>>31
>if you really think the Clinton case was about perjury you're a fucking idiot.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Bill_Clinton
Hur hur hur. Facts are for fucking idiots.
You know what, believe whatever you want. This is my last word on this subject, because there is no point in trying to argue with someone who honestly accepts the most superficial and just... silly... interpretation of the facts. I don't know how you can accept the propaganda spoon-fed to simpletons through talk radio and other conservative populist mediums as the *actual motivating force* behind the American conservative movement, instead of what it really is: a simpering wail appealing to the lowest common denominator, shoring up the party of business's support in middle America in the one thing they want that the liberals are disgusted by: an absolutist moral code.
The Clinton case was about perjury. No-one forced him to commit perjury. He did it himself. Why did his political opponents jump on it? Because they're his political opponents. Why do you needlessly multiply what is really so simple to understand?
One more thing:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_Razor