quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

And there's another of your standard ploys, Ken, when you decide to make your stand anyway, on an already broken position. I put out a a very common knowledge, widely accepted, interpretation of a historical event, you call it "opinion," and claim your stupid little made up test is the new standard of reality and accuracy.

Here's a nice top 10 list of all time Presidential scandals. Three of them were on Grant's watch. He wasn't a crook, personally, but he was inattentive and ineffective, and a lousy judge of character and competency. Do feel free to google up the rankings. (You might have been better off going with Harding to counter my reference to Grant as the worst President ever. Hell, I might have given you that one. a Reagan-bash? Don't even think about it.)

quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan

Well, personally, I like politicians investigated, all of them.

Anyone who calls themselves a public servant should damn well be one and should be held accountable as one. And that point of view goes across party lines, religious lines, racial lines, in fact, every line you want to draw. I could care less about scandals or corruption in the past.

And if there is a ploy that is evidenced on both sides of this debate, it is running to the past to get away from the present.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan

Well, personally, I like politicians investigated, all of them.

Anyone who calls themselves a public servant should damn well be one and should be held accountable as one. And that point of view goes across party lines, religious lines, racial lines, in fact, every line you want to draw. I could care less about scandals or corruption in the past.

And if there is a ploy that is evidenced on both sides of this debate, it is running to the past to get away from the present.

We should have oversight and we should have reasonable audits. We've already had 6 years of the GOP trying to dig up dirt on a POTUS they didn't like.

They tried to prosecute his family and friends for losing money on a land deal and tried to remove him from office for getting a blowjob. Does anyone really think the millions of tax payer dollars spent on those investigations and prosecutions were well spent?

quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan

Well, personally, I like politicians investigated, all of them.

Anyone who calls themselves a public servant should damn well be one and should be held accountable as one. And that point of view goes across party lines, religious lines, racial lines, in fact, every line you want to draw. I could care less about scandals or corruption in the past.

And if there is a ploy that is evidenced on both sides of this debate, it is running to the past to get away from the present.

We should have oversight and we should have reasonable audits. We've already had 6 years of the GOP trying to dig up dirt on a POTUS they didn't like.

They tried to prosecute his family and friends for losing money on a land deal and tried to remove him from office for getting a blowjob. Does anyone really think the millions of tax payer dollars spent on those investigations and prosecutions were well spent?

The removal would not have been for a blow job, but for lying to Congress. I don't believe the rules state anywhere that having one's dick sucked is an impeachable offense. Having said that, I found those investigations as much a waste of time and resources as anyone, primarily because the subject of most of it was invasion into a personal situation.

Beyond that, I have no issue with politicians being investigated nor being held accountable.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Google is your friend. Turnout proportion increased from about 11% of total to about 13% of total votes and their Dem vote was 95% compared to 88% in 2004.

Question. Since voting is by secret ballot, how do you know the figures you have are accurate to begin with?