Txdigest.com

BillB wrote:

planosteve wrote:I don't know if it's perversion or not. I don't know it it's a choice or not. But, I really don't think it's important enough politically that it is a factor. It's a very small minority.

It's a perversion.

per·ver·sion
pərˈvərZHən/
2.
sexual behavior or desire that is considered abnormal or unacceptable.

Homosexuals make up from 3% to 10% of the population.
That makes it abnormal.

sounds pretttttty intolerant to me !!

and there is no way to fix it , imagine a normal soldier complaining if something weird were to happen . His perception of weird will be laughed at and he'll be drummed out of his career choice I guess .

BillB wrote:

planosteve wrote:I don't know if it's perversion or not. I don't know it it's a choice or not. But, I really don't think it's important enough politically that it is a factor. It's a very small minority.

It's a perversion.

per·ver·sion
pərˈvərZHən/
2.
sexual behavior or desire that is considered abnormal or unacceptable.

Homosexuals make up from 3% to 10% of the population.
That makes it abnormal.

Your definition is out of date. As a society we have decided that it ISN"T abnormal. Even the Conservative SCOTUS has recognized this. And it hasn't been considered unacceptable in a long time. That trumps your definition. The stats are meaningless. Our society has made a decision on this. You are nitpicking.

Castle Doctrine wrote:...Conservative SCOTUS...

Idiot.

Why is he still our president? He should have been impeached the first time he broke the law. We are supposed to be a country of laws, but we aren't anymore. Yes, I blame the republicans for not doing it.

ann jusko wrote:Why is he still our president? He should have been impeached the first time he broke the law. We are supposed to be a country of laws, but we aren't anymore. Yes, I blame the republicans for not doing it.

Ann,
I think impeachment is a bad idea, because there are not enough Senate votes to convict him and remove him from office. It takes 67 votes and it will never happen.
Impeachment alone, without a conviction is meaningless.
It played into Clinton's hands as I predicted it would.
After the Senate failed to convict him, his polls went sky high.

Definitely not meaningless.

It the ultimate Scarlett letter for an ex President.

Andrew Jouson is remembered for one thing.

Bill Clinton will be remembered for that same one thing.

while Bill is correct about conviction republicans just want to make excuses for their lack of doing anything about anything .

GFB wrote:Definitely not meaningless.

It the ultimate Scarlett letter for an ex President.

Andrew Jouson is remembered for one thing.

Bill Clinton will be remembered for that same one thing.

Andrew Johnson- maybe but who cares? That is only because he was the first president who was impeached.
If you did a word association for Bill Clinton, you would come out with Lewinsky, not impeachment.
I believe that if it had not been for the abortive (and doomed to failure) attempt to remove Clinton from office, he may have been indicted and convicted as soon as he left office.
As it were, the popular consensus was "leave him alone- enough's enough".

The history books will not care or mention all the sluts he associated with.

Impeachment will be attached to him 100 years from now.

("Do a google search"..good grief!)

GFB wrote:The history books will not care or mention all the sluts he associated with.

Impeachment will be attached to him 100 years from now.

And the more presidents we attach it to, the less it will matter.

The framers wrote impeachment into the constitution for one reason only- to get rid of a bad president.
It wasn't for any other political reason.

And if a President gets impeached, which is essentially being brought up on criminal charges..he's a scumbag forever..removed or not.

If Republicans go into the fetal position when faced with "going against the framers"..we'll be losers forever.

Democrats don't worry about stupid stuff like that..so to compete, it's time to throw it out unless it benefits us.

plus , I have heard that defending against the 'impeachment' and conviction takes presidential time and energy . Slows down the mrobama and 'dem' agenda . I think that anything that can be thrown at him the better . Course the 'repubs' with the big brains that are plotting strategy making making the decisions would prefer to kiss azz and hide .

ralph wrote:plus , I have heard that defending against the 'impeachment' and conviction takes presidential time and energy . Slows down the mrobama and 'dem' agenda . I think that anything that can be thrown at him the better . Course the 'repubs' with the big brains that are plotting strategy making making the decisions would prefer to kiss azz and hide .

Great points

Impeachment is the ONLY constitutional remedy for a lawless president. To not impeach a lawless president is to condone the lawless behavior.

Seems like only last week we, The Nation, were all entangled with the "Dont ask, dont tell" policy....Look at us now. Pretty sad.

Mark wrote:Impeachment is the ONLY constitutional remedy for a lawless president. To not impeach a lawless president is to condone the lawless behavior.

---------------------------------------------------------- well said Mark !! Just shows the stature and character of the 'gop' repubs .