Another entitlement question


Aren't the two ladies who both allege "The Slickmeister", aka Bill Clinton, both raped and assaulted them, entitled to press charges? Yet, women who allege Cosby raped them, as far back as 25 years ago, are? Talk about a double standard!!! I'm sure, as are all sane and intelligent people, Hillary would pardon him on her first day in office if(GOD FORBID)she were elected.

No votes yet

Bill Clinton isn't a Black Man, so he gets a pass.

In my book, that's just plain wrong! The women should press charges now! Or go to court and force the issue.

With a man of color such behavior is repulsive and a felony. With White men such behavior is not sexual relations.

It's on tape.
And she's sitting right beside him, too!
Here's a link:

Remember...The Donald is on his third marriage!

As they say: "Is that all you got?"

keep repeating more recent and current marital and sleazy incestuous issues with The Donald. You see, the daughter thing goes much deeper than just the implied incest. It's the fact that Ivanka was a very young adult at that time, and The Donald discards a wife after she ages a little. In fact, he only wants to be with young, attractive women, using them as eye candy. As soon as they get older, he gets a newer model, who looks like a model, or, in fact, has been a model! And The Donald even attacks a supermodel, Heidi Klum as she ages!
The Donald doesn't like strong, intelligent women who stand up to him. That's why he attacked the looks of Carly Fiorina. She had the nerve to run against him in the Republican primaries. That's why he attacks Hillary. She has the temerity to stand between The Donald and the presidency. Remember, this is the same Hillary Clinton The Donald proclaimed as being "very, very capable..." 8 years ago, when The Donald was NOT running for POTUS. Hmmm...

And, I'll bet you'd vote for The Donald over Hillary, G-MAN!
Some "family values," huh?

It's not Donald who is campaigning as if he's some savior to women. It's Hilary. That's why the Clinton sex scandals are so damaging. It doesn't need to be a win for Donald, all it needs to be is a wash and he walks away a winner.

The brilliance of Donald is he didn't even bring up any specifics. He just said if Bill is on the campaign trail his sexual exploits will be an issue. Because the liberal media just CANT STOP talking about Trump the next week and a half were filled with discussions on Bill, debates on should every rape accuser be believed, and how quick liberals are to sell out women when it comes to defending the Clintons. Trump just pushed a rock and it turned into an avalanche. And it wasn't the conservative media sources, it was all the liberal ones. Because liberals deep down know what a flawed candidate she really is.

The poll numbers have followed to zero shock from either side.


Bill Clinton was one of the best POTUS we've had and Hillary was right there with him when he made all our lives better. She'll make our lives better too instead of packing more of our money into billionaires pockets.

him. It figures.
Some family values voters, huh.

Blah blah blah is right. You could be Hilary's campaign manager they are following the same path. Just ignore the reality of the situation. Her campaign is in a downward spiral. Then again, you are the guy who told me I didn't know what I was talking about when I said Carsons campaign would be a non factor and here we are weeks away from votes being cast and he is barely a blip on the radar.


before you get it? I never said that Ben Carson would win the Republican nomination. I only said that he would be a factor. He is still running ahead of your professed favorite, Chris Christie, in almost every poll.

If you actually read and understand what I have written, I did say that no one should underestimate The Donald. The Donald appeals to the strongest of human emotions -- fear. The Donald is also a master of the media. And, you know that if he's the Republican nominee, you'll vote for him over any Democratic candidate, Mikey!

As far as Hillary is concerned, I did NOT support her in the 2008 Democratic primaries. As far as 2016 is concerned, I'll wait until it's closer to the Ohio primary date before I decide how I will vote in the primary.
If Hillary is the nominee, I will vote for her over any of the leading Republican candidates. The Republicans are all tools of the super-rich. Or, in the case of The Donald, he is ONE of the super-rich, who changes wives like he changes shirts, and spews hatred in almost every speech, including hatred of his Republican rivals!
Imagine -- The Donald has the temerity to call Ted Cruz a "nasty guy!" And stated by someone who looks in a mirror several times a day and sees a "nasty guy" looking back at him!

First Carson is not a factor. Neither is Christie. I've never professed my support to Christie. I know this because I don't make a choice until the Ohio primary. I can say I won't be voting for Cruz or Trump. But no Carson is not a factor in this election and is an also ran. If he remains in until South Carolina it would be out of desperation. He will also not be a running mate.

Lol you lambast Donsld for being super rich yet you would vote for super rich bank loving Hilary. LOL too funny

You think Trump changes wives yet he doesn't have a list of women he's taken advantage of, sexually harassed, or even raped. Lol Even funnier you defend a rapist and think women should put him back into the White House.

As far as Trump v Cruz goes, I don't care. I won't vote for either for various reasons. I find them entertaining. Especially how unhinged the liberal mainstream media gets.


did NOT vote for Hillary in the 2008 primary. I do support Hillary over the Republicans who almost universally want to further enrich the super-rich. The hypocrites are Republicans who attack Hillary for being too cozy with Wall Street, and support Republican candidates who have made laws which have done more to enrich the super-rich than any Democrat since the Great Depression! When Bernie attacks Hillary for being too close to Wall Street, at least his policies are opposed by almost all or the Republican sycophants and the super-rich they serve so well!

And, I clearly stated that if Bill is guilty of breaking criminal laws, he should be prosecuted. When the Republicans tried to remove Bill from office in 1999, why did they NOT accuse him of rape? That would have definitively met the requirement of removing a high official for a "high crime!" Hmmm...

Finally, Hillary is her own person. If Hillary is elected, Bill will be an advisor only; just as Hillary was an advisor when Bill was in office. I'm married. Trust me -- if my wife were to be elected to an office, I would not be doing her job. She wouldn't here of it! Anyone who has been married in America since World War II knows who is in charge in most marriages. Not to be overly dramatic, but I could have died 20 years ago if I had ignored the angina chest pains, as so many people do, instead of getting the proper treatments. I chose to marry an intelligent, well-educated woman so she would be independent and didn't need me to survive and thrive. And she is that and more! Just as is Hillary!

Selective reading? Where did I say you voted for Hilary? I will encourage you to look again. You are as delusional as her campaign manager is what I said

Bill's rape of Juanita Broaderick is beyond the statute of limitations. Juanita Broaderick was compelled to testify about it against her wishes. This is quite normal among women who've been raped.

Hilary is her own person. She has consistently trashed the women who've come forward about Bill's sexual misbehavior. And yes, the First Lady and in this case the First Gentlemen would have duties within the White House.

Additionally, concerning your other post. No I will not be voting for Donald Trump. In the primary or the general election. I will either vote for a third party or not at all. I do find enjoyment in how insane he's driving you liberals. But no you do not chose who I vote for. In fact, I will go on the record that my vote will be to neither Trump nor Cruz for the Presidency. Because I am a man of principles.


campaign manager." I merely pointed out that I have never voted for Hillary.

As far as your vote is concerned, I hope that you follow through in the General Election with not voting for either The Donald or Cruz, if either is the Republican nominee for POTUS. Once you do start marking your ballot, I suspect that you will vote for one of them rather than throw your vote away on a third party candidate. If you do vote third party, thank you! That will help the Democratic nominee.

The Juanita Broaddick allegation is just unproved allegation. If she were raped by Bill, she screwed up by not reporting it at the time. I cannot say if her allegation is true or not. Far too many rapes are unreported. Even though the statute of limitations was up as far as a criminal charge is concerned, the Republicans in Congress could have certainly made it part of the impeachment process. Inform me, Mikey. Which article of impeachment against Bill contained this allegation? I cannot recall.

Thank you for acknowledging that, if elected, Hillary will wield the powers of the POTUS, and Bill will be an advisor only.

She always was the brains of that combo.

above the "genius" level by most measures. Here are two different sources, both of which rate Bill's IQ as 4th among all POTUSes:

I would also point out that Bill, without any wealth or "connections," earned a Rhodes Scholarship to Oxford, and went on to attain a law degree from one of the most prestigious law schools in the world, Yale Law School.

I would further point out that, unlike the predictions by Republicans and Ross Perot in the 1990s, the Clinton Administration, not only created balanced budgets, but had America on a path to PAY OFF THE ENTIRE NATIONAL DEBT within a generation before the Republicans took control in 2001 and ruined the national budget, and eventually pushed the economy into the Great Recession!

Dale you have admitted to supporting Hilary, you admit it in this thread. I never suggest you are supporting Hilary over Bernie.

No you didn't suggest that you hadn't voted for Hilary by just pointing it out. You accused me of suggesting you voted for her and I made no such suggestion.

AGAIN, Bill could not have been charged by Congess because it was past THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. But I have no doubt you believe Cosbys accusers. I believe bothered true. When there's a pattern there's a reason for the pattern. You however seem to not think Bill is a sexual predator and would gladly have him working in the White House.

So spare me your family values attacks on Republicans. You want a known sexual predator in the White House over a guy who legally divorced two women.


Not only is he a serial marrier, he started dating the woman who would be his second wife while he was still married to his first wife! And, he would like to date his own daughter. And, while no other women have revealed either a criminal attack, or a coerced intimate relationship, it is hard to believe that a man with his massive ego and sense of entitlement has had no such relationships. I could be wrong about this. We'll see.

At last count, the Cosby accusers are up to 41! You can count on one hand the women who have accused Bill of forced or coerced relationships. Numbers do mean something. In addition, Congress does not have to follow the same criminal procedures in an impeachment trial that criminal courts must follow. If there had been strong evidence of a rape by Bill, believe me, it would have found its way into the impeachment procedures.

Spare ME the family values attacks on Democrats, who do NOT make an issue of being in a political party that purports to be the party of "family values." Is your model and the Republican model of "family values" the Trump family? Is your model of "family values" the Palin family? Is your model of "family values" the Gingrich family? And where does the Obama family fit into all of this "family values" discussion? Hmmm...
Obama was elected twice with a majority of the vote. Obama joins FDR, Eisenhower, and Reagan, as the only POTUSes to be elected twice with an actual majority of the total vote for POTUS in the past 100 years! He is the current -- Democratic -- POTUS and has not been accused of ANY sexual improprieties! He has been married to only one woman for most of his adult life. She is an accomplished professional in her own right. And SHE has never been accused of sexual improprieties! And, neither of their daughters is pregnant with no husband in sight!
And, before you bring up how young the Obama daughters are, Bristol Palin was almost the exact same age that Malia is now when she announced her first pregnancy! Bristol also revealed that she was sexually active at the age of 15, while her mother was concurrently widely broadcasting her position that teens should abstain from sex altogether!
As long as the Republican Party puts forth leaders who talk the talk, but fail to walk the walk in the family values arena, I will continue to point out their hypocrisy. And, as long as Republican voters support and vote for Republican candidates who make a mockery of the family values label, these voters are guilty of aiding and abetting this hypocrisy! It is long past time for the Republicans to just, plain stop making family values a partisan issue! True "family values" is an important issue, but it is NOT a partisan issue. And the Obama family is a shining example of a family living their lives having great family values!

Just to clarify.

Dating a woman while waiting for your divorce to be finalized = bad.

Admittedly having an affair without being honest enough to seek a divorce = ok.

Rape and multiple incidents sexual deviancy is ok if you have the right political opinions.

How'd I do?

And to answer your question, yes the rules of due process are followed in every trial even if that trial is held in the Senate.


supporting evidence, on mere hearsay, is also a criminal act, unless the person is a political figure with whom you disagree. Do I have that right?
Just to clarify.

Statute of limitations. Learn about them.


Hearsay evidence. Learn about it!

It's not hearsay if it actually happened to the person. Definitions matter.


manager," since I have not voted for her up to this point in time. As a good Democrat, I will support the Democratic nominee for POTUS -- whether that would be Hillary, Bernie, or Marty -- over any of the Republican candidates -- especially The Donald! I don't know how that qualifies me to "be Hillary's campaign manager."

I admit to being a consistent, persistent critic of the national Republican Party and all of the major Republican candidates for POTUS this year. I admit that I find no major Republican leader to be one for whom I could cast a vote for POTUS. I admit to being a partisan Democrat. By that definition, there are several millions of people who could "be Hillary's campaign manager." You, Mikey, do not admit to being a partisan Republican. I'm willing to wager that if we were both given a polygraph, it would show that the only Republican for whom I have ever voted for POTUS was John Anderson in 1980, and that you have NEVER voted for a Democratic candidate for POTUS. If I am wrong, you may choose to inform me of which Democratic candidate for POTUS you voted, Mikey.

I voted for her once!

who knows? We do know that The Donald does divorce women when they age. We do know that The Donald does enjoy discussing the physical attributes of women -- very publicly -- both in a positive and negative way. We do know that The Donald publicly stated that his own daughter is so attractive that he is attracted enough to her, that he would like to date her.

The Donald's family values are LOVED by the self-proclaimed family values Republican primary voters and caucus goers, at least much more than any of the other Republican candidates according to the polls! (BTW -- IMHO, The Donald's totals are UNDER-reported. Many more Republicans will vote for The Donald at a polling place than will admit to supporting him to a poll-taker!) The Donald openly admires the virtual dictator, Vladimir Putin, and the actual dictator/king Kim Jong Un of North Korea!

And, Mikey, you well know that even if you do not vote for The Donald in the Ohio Primary, if he is the Republican candidate against any of the current Democrats in the field, your vote will go to The Donald!

" We do know that The Donald publicly stated that his own daughter is so attractive that he is attracted enough to her, that he would like to date her.". Why do you ALWAYS leave out the end of that statement "If she weren't my daughter"?

First of all, I posted the entire segment for anyone who wants to hear and see it. Secondly, after The Donald made his statement, even he says, "Is that terrible?" It doesn't take a degree in psychology to understand what THAT means!

And, among other things, he started dating Marla Maples, wife #2, while he was still married to Ivana, (Ivanka's mother), wife #1!

A whole lot of Republican "family values" voters support The Donald!
Some family values, huh!

"entitled" than does The Donald. Look, by your standards and mine, the Clintons are rich...very rich. They aren't even in the same rich "zip code" as The Donald!
The Donald is seeking the nomination for POTUS from the political party which purports to stand for "family values." If The Donald is their standard-bearer, as it appears more and more likely every day that he will be, for what kind of "family values" will the Republican Party stand? Values of the Borgia family? And The Donald, and those who would vote for him have the temerity to bring up Bill's marital infidelity? Really?

Now, if Bill has broken the law, prosecute him. Otherwise, he has had the same wife for nearly his entire adult life. The Donald, trades them in like used limos! And how long do you really think it will be before the accusers of The Donald surface to claim HE coerced them into inappropriate adult activities? Get ready! The vast majority of entitled people have lots and lots of skeletons in their closets. And, no one feels more entitled than does The Donald! We shall see.

I wanted to see the latest breakdown I could find about how Hillary would do among African-American voters. So, I went to your favorite polling website (and mine, BTW), realclearpolitics, and I looked for such a poll. Lo and behold, there it was! And it's only a little over a week old, too. And it was provided by Fox News, as well.
Now, in the poll, it does show The Donald leading Hillary in a head-to-head contest. But I expected that. It's Fox News, after all. Anyway, on page 26 of the 32 pages of analysis, they list Hillary's support among African-Americans when facing Trump. According to this Fox News analysis, Hillary leads The Donald 89% to 4% among African-Americans. Now, I have to admit that a BIG part of this showing is how "warmly" The Donald is received by minorities in general, and African-Americans in particular. But, those numbers for Hillary are certainly Obama-like! Remember Mikey, you have been strident in proclaiming that Hillary could never even approach Obama's percentages among African-American voters. Better rethink your analysis, Mikey!
Here's the link:

Maybe, but it really depends on how many will show up at the polls.

How G-MAN of you!
89-4%. That leaves 7% to get to 100% -- DUH!
5% stated that they did NOT intend to vote! The other 2% were undecided or voting for someone else.

Exactly Gman. Dale is confusing vote share with support.

Of the two groups of Black men, which do you think will show up to the polls in greater numbers? Those who support Trump or those who support Hilary? Since, Trump supporters tend to have more enthusiasm it's not unthinkable to think that they will show up at higher rates than Hilary supporters.

Now if Blacks are a lower percentage of the vote share, which I believe will happen unless if Hilary takes a black running mate. If Blacks are a lower vote share I believe the loss on the support question will overwhelmingly come from Hilary's support side. So the less Black people vote then the more the Black Republicans votes make an impact. Republican's traditionally get around 9% of the black vote. If the Black voters don't turn out then the number of Black Republicans automatically rises as a percentage of the vote share.

For Hilary to take the White House she needs to out perform Barack's approval with Blacks, she's not, and she needs them to become a bigger percentage of the vote share. Do you think Blacks are more motivated to vote for Hilary or Obama?


Blacks like everybody else will vote for the persons they think are the best candidates.

Where did I say they wouldn't?


In previous posts you may have stated that Blacks will automatically vote for a Black candidate.

No in previous posts I showed their voting trend and they will continue that trend.

You're seeing now Hollywood shit on black actors. Maybe those actors should listen to George Clooney's speech on how Hollywood is on the right side of issues.

What Black Anerica needs to do is realize that both Democrats and Hollywood don't REALLY care about blacks when push comes to shove.

Do I think Black Americans will realize that before November? Nope.


(Republican), so African-Americans will vote in their own interests, (Democratic), too.
Secondly...Republicans keep bashing minorities and expecting a higher percentage of minority support because, why? You can't keep kicking people in the face and expect them to support you. DUH!

Do I think that, in November, African-Americans will vote for people who can't stand them?

WTF?? Obama isn't running! That said, unless she improves on her phony Mississippi dialect, she will not get as much Black support as she thinks she will.

Hillary would do against The Donald, according to a fairly recent poll done for Fox News, and available through the website realclearpolitics:
The direct percentages of African-American votes are on page 26 of 32 pages. Hillary 89%, The Donald 4%, other 1%, wouldn't vote 5%, don't know 1%.
I think that Hillary would take those numbers. And, IMHO, the longer the Republicans keep appealing to the worst in voters by bashing various group of Americans, the greater is the chance that minorities and women will turn out in high numbers to defeat whomever the Republicans nominate. Just sayin'...

Suggesting that MikeyA rethink something is like trying to get a tomato to give birth to a giraffe.

Do you still believe the Constitution says we have a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness or will you admit your wrong?


Dale, what do you think of a President who married his cousin(related by blood)?

If you are referencing FDR and Eleanor, they were 5th cousins, once removed. I know of no state in the United States where such a distant relationship, then or now, makes them ineligible to marry. The research I have seen suggests that once one gets to the level of third cousins or further away, there is little or no greater chance of having children with genetic problems than there is with those who are not related at all.

On the other hand, The Donald finds his own daughter so attractive, he has stated that he would like to date her. What's the word for that again? Oh, yeah! Incest! GREAT family values!

research. As I stated originally, and as I recalled correctly as it appears, the House of Representatives and the Senate make the rules for the trials under the impeachment powers. Therefore there is no statute of limitations on what charges may be brought to be considered. Here is the citation from the Tulsa Law Review in 1998, specific to the then pending impeachment trial of Bill Clinton: "Except for the explicit requirements in the Constitution, the procedures and standards of impeachment are left first to the House of Representatives and then to the Senate.' 2 Clearly, it is inconceivable that a court would overturn any conviction and removal of a President by the Senate because of faulty procedures. 13 As one commentator noted, "[t]here are ten rules about judicial review of the judgments of the Senate on impeachments. The first rule is that the courts have, in this, no part to play. The other nine rules don't matter."'4
In simple terms, the House and the Senate make their own rules regarding impeachment. A statute of limitations would only exist if Congress wanted one to exist. I did research, I found no consideration of any rape charge by the Republican-controlled Congress against Bill Clinton. Few prosecutors would go forward with such a "he said, she said" case without corroborating evidence. Congress wanted Clinton's head on a platter. If there had been a decent case of rape to be made, it would have been part of the impeachment trial.
The bottom line is that The Donald is sleazier than Bill, as sleazy as Bill may be, and you can't stand it, Mikey! It appears ever more likely that the party that fallaciously claims the "family values" label, is a party which accepts as leaders the likes of the Trump family, the Palin family, and the Gingrich family.
Some family values, huh!

Really you had better go bone up on the rules of Impeachment

Form of oath to be administered to the Members of the
Senate and the Presiding Officer sitting in the trial of
‘‘I solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) that
in all things appertaining to the trial of the impeachment
of ——— ———, now pending, I will do impartial justice
according to the Constitution and laws: So help me God.’’

Notice the last line. They cannot circumvent the laws or constitution. Sorry, a trial of impeachment is not based upon arbitrary made up rules but rather the same laws of due process.


Constitution. I have often acknowledged your expertise on military matters and in the area of weaponry.
Others are experts in other areas. I quoted a well-researched, legal opinion. End of story.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.