I'm reasonably certain part of the story was that the Clinton impeachment scared Democrats into making a tacit agreement with Republicans: Don't go after our crimes, we won't go after yours. And because there is no other party with any real power, the result is that both Democratic and Republican presidents can commit crimes with impunity.
While I think the agreement you mention is likely true, I think that getting your dick sucked in the oval office is a notably less heinous of a crime than what occurred during Watergate, and I don't really think the two can be compared.
He went to Gawker and leaked the information that he gained, victimizing all of those people in the process. Just because someone leaves a door unlocked or open does not give you the right to go in and steal stuff and this is no different.
A door being unlocked doesn't obligate you to inform the owner of the door, nor does is there any reason you can't tell someone else about it.
It is *beyond* stupid to swear at a federal judge and call her a "mean bitch" when she is the one that is sentencing you.
I think that, like with police officers, it is up to a judge to be the "bigger man" and realize that although it is rude, being a dick isn't something someone should get jail time for.
It is *beyond* stupid to go on a public forum and post that you intent to commit the same crimes again once you get out of prison.
It is stupid, but if the "crimes" that landed him in jail should not have lead him to be serving jail time to begin with, I think he has reason to make a big, public hub bub about it. The guy is an asshole, but I don't want any dangerous precedents being set just so he gets punished. Besides, there is nothing to gain from him being in jail.
His entire life has been dedicated to griefing people and generally being an asshole and yeah, the judge is going to look at that.
Maybe we should go ahead and throw Kanye West in jail the next time he getting a moving violation? I mean, the guy is generally an asshole.
Especially if people keep supporting inefficient land usage, such as ethanol production and "organic" farming.
Personally I don't care that organic food is organic, but I do think it tastes better due to not having been shipped for a week and a half from a country on a different continent.
I get your point, but I think you romanticize it too much. It's not like they are going over a trench in WW1 to save the man beside them, knowing for a fact that, short of some miracle, they will die. Astronaut death rate is only about 7.5% (34 deaths per 450 visitors to space)-- and I imagine it is only getting safer. They become astronauts because the thought of going into space is sweet, it pays lots of money, gives you lots of glory, and in some case, lots of fame. Astronauts compete with many other men to be one of the few to make it into space -- It's not like they do it because "Someone has to do it! And I will do it for humanity!" or something like that. You make it seem as though they are doing something that everyone else is too scared too do. No, they actually competed and won the opportunity into travel into space.
Maybe, a few of them hold the attitude of doing the job as a dangerous and selfless act for the good of humanity, but they are few and far between. Most of them as kids watched the first man step on the moon and spent the rest of their lives wanting to follow in his footsteps (no pun intended). I don't think the dangers are really part of their consideration -- just excitement and the prospect of a childhood dream and once-in a lifetime experience being fulfilled.
If the tax returns are fake, then they don't influence the election. If they are real, they only influence the election by giving voters more information on which to vote. I don't really see the problem here, or why is necessitates a different response than when the same thing happens to Joe Schmoe. My two cents.
In my opinion, the dumbest thing that has happened in this thread thus far is someone comparing this (a third party claiming they hacked Romney's tax returns off of a laptop) to Watergate (The president and the republican party breaking and entering into the other Democratic party's HQ). They are a bit different.
Why do folks live there? Schools. To have their kids go to a better school.
Otherwise stated as "schools without any blacks or hispanics".
No, otherwise stated as "schools located in areas that have a large [property tax]:[population] ratio. You can try to make this a racial thing, but in reality it's a monetary thing. It just so happens that in the US if you are poor you are more likely to be non-white. Many of he problems people associate with non-white people in the US are actually problems associated with poverty.
Money for schools comes primarily from property taxes. If you have big, expensive houses with big yards, and a relatively low population, the schools in the area are going to have plenty of funding. If you pack tons of people on welfare into the same area, guess what? There isn't going to be money to adequately fund schools in the area.
As a person who has played competitive Counter-Strike (the original, not the Source remake) for about ten yen years, i have to laugh every time I read something like, "either to win in a dirty way (campers)." I wasn't aware that "camping" was dirty play? So because when YOU'RE running around the map and YOU are too lazy to check corners and YOU assume no one is there, I am somehow a "dirty" player? Laughable. It's the same response I have to people who complain about the AWP (sniper rifle). It's part of the game, if you don't like it choose a different genre or server. The sniper isn't "unbalanced" just because you as an individual are too inexperienced of a player to know how to tactically deal with. That's part of getting better at the game.
You might as well say, "I like Chess, but I get annoyed by dirty players who use their bishops to infiltrate my front line and check mate me in 15 moves." You're less skilled so you complain about the tactics being used to kill you.
If you're walking in a US neighborhood that a patrolling police officer thinks you look out of place in, he will stop and talk to you and he will likely demand identification. If you really want to you can try to explain to the officer why you don't need to, but you're most likely going to get into a drawn out argument with a police officer. this is how 'Merica works.
"You don't need papers," my ass.