Time to get Back to Basics

[johnny]

Originally posted by MagiK: quote: Originally posted by johnny: When marriage was for life ? I think that was never the case, not on this planet that is.

What rock have you been hiding under. A great many people in the world marry for life.[/QUOTE]And there's a great many people who didn't. Third rock left of the moon.

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: [*ahem* Oh, if only that were true harkenindustrieshewascaughtredhanded andsaidwealldoitsoitsokayneedisaymore. But, now that he's at the forefront of corporate policing that's all overwith godforbidwementionchaney

According to the Laws of the United States of America and the rules set down by the SEC Harken Industires is a non-issue, George W. Bush obeyed every regulation that was in force. Ever wonder why the Dems dropped that whole issue? Cause there was nothing to it...Next issue. You can accuse him all you want but he didnt do anything wrong according to the LAW. If you want to debate his Moral responsibility then we will have to find a common reference for that measure..I prefer the St. Josephs New Revised version of the Holy Bible...which moral document would you prefer to use?

This is definately one of those issues you have to discard since it is only something you read. This was brought up by a democratic party trying to find something, anything they could to try and get revenge for the impeachment of their democrat president.

By the way, what was the run on typing for?

[ 10-01-2002, 01:24 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

[Rokenn]

Originally posted by Donut: Someone who will look me in the eyes and tell me how to be a better person. Where can we find such a man - it can't be a major problem can it?

Why do you need someone else to tell you how to be a better person? If this does not come from within then it will never be true.

Originally posted by Rokenn: quote: Originally posted by Donut: Someone who will look me in the eyes and tell me how to be a better person. Where can we find such a man - it can't be a major problem can it?

Why do you need someone else to tell you how to be a better person? If this does not come from within then it will never be true.[/QUOTE]Good point Rokken [img]smile.gif[/img] But I don't think he was meaning that to be taken as a literal thing [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Attalus]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: [QB*ahem* Oh, if only that were true harkenindustrieshewascaughtredhanded andsaidwealldoitsoitsokayneedisaymore. But, now that he's at the forefront of corporate policing that's all overwith godforbidwementionchaney[/QB]

Pish, tush, the SEC investigated and didn't find anything. And what does Cheney, who didn't do anything wrong, either, BW, have to do with this? Next, you'll be bringing up something Reagen did to bas W. with.

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by Attalus: quote: Originally posted by Timber Loftis: [QB*ahem*

Pish, tush, the SEC investigated and didn't find anything. And what does Cheney, who didn't do anything wrong, either, BW, have to do with this? Next, you'll be bringing up something Reagen did to bas W. with. [/QB][/QUOTE]I'll begin by stating I think Bush has many good points, and that I write in response to one particular alleged issue.

Harken execs were on the SEC board at the time. I'm not saying it was different than the normal practice, but I think the normal practice is rather fishy. BTW, execs of the investigatees being on the board of investigators is common, so I'm not alleging illegal activity there, either. SEC findings of wrongdoing over the past decade are rather suspect these days, don't you think?

But, he did report late. And the setup was simple: he sold off tons of stock instances before the stock fell, reported the sale late, and said he sold the stock to finance another investment he needed money for. THat's a rather lame excuse. I've never known a millionaire who sold a large holding that didn't have the next investment lined up to push the money into - makes no sense tax-wise to do otherwise. Proving insider trading is rather hard to do - it's too hard to show what people *knew* and *intended*.

These may not be illegal, as MagiK pointed out, but the original On-Topic request was for a leader of high moral caliber. I'm pretty jaded on this, though, as I don't think very highly of most all politicians and I think the political system only corrupts the would-be good ones.

I ask that we not start yet another flame war about whether the President is this or that - I've stated my opinion on this issue, and we all respect each other's opinion on this forum.

Back On-Topic, if asked to pick a politician/leader based SOLELY on moral fiber, I think I'd go with Lehey from Vermont. Any other suggestions (other than the pres.)?

[magnetism]

Men were always having torrid affairs even when they did not talk about it on Oppra.

Live your life by your own rules and stay the @#$$ out of everyone elses business.

The maxim is "Cultivate your garden" not "criticize your neighbors garden."

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: quote: Originally posted by Attalus: quote: Originally posted by Timber Loftis: [QB*ahem*

Pish, tush, the SEC investigated and didn't find anything. And what does Cheney, who didn't do anything wrong, either, BW, have to do with this? Next, you'll be bringing up something Reagen did to bas W. with. [/QUOTE]I'll begin by stating I think Bush has many good points, and that I write in response to one particular alleged issue.

Harken execs were on the SEC board at the time. I'm not saying it was different than the normal practice, but I think the normal practice is rather fishy. BTW, execs of the investigatees being on the board of investigators is common, so I'm not alleging illegal activity there, either. SEC findings of wrongdoing over the past decade are rather suspect these days, don't you think?

But, he did report late. And the setup was simple: he sold off tons of stock instances before the stock fell, reported the sale late, and said he sold the stock to finance another investment he needed money for. THat's a rather lame excuse. I've never known a millionaire who sold a large holding that didn't have the next investment lined up to push the money into - makes no sense tax-wise to do otherwise. Proving insider trading is rather hard to do - it's too hard to show what people *knew* and *intended*.

According to the figures released in a story in the Washington times when this was brought up (A liberal paper at that) the stock price actually went up for several months before it fell. I do believe there was a net loss on the books for him

These may not be illegal, as MagiK pointed out, but the original On-Topic request was for a leader of high moral caliber. I'm pretty jaded on this, though, as I don't think very highly of most all politicians and I think the political system only corrupts the would-be good ones.

I ask that we not start yet another flame war about whether the President is this or that - I've stated my opinion on this issue, and we all respect each other's opinion on this forum.

Back On-Topic, if asked to pick a politician/leader based SOLELY on moral fiber, I think I'd go with Lehey from Vermont. Any other suggestions (other than the pres.)?

yeah I actually would like to say Both Wayne LaPierre and Charlton Heston both have my vote [img]smile.gif[/img] not politicians but they are leaders [img]smile.gif[/img] [/QB][/QUOTE]

[ 10-01-2002, 02:03 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by magnetism: Men were always having torrid affairs even when they did not talk about it on Oppra. Live your life by your own rules and stay the @#$$ out of everyone elses business. The maxim is "Cultivate your garden" not "criticize your neighbors garden."

I agree, especially with the second quote. Question regarding these "nuclear" family values. I know some couples where "cheating" is okay. For whatever reason, the two people are not possessive of each other in that way. I'll admit I don't comprehend it, but sometimes I wonder if maybe I'm more a slave to my insecurities than these folks. I'm talking about long relationships and marriages here where the partners simply are not hung up on the issue of monogamy. Where do these people fall on the moral scale? I certainly must say that on mine they rate a lot better than the a church-going mysogenist who, through coercion or manipulation but not physical force, keeps his wife from getting a job, going out alone, having guy friends, or simply being herself.

[magnetism]

Originally posted by Epona: quote: Originally posted by Donut: quote: Originally posted by Attalus: Actually, there is an honest, moral politician who is faithful to his wife and his ideals. You will find him at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, D.C, USA [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Good grief - I'd rather have John Major. Oh and Attalus, never believe anything or you'll end up with egg on your face! Or should that be Currie?[/QUOTE]Oh gawd, that has to be the most horrible image that has occurred to me in some years. [img]graemlins/1puke.gif[/img]

Thank you for that thought Donut.[/QUOTE]The qualities we can pin to Bush are ignorance and hipocracy.

His parents know he is a dip shit, and have said so.

Though to his credit he really wants those kids to "git edjumicated."
Daddy Bush is likly mortified each and every time his yahoo son appears on t.v.
for fear he will further sully the image of his familly.