• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

House passes resolution criticizing Wilson

So then he didn't commit perjury. Once again being as the lewinsky affair was deemed immaterial to the case his lie was a lie under oath and not perjury. The lie under oath was what got him the contempt.

As I say, that would have been a matter for trial.
 
As I say, that would have been a matter for trial.

if Judge Wright thought he committed perjury there would have been action taken. Even with it being a civil case. Once again there was no perjury contrary to what people have claimed.

Don't you think there's a reason there's no mention of perjury in her contempt citation
 
Last edited:
Don't you think there's a reason there's no mention of perjury in her contempt citation

I already told you -- it's outside the scope of a contempt ruling.
 
Don't you think there's a reason there's no mention of perjury in her contempt citation

I already told you -- it's outside the scope of a contempt ruling.
 
Oh so he's for paying more money in emergency coverage than some non-existent plan to give illegals healthcare coverage gotcha makes so much more sense now
Who will vote to deny emergency treatment? Hmmmm, you?
 
if Judge Wright thought he committed perjury there would have been action taken. Even with it being a civil case. Once again there was no perjury contrary to what people have claimed.

Don't you think there's a reason there's no mention of perjury in her contempt citation
I don't know, could there possibly be any political considerations in charging the President of the United States with purjury? Were there preconditions in his testimony? Gee I don't know. :roll:
 
What is really criminal is these retards waste time and our money on a useless resolution when they should be doing important things like running our country.

*snicker* Yeah. Stuff like this is soooo much more important...

S.1435 - Human-Animal Hybrid Prohibition Act of 2009

Introduced by Sam Brownback (R) Kansas

Official Summary

Human-Animal Hybrid Prohibition Act of 2009 - Amends the federal criminal code to prohibit and to set penalties for:
(1) creating or attempting to create a human-animal hybrid (a being with human and non-human tissue as specified in this Act);
(2) transferring or attempting to transfer a human embryo into a non-human womb, or a non-human embryo into a human womb; or
(3) transporting or receiving for any purpose a human-animal hybrid.


Note: Found ^that^ gem while searching for this gem, the Kansas City Animal Health Corridor bill, which was voted on the same day as the Wilson censure vote.


Animal health bill passes after some debate
by Ken Newton
Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Few things happen easily in Congress these days, and a resolution mentioning St. Joseph generated a brisk discussion in the U.S. House on Tuesday.

The bill was intended to recognize a Kansas City Animal Health Corridor, a zone between Columbia, Mo., and Manhattan, Kan., critical to research in veterinary care. Because of the presence of animal pharmaceutical concerns, St. Joseph got a specific mention.

The measure passed Tuesday evening by a vote of 312 to 108, a curiously divided outcome for a bill originally placed among non-controversial suspension items destined for quick passage.

Instead, the matter required a voice vote, though having no trouble reaching the two-thirds majority needed for a bill considered with rules suspended.

The resolution would, among other things, recognize "the Kansas City Animal Health Corridor as the national center of the animal health industry based on the unmatched concentration of animal health and nutrition businesses and educational and research assets."

Now, I like animals probably more than the next guy, but please. Is recognizing a geographical region as the national center of the animal health industry that "important?" Really?
 
I looked everywhere & I can't find a definition of Adultery that says any "Inappropriate Act" or anything that was "Wrong"

Have a link?


Legal Definition of Adultery
Voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and another person who is not their married spouse. ... Adultery: Voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and another person who is not their married spouse. In most countries, adultery is a legal ground for divorce (the other being, generally, cruelty).
254k - 36 sec @ 56k
Legal Definition of Adultery



Again you are trying to play a game of semantics. It is getting old.

If your daughter was sucking some guys shlong, would you consider that adultery if it was not her husband? If you went to court to divorce your wife for sucking some other mans ****, it would be given on the grounds of adultery.

I notice you left this part out of the definition you listed...

"The legal definition of adultery has preoccupied Courts for as long as there has been the concept of marriage."

I also found this...

"In the traditional English common law, adultery was a felony. Although the legal definition of "adultery" differs in nearly every legal system, the common theme is sexual relations outside of marriage, in one form or another." - [ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adultery[/ame]

You are trying to skirt around the spirit of the law and ignore it on semantic grounds. It would not stand in a US court of law.
 
Last edited:
Now, I like animals probably more than the next guy, but please. Is recognizing a geographical region as the national center of the animal health industry that "important?" Really?

From a financial standpoint for the state? Yes it is.

Any good publicity for a state generates income in one form or another. Being known as the center of the animal health industry is a good thing. Sort of like silicon vally or wine country for CA etc. It attracts investors etc.
 
If I claim something is a FACT I either provide a link or stand ready to provide one if asked.
When someone demands I prove my opinion...I just laugh.

Claimed FACTS need proof ........ OPINIONS don't.


Examples:

Claimed Fact requiring proof:
Pearl Harbor was attacked on 12/7/1941 (I should provide links to prove that claim if asked)

Opinion requiring no proof:
I like chocolate ice cream better than vanilla.




See the difference?;)

I know all that.

It does not change the facts of my post.

Your comments past and present are indeed hypocritical and it has been proved using your own posts time and time again. You have made many "claims" and did not back them up even when asked.

You could lie and deny it, but that would make it even worse.
 
I don't know, could there possibly be any political considerations in charging the President of the United States with purjury? Were there preconditions in his testimony? Gee I don't know. :roll:

Well could there have been possibly any political considerations for putting a sitting president through a civil trial which was unheard of before?
 
Why is this thread still going?

It didn't work... Most Americans still thinks the Obama health care plan sux. You all will just have to manufacture another outrage to try and distract the American public.

.
 
Well could there have been possibly any political considerations for putting a sitting president through a civil trial which was unheard of before?
Because a grand jury required it?
 
From a financial standpoint for the state? Yes it is.

Any good publicity for a state generates income in one form or another. Being known as the center of the animal health industry is a good thing. Sort of like silicon vally or wine country for CA etc. It attracts investors etc.

We're not talking about the financial woes of a region (not a "state"). The issue, as introduced by rudedog, is that Congress should be doing "important things like running our country," instead of censuring Wilson for violating the rules of Congress.

What is really criminal is these retards waste time and our money on a useless resolution when they should be doing important things like running our country.

You seem to believe that, as far as properly utilizing "our time and money" is concerned, recognizing a geographical region as having a surplus of veterinary services is at least on par with ensuring that our government officials act with integrity and decorum.

I disagree. And I seriously doubt that this bill will create an influx of tourist visits to the many veterinarian offices in the region.

Tell me, what do you think of the animal-hybridization act introduced by Sam Brownback? Is that more or less important than ensuring that our government officials act like reasonable, mature, responsible adults in the commission of their duties?
 
Last edited:
I looked everywhere & I can't find a definition of Adultery that says any "Inappropriate Act" or anything that was "Wrong"

Have a link?


Legal Definition of Adultery
Voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and another person who is not their married spouse. ... Adultery: Voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and another person who is not their married spouse. In most countries, adultery is a legal ground for divorce (the other being, generally, cruelty).
254k - 36 sec @ 56k
Legal Definition of Adultery



Again you are trying to play a game of semantics. It is getting old.

If your daughter was sucking some guys shlong, would you consider that adultery if it was not her husband? If you went to court to divorce your wife for sucking some other mans ****, it would be given on the grounds of adultery.

I notice you left this part out of the definition you listed...

"The legal definition of adultery has preoccupied Courts for as long as there has been the concept of marriage."

I also found this...

"In the traditional English common law, adultery was a felony. Although the legal definition of "adultery" differs in nearly every legal system, the common theme is sexual relations outside of marriage, in one form or another." - Adultery - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You are trying to skirt around the spirit of the law and ignore it on semantic grounds. It would not stand in a US court of law.

Adultery requires sexual intercourse....A BJ is NOT sexual intercourse by any definition.

It is YOU that is "trying to play a game of semantics".....& you are quite right when you say.." It is getting old."
 
Adultery requires sexual intercourse....A BJ is NOT sexual intercourse by any definition.

In fairness the definition is given as:

* Main Entry: sexual intercourse
* Function: noun
* Date: 1799

1 : heterosexual intercourse involving penetration of the vagina by the penis : coitus
2 : intercourse (as anal or oral intercourse) that does not involve penetration of the vagina by the penis

So Oral sex, is still sexual intercourse. I mean, they don't call it oral SEX for nothing ;)
 
We're not talking about the financial woes of a region (not a "state"). The issue, as introduced by rudedog, is that Congress should be doing "important things like running our country," instead of censuring Wilson for violating the rules of Congress.

No kidding. That comment has nothing to do with my reply to your statement.

You seem to believe that, as far as properly utilizing "our time and money" is concerned, recognizing a geographical region as having a surplus of veterinary services is at least on par with ensuring that our government officials act with integrity and decorum.

I disagree. And I seriously doubt that this bill will create an influx of tourist visits to the many veterinarian offices in the region.

Do you have any proof that it will not? We know for a fact other regions have been affected positively by being recognized as industry centers.

You are over simplifying the argument and comparing apples and oranges.

Tell me, what do you think of the animal-hybridization act introduced by Sam Brownback? Is that more or less important than ensuring that our government officials act like reasonable, mature, responsible adults in the commission of their duties?

:roll:
 
Adultery requires sexual intercourse....A BJ is NOT sexual intercourse by any definition.

It is YOU that is "trying to play a game of semantics".....& you are quite right when you say.." It is getting old."

Well I think the Next Extra pretty much blew what was left of your argument away.

And you have certainly proved it is getting old. :lol:
 
Do you have any proof that it will not?

It is impossible to prove a negative.

Clearly, I'm wasting my time if you're so uninformed about debate that you don't know one of the most basic tenets of the activity.

As for your refusal to answer my question about the "importance" of the animal-human hybridization bill...

Well, I think my work here is done. :2wave:
 
In fairness the definition is given as:



So Oral sex, is still sexual intercourse. I mean, they don't call it oral SEX for nothing ;)


I have never seen that definition of sexual intercourse, nor do I think most people would define oral sex as sexual intercourse.

In either case, I will accept the (linked to) definition as real & will concede the point to Harshaw.

Harshaw had the integrity to concede a point to me a while back....so I am hereby returning the favor.:)
 
It is impossible to prove a negative.

Clearly, I'm wasting my time if you're so uninformed about debate that you don't know one of the most basic tenets of the activity.

As for your refusal to answer my question about the "importance" of the animal-human hybridization bill...

Well, I think my work here is done. :2wave:

You can't prove a negative, but you must have proof of it failing in other places if you feel this way? I can show it has been a success in other places. So this begs the question: Why do you think it will fail??? :2wave:

As for your other question about the "animal-human hybridization bill" it has nothing to do with my remarks at all. :doh

So until you can explain why "recognizing a geographical region as having a surplus of veterinary services" (among other things) will out of hand fail financially when it has worked countless times before, and how this makes it comparable to waisting time on bvll**** like the censuring.
 
I have never seen that definition of sexual intercourse, nor do I think most people would define oral sex as sexual intercourse.

That is not true. Most people think it is adultery as does the US court system.

In either case, I will accept the (linked to) definition as real & will concede the point to Harshaw.

:roll:

Like you had a choice.

Harshaw had the integrity to concede a point to me a while back....so I am hereby returning the favor.:)

:doh
 
Well I think the Next Extra pretty much blew what was left of your argument away.

And you have certainly proved it is getting old. :lol:

Based upon the (linked) definition supplied by Next Extra....I hereby concede the point to Harshaw.
You were right & I was wrong. (man....that hurt!!):sick:
 
Last edited:
As for your other question about the "animal-human hybridization bill" it has nothing to do with my remarks at all.

Never said it did. I brought up the republican-sponsored animal-human hybridization bill because I consider it to be a colossal waste of time and money (i.e., the concept originally posited by rudedog, which we are now discussing).

If you believe it's NOT a waste of time and money, please do elaborate. We're all ears.

So until you can explain why "recognizing a geographical region as having a surplus of veterinary services" (among other things) will out of hand fail financially when it has worked countless times before, and how this makes it comparable to waisting time on bvll**** like the censuring.

Umm? Where did I say or imply that this animal health corridor designation will "out of hand fail financially?"

I recommend you reread my statement:

And I seriously doubt that this bill will create an influx of tourist visits to the many veterinarian offices in the region.

Then think about it a bit more, before wandering even further into Ignorant Debater Land.
 
Back
Top Bottom