Re-Evaluating Newt..

[paperview]

And the pubs pushed Newt out cause he fucked up royally overplaying the impeachment.

He put all his eggs in that basket, and got poached by them.

The reps, after suffering historical mid-term losses were coming after him with pitchforks.

His tawdry little piece of 6 year adulterous flesh on the side was a more collateral damage than anything compared to the Newt massive smoke bomb his own party tossed in his face for the electoral losses he helped engineer.

 

[paperview]

Yes. The impeachment happened before he resigned.

Thanks for verifying I was correct.

Cheers!

It was started, but not completed. Do you understand how calendars work?

Do you understand what the word impeachment is?

He was LITERALLY impeached on Dec. 19, 1998. That's when the House voted. THAT was the impeachment.

It helps if you understand: Impeachment is the political term for Indictment.

Now look up indictment in your lil, book, kay?

 

[SAT2]

And the pubs pushed Newt out cause he fucked up royally overplaying the impeachment.

He put all his eggs in that basket, and got poached by them.

The reps, after suffering historical mid-term losses were coming after him with pitchforks.

His tawdry little piece of 6 year adulterous flesh on the side was a more collateral damage than anything compared to the Newt massive smoke bomb his own party tossed in his face for the electoral losses he helped engineer.

I'd have to say it was both. He did announce he was leaving office a day after those losses, but the spectacle of having a SOTH who was having an affair while the GOP attacked the President for womanizing was a bit much for them-remember Bob Livingston?

 

[SAT2]

Yes. The impeachment happened before he resigned.

Thanks for verifying I was correct.

Cheers!

It was started, but not completed. Do you understand how calendars work?

Do you understand what the word impeachment is?

He was LITERALLY impeached on Dec. 19, 1998. That's when the House voted. THAT was the impeachment.

It helps if you understand: Impeachment is the political term for Indictment.

Now look up indictment in your lil, book, kay?

Yes, I know what impeachment means. That even if the President is not removed from office, impeachment means the initial filing.

Your contribution seems to be to wave that bit of information around like a flag.

Do you want a pat on the head?

I also know that Newt was pushed out before the Senate voted on the charges, and that Newt had announced he was stepping down in November before that December event. Newt was forced out, and announced he was leaving as soon as a replacement could be appointed.

 

[paperview]

And the pubs pushed Newt out cause he fucked up royally overplaying the impeachment.

He put all his eggs in that basket, and got poached by them.

The reps, after suffering historical mid-term losses were coming after him with pitchforks.

His tawdry little piece of 6 year adulterous flesh on the side was a more collateral damage than anything compared to the Newt massive smoke bomb his own party tossed in his face for the electoral losses he helped engineer.

I'd have to say it was both. He did announce he was leaving office a day after those losses, but the spectacle of having a SOTH who was having an affair while the GOP attacked the President for womanizing was a bit much for them-remember Bob Livingston?

Oh...I remember. Remember well. As if it was yesterday.

Watching that political spectacle that happened then, under the guidance of Gingrich.

I sat that whole month with my mouth open unbelieving what the bastard republicans were pulling.

I watched it live. Every minute of it.

It took this libertarian/independent who voted for Reagan and thought Clinton up till then was a mediocre, horndog president marching down to my town hall office and changing my party affiliation to democrat - LITERALLY that week.

It disgusted me so much I had to show them how pissed I was. The republicans overplayed their hand times 10... I only just a few years ago changed it back. But there is this persons visceral response to that madness that occurred in the late 1990's.

Fucking republicans. I vowed then I'd never vote for another republican as long as I live.

 

[paperview]

It was started, but not completed. Do you understand how calendars work?

Do you understand what the word impeachment is?

He was LITERALLY impeached on Dec. 19, 1998. That's when the House voted. THAT was the impeachment.

It helps if you understand: Impeachment is the political term for Indictment.

Now look up indictment in your lil, book, kay?

Yes, I know what impeachment means. That even if the President is not removed from office, impeachment means the initial filing.

Your contribution seems to be to wave that bit of information around like a flag.

Do you want a pat on the head?

I also know that Newt was pushed out before the Senate voted on the charges, and that Newt had announced he was stepping down in November before that December event. Newt was forced out, and announced he was leaving as soon as a replacement could be appointed.

Yes. You are right.

He announced in Nov.

I was in error.

My apologies.

 

[SAT2]

That was gracious beyond what I deserved.

 

[L.K.Eder]

don't fight, babes.

we can all agree, upon careful re-evaluation, that newt was is and will remain a scumbag.

 

[SAT2]

A bloated bag of ego!

Your turn.

 

[L.K.Eder]

A bloated bag of ego!

Your turn.

president newt needs to be seated in the back of AF1.

 

[SAT2]

A bloated bag of ego!

Your turn.

president newt needs to be seated in the back of AF1.

His head doesn't look like a head, it looks like a container for a head!

[Stole that one]

 

[L.K.Eder]

A bloated bag of ego!

Your turn.

president newt needs to be seated in the back of AF1.

His head doesn't look like a head, it looks like a container for a head!

[Stole that one]

stealing is unethical, right up noots alley.

newt, delay, norquist.


hahahaha

 

[SAT2]

president newt needs to be seated in the back of AF1.

His head doesn't look like a head, it looks like a container for a head!

[Stole that one]

stealing is unethical, right up noots alley.

newt, delay, norquist.


hahahaha

Jon Stewart said it about Ted Kennedy. But it works for Newt, too!

 

[L.K.Eder]

His head doesn't look like a head, it looks like a container for a head!

[Stole that one]

stealing is unethical, right up noots alley.

newt, delay, norquist.


hahahaha

Jon Stewart said it about Ted Kennedy. But it works for Newt, too!

it looks like he needs to be newtered after all.

and after all that training in lobbying he still sucks at pr.

 

[SAT2]

Newtered.

 

[JoeB131]

No. You aren't. You were making a cost comparison, but when I pointed out public schools are providing more services than parochial schools, you went off into a whine about your disapproval of those services. I'm pointing out that you need to compare apples to apples. If you can't do that, then you're not being analytical.

But you see, that's the problem. They are providing services that do not add to the value of the final product.

Again, you are not being analytical. The value of the services is a separate issue, an issue worth discussing, but you were making a point about the per pupil costs. I hope, at this point, that you can see the problem with your comparison.

It's being perfectally analytical. The Parochial Schools spend less per student than the Public schools and get better results. So the analysis becomes "What are they doing right?"

Not wasting money on things that don't matter to the finished product.

The finished product being a High School graduate who is prepared to go on to college or the work force.

 

[SAT2]

But you see, that's the problem. They are providing services that do not add to the value of the final product.

Again, you are not being analytical. The value of the services is a separate issue, an issue worth discussing, but you were making a point about the per pupil costs. I hope, at this point, that you can see the problem with your comparison.

It's being perfectally analytical. The Parochial Schools spend less per student than the Public schools and get better results. So the analysis becomes "What are they doing right?"

Not wasting money on things that don't matter to the finished product.

The finished product being a High School graduate who is prepared to go on to college or the work force.

It's being anti-analytical. The Catholic schools don't have the same expenses. You admitted that earlier, finally, when you couldn't avoid it any longer.

 

[JoeB131]

It's being anti-analytical. The Catholic schools don't have the same expenses. You admitted that earlier, finally, when you couldn't avoid it any longer.

I admitted they don't piss away money on bullshit. I'm sorry you can't get your arms around the concept.

I think I'm starting to understand the Solyndra screwup better, though.

 

[SAT2]

It's being anti-analytical. The Catholic schools don't have the same expenses. You admitted that earlier, finally, when you couldn't avoid it any longer.

I admitted they don't piss away money on bullshit. I'm sorry you can't get your arms around the concept.

I think I'm starting to understand the Solyndra screwup better, though.

You admitted that the school wasn't charged rent. Remember?

 

[JoeB131]

It's being anti-analytical. The Catholic schools don't have the same expenses. You admitted that earlier, finally, when you couldn't avoid it any longer.

I admitted they don't piss away money on bullshit. I'm sorry you can't get your arms around the concept.

I think I'm starting to understand the Solyndra screwup better, though.

You admitted that the school wasn't charged rent. Remember?

Noooooo, I admitted the schools are owned by the church. Just like the Pubic Schools are owned by the School district. One is paid for by tuition, the other paid for by taxes.

Man, are you like some kind of high functioning retard or something?