edited September 13, 201213 yr by Max

All the over top ranting and anger about Obama aside, let's be rational for once. Romney opened his mouth, Clinton didn't force him to do, Obama didn't force him and neither did any other Democrat, it was all on Romney himself, period. But, go ahead and keep demonstrating why the Republican Party is half a step away from being below the Monster Raving Loony Party (a joke).

All the over top ranting and anger about Obama aside, let's be rational for once. Romney opened his mouth,

I'm sure Romney would have been villified if he said nothing either (because he has been trashed for not having many press conferences). Even though Dole and McCain--two of the most honorable people to ever run for president--were absolutely savaged by the press, I have never seen such a universally negative portrayl of a nominee until now.

You've have never criticized this president for failing to turn the economy around. You have even bragged about how you and other African Americans in Ohio are going to fully take advantage of early voting to help Obama. What you say that, it makes me believe that you (and like minded people) are voting for him just because of his skin color. THAT MAKES ME SICK. And you have the nerve to say that Romney voters are racists.

When you have been playing the race card to (1) first get a wholly unqualified person elected president and (2) get a president with a horrendous economic record re-elected, don't expect the other Uside to sit quietly.

Max I thought you were above this. And you know what for every vote he may have gotten in 2008 because he was African American, there was at least one person for each one of those who voted against him because he was African American. He won because of voter turnout and because younger people in particular were energized by his freshness and message and turned out in record droves. He attracted voters that are normally complacent and don't vote. Republicans it seems are the only ones who seem to care about younger people voting or not voting and want voter turnout low because they know it favors them. Do you recall what voter tour out was in 2008? That's why Obama won.

I don't need to defend Marceline, but have you read her posts? She's not an Obama cheerleader and seems IMO to be pretty objective. I myself have voted republican in our state elections in Illinois. The last 2 decent governors we had, Edgar and Thompson were republican while the democratic party in this state tends to be partisan. But I will tell you both of those gentleman are no longer involved in politics or the party because they are moderates and have both gone on the record saying they feel disenfranchised by the republican party of today. Don't blame those of us who may support the democratic candidate this go around because the current republican party is a mess and they've lost good people because of it, like the 2 I've mentioned.

I don't need to defend Marceline, but have you read her posts? She's not an Obama cheerleader and seems IMO to be pretty objective.

As much as I love what you wrote here, I don't want you to take a bullet for me. You're right that I'm not an Obama cheerleader. I love the guy but I've posted in detail where I disagree with him. But I have to admit that I'm not exactly objective. I try to be on a lot of issues but I openly and proudly admit that I am first and foremost a liberal. In fact most of my issues with Obama stem from the fact that he isn't liberal enough.

Romney is running a terrible campaign (the worst of any nominee since Dukakis) and deserves to lose. Obama has been a terrible president and also deserves to lose.

Romney was never my choice to be the nominee. Huntsman was. However, what pisses me off is this phony love affair that partisan Democrats have with the man (as it was the same type of phony love affair the Democrats had with McCain prior to 2007). Aside from the facts that he worked for Obama, and that he is not a partisan flame thrower, there is nothing in Huntsman's background to indicate a groundswell of liberal support for his presidential bid. Apart from civil unions, there is not a single issue I can think of where Huntsman is to the left of Romney; on some issues--such as guns and abortion--he has always been further to the right than Romney. (And the pro-gun control, pro-choice Giuliani was savaged by Democrats, so I can't imagine why they would take somebody who is considerably more conservative than him.) And like Romney, Huntsman is "filthy-rich" and part of the "cult" of Mormonism, but--in contrast to the former Massachusetts governor--he became the head of a big business solely because he inherited it from daddy. (Romney at least attained his position at Bain Capital without family connections, and gave away his inheritance to BYU.)

There's no doubt that the GOP would be in better shape right now if Huntsman was the nominee. But, he would still face a big charisma deficit compared to the president, and he also is/was not an aggressive campaigner. More problematic is the fact that the Obama machine would be hammering him for being a super-wealthy one-percenter (anybody would be delusional to believe otherwise), who headed a company that did a large amount of business with China. (These criticisms were never waged against Huntsman because he was never a serious threat to get the nomination, but if he had been, you can bet the Democrats would turn on him on a dime. Just as in 2000, when McCain was far behind Bush, every liberal and his mother praised the Arizona Senator, yet the living s#it was kicked out of him eight years later when he had a real chance at the White House.) If Huntsman actually was the GOP nominee, I could imagine Jane and Wales (who aren't nearly as partisan as the rest of the Obama supporters here) considering voting for him. However, it is a total fairy tale for me to believe that the die-hard liberals here would honestly vote for Huntsman over Obama, especially after tons of negative advertising that would have drilled home the point that Huntsman is a conservative.

I don't know if Democrats or liberals really love Huntsman, but he was unique in the Republican field and in the party in general. Although as you noted in his positions he is fairly in line with the Republican party, it was his demeanor and his tone that many liked. He seems less overtly partisan in a time of hyper partisanship. When so many Republicans were all but declaring Obama evil, Huntsman agreed to work for Obama. That earned major points in many people's books.

I don't know if Democrats or liberals really love Huntsman, but he was unique in the Republican field and in the party in general.

Speaking only for myself, I really like Jon Huntsman. I disagree with him on a million things but I respect him and if he were in a public office, even though I would consider it a loss for my "side," I wouldn't consider it a loss for the country. I looks at Huntsman and see a good citizen. He believes in science and service and reaching across the aisle and all those things that are vilified these days.

I don't feel like Jon Huntsman "hates" me on principle. I think Mitt Romney does.

Edited September 13, 201213 yr by marceline

John Edwards - This one actually breaks my rule but I need to cop to the truth. I hate him for what he did to his wife and family. I believed in him once because what he said about two Americas was SO true. I can't describe how betrayed I felt by him. When I think "sociopath" I don't think Mitt Romney, I think John Edwards.

After following John Edwards' trial, I am convinced that there is something mentally wrong with him. I think that it is more than justifiable to consider him a sociopath.

Max I thought you were above this.

Why? What about his irrational rants, use of ridiculous nicknames for the President, and his occasional euphemisms about race and ethnicity makes you and others think that Max was "different" or "above this?"

Edited September 13, 201213 yr by Ann_SS

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hn0CAD1Pyfk

I said before I thought Obama won over Hillary because of his race. That doesn't mean I am racist, that means I think society hates women more than they hate black men. He had no qualifications to be president and nothing in his résumé. People voted for him anyway. Such is the way of the world.

About Clinton, I don't blame him for lying under oath. They had no business asking him if he cheated on his wife. What's he supposed to do, admit to it? No cheater admits to it and it is routine to lie about it. And this is just my theory: Hillary is a lesbian, she has known about all his affairs and just doesn't care as long as she isn't embarassed. Clinton was president and it was not like he could go to singles bars. Cut the guy a break!

The personal animosity toward Max in this thread is uncalled for. Yeah he calls Obama "Barry" and "Obummer", but I go to Crooks and Liars and they call Romney "Mittens". It's harmless contempt.

Ah, the warmongers emerge. Always ready to send other people's children off to war to be killed and maimed and do the same to others in a drop of a hat. Anything to waste lives and make profit for their allies in the military industrial complex.

Here is a tip to the warmongers: Netanyahu is doing a favor to support his friends, Sheldon Adelson and Mitt Romney, but he is NOT the President of the United States. He does not get to dictate when he meets with the President or the foreign policy of the United States. If Netanyahu wants to bomb Iran, I don't see what is stopping him. But I think that his government and our supposed allied Arab governments have killed and/or contributed to the deaths of enough Americans to last a lifetime.

Like when 14 of the hijackers on 9/11 were Saudis and somehow Iraq that was the real problem.

Well said. It's ridiculous how necons always make Iran out to be the bad guy when the biggest sources of conflict in the Middle East are Israel and Saudi Arabia.

The personal animosity toward Max in this thread is uncalled for. Yeah he calls Obama "Barry" and "Obummer", but I go to Crooks and Liars and they call Romney "Mittens". It's harmless contempt.

Thank you so much for defending me, Qfan. You have always been such a class act.

Some people here have been nasty to me, but Marceline was not one of them. I took her criticism of Romney and personalized it, and then made a very nasty remark. That is totally unforgivable.

I have been getting more temperamental over this election recently, perhaps as a result of my employment situation. If there is any silver lining to the likely Obama victory, it is that the lives of many gay folks here would be much better with a Democratic president instead of a Republican one. In the rare event Romney wins, I could totally relate to the despair they would be feeling.

It is probably for the best that I no longer participate in this thread (or at SON at all) for quite some time, as to prevent my emotions from getting the better of me again.