You know your country is fucked when
 

Your last President gets impeached for getting laid and your current President is allowed to fuck up the entire countrys economy while simultaneously getting the entire world to hate you. Nice. :mad:

Life is very strange.

clinton was not impeached

In the modern understanding of the word "impeached", he most certainly was.

It was for telling lies to Congress though, and not getting laid. :2 cents:

Yeah, but the shitstorm was caused by the fact that he got his noodle wet.

Indeed. Still, he could have gotten laid, told the truth, and probably been okay. Can't say I blame him for his choice though. It is kind of a silly thing for Congress to be investigating.

yes he was.

Very true, but with all these religious wackos we have in this country things might not have turned out all that differently.

its a sad sad situation

did clinton finish his term in office?...if he did then he was not impeached

The question you seem to be posing is, are we as a nation better off now under the Republican Bush Jr. administration, or were things better off under the Democratic Clinton administration?

No contest...unless you approve of the largest decrease in jobs under any Presidency, record tax cuts that almost exclusively favor the wealthiest, record deficits, decreased stability in the world, and the international erosion of U.S. leadership and prestige.

If anyone in the adult industry believes for a moment that they have a friend in the White House, then you are seriously misguided.

http://servercc.oakton.edu/~billtong/bnsp/franken-w.jpg

ADG Webmaster

How about you go learn what "impeach" means and then come back, that way you won't continue to make an ass of yourself. :2 cents:

impeach means to be forced out of office due to a vote..i need not look it up...

You're an idiot. Please, do us all a favor and look it up, then come back and tell us what you've learned. Here, I'll even help you, just click here.

just to make sure i did look it up and there are multiple of correct usages for the word one of which is mine so we're prolly both right..

No, we're not probably both right. I am right. You are wrong.

she agrees

http://www.ananova.com/images/web/84975.jpg

im reading it out of weabsters dictionary... impeach 1:to charge(a public official) before an authorized tribunal with misconduct in office 2: to challange creditibility or validity of
3: to remove from public office for misconduct...

im·peach ( P ) Pronunciation Key (m-pch)
tr.v. im·peached, im·peach·ing, im·peach·es

To make an accusation against.
To charge (a public official) with improper conduct in office before a proper tribunal.
To challenge the validity of; try to discredit: impeach a witness's credibility.

websters dictionary

Listen, you're clearly wrong, maybe you haven't been around GFY for long enough, but you're not fooling anyone here by trying to make justifications. It doesn't matter, now you know what impeachment means. You don't have to admit that you were wrong, but it would probably gain you some respect. :2 cents:

http://www.henkelsandmccoy.com/corpo...p-lewinsky.jpg

Bad lapse of judgement by Bill...

...but Dubya has seriously fucked up our country and is attacking our industry.

Let's deal with the current problem...

ADG Webmaster

We weren't arguing about what it means, we were arguing over the fact that you said he wasn't impeached. Seriously, you're not going to get one over on me, I guarantee it, you might as well give up now, you're only making yourself look bad. :2 cents:

From an American Legal Dictionary:
impeach
v. 1) to discredit the testimony of a witness by proving that he/she has not told the truth or has been inconsistent, by introducing contrary evidence, including statements made outside of the courtroom in depositions or in statements of the witness heard by another. 2) to charge a public official with a public crime for which the punishment is removal from office. One President, Andrew Johnson in 1868, was charged with violation of federal laws in a politically motivated impeachment, but was acquitted by the margin of one vote in a trial held by the Senate. President Richard Nixon resigned in 1974 rather than face impending impeachment charges brought by the House of Representatives in the Watergate affair, in which he was accused of obstructing the investigation and lying to Congress about his participation. Several federal judges have been impeached and nine have been found guilty by the Senate.
http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?selected=900&bold=impeach||

Game, set, match. :)

Wrong quote? I'm agreeing with you. :warning

i like peaches.

My mistake, I didn't take time to read who posted it. Sorry. :)

unless you get the websters dictionary then i cannot convince you. I will leave it there and leave the trash talk to you...

William Jefferson Clinton has become only the second president in the history of the United States to be impeached.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/events/cl...ews/238784.stm

No one was trash talking. Several people here told you that you were wrong yet you continued to tell us we were wrong. I hate being an asshole, but what I hate worse is someone trying to undermine my intelligence.

:thumbsup

Bill Clinton was impeached as President of the United States on December 19, 1998 by the House of Representatives. The charges were perjury and obstruction of justice arising from the Lewinsky scandal. The Senate acquitted Clinton on both counts in a trial concluding on February 12, 1999.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeach...f_Bill_Clinton

honestly i am confused....the way im reading it is correct in my point of view, the deffinitions are real and i am reading them from websters(the ones i gave)..and if they are real which they are then i see it as we are both right mabye i am missing something in the debate...as you pointed out i am new so the last thing i want to do is tangle with possible employers or piss off someone who could help me...so i wouldn't make up shit..

Just admit that you're wrong so we can all forgive you and move on.

and i forgot to say i can say you are a lil more right than me cause two of the deffs i gave went your way so yes he was impeached but im still 1/3 right

If you still think that you're 1/3 right then you're still 1/3 wrong. Admit that you were wrong, theres no shame in that.

i would be 2/3 wrong by the math but thats another debate

:1orglaugh

Seriously though, you're wrong. Wrong again I should say. You admit that I was right, except you're only willing to admit that I am 2/3 right, so you've still gotta come around on the other 1/3, meaning you're still 1/3 wrong. Seriously, you won't win.

One last time, the original debate was whether or not he was impeached, not what impeachment means. I told you to look up what it meant, you did, realized that you were wrong and that he was in fact impeached, then you tried to skew it to make people think you are partially correct.

What it comes down to is that you were wrong, he was impeached. Admit that you were wrong.

i cant actually say im wrong because of the deffinitions i am reading from websters the only thing i will say is, i thought thats all it was is actually being impeached to the deffinition but when i did read it i saw that just being charged is equivelant to being impeached i agreed with you, in fact i learned a lil...so i have admitted i was wrong and did so in previous posts but im not completly wrong and you are not completly right....if you want a straight out im wrong you gotta say it at the same time..(insert chris tuckers voice)

Was he impeached, yes or no?

The thread was not about impeached/depeached/invertedpeached or any fucking peach - who cares? *lol*

Shoehorn started with a serious point - stick to it!

Good point. :)

clinton was not convicted and if u think the economy is in the crapper and bush is soley responisble for said "fucking up the economy*, then u are a bigger fukin idiot than u are making yourself out to be in this thread

Another genius. Lucky for you I am going to sleep.

Is grey a darker shade of white or is it a lighter shade of black? :)

Na... forget that - they will be jabbering on about that for days, checking webster and consulting online resources to quote bullshit about colors! :1orglaugh

Now.. back to the subject!!! :-)

i cant i still think i was right in my origional statement that no he was not impeached because he was not removed from office...which actually one of the deffinitions i found for it and if the debate is was he impeached and i said no then i was right and at no point did i say that you were wrong in the issue infact i have agreed with you the whole time but i was not wrong in my origional stament on no he was not if one of the deffinitions is as given 3)to remove from public office for misconduct, i would be right in saying he was not.....thus same time man i dont know you....if ya wanna hear it...

I am finished with you as well. Plus I think you might be Kyle Hoppes.

thanks?

dumass

:1orglaugh

My point exactly. It'll be awhile before you're able to debate with intelligent people.