[Maelstrom]

Impeachment is not "punishment for crimes". It is removal from office. High crimes and misdemeanors can lead to impeachment, but we all know there have been far worse crimes committed by Presidents than the particular one Clinton was impeached for.

This tells me that you do not understand the fundamental principles of conservatism. No other president was impeached for lying under oath...because no other president was found doing so.

Why is lying under oath to the judiciary so important?
Because it is a catch-all that inoculates the President from any and all crimes he may commit.

"Genocide of millions? I didn't do it."
...and when found to be a lie...gets away with it.

There was far more damage done to the US government by failing to remove him than by impeaching him.

The "bar" wasn't lowered by insisting that the President obey one of the Fundamental Principles necessary for the Rule of Law to survive. If anything, the standards for Presidents was dramatically lowered because the man guilty of the crime walked, and was the single highest level executive in the US.

Here's a shocker for you... ...Agreeing with Rush Limbaugh does not make you a conservative. There are underlying principles that create the obverse situation...one in which Rush Limbaugh agrees with *you*. The man's said as much, but so few people listen.

Offering Arnold as a candidate isn't conservative, doesn't advance conservatism, and fails the test of pragmatism as a result.

Here's another shocker...saying the word "God" are part of a Pledge of Allegiance, or putting it on a public building dosn't establish any religion.

So yes...if you agree with the 9th Circuit court, you're simply wrong.

[DrMartinVonNostrand]

Why is lying under oath to the judiciary so important? Because it is a catch-all that inoculates the President from any and all crimes he may commit. "Genocide of millions? I didn't do it." ...and when found to be a lie...gets away with it.

Pure sophistry.
It's the genocide that is the crime in the first place.

Here's a shocker for you... ...Agreeing with Rush Limbaugh does not make you a conservative. There are underlying principles that create the obverse situation... I never claimed to be a disciple of conservativism. I have my personal views for my personal reasons, and that's that. My whole point was that I'm not even sure what being a "conservative" means. I like President Bush and in my neck of California that not only makes me a "conservative" but a bad person as well.

I live in the Bay Area, as I said before, and I can tell you from first hand experience, liberals are shrill, hateful, cynical people. Hence why defeating them at the polls and destroying their party is my main priority.

Here's another shocker...saying the word "God" are part of a Pledge of Allegiance, or putting it on a public building dosn't establish any religion.

Go and re-read the 1st Amendment. This may come as a shocker to you yourself, but it does not say "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion."
It in fact says "...the establishment of religion." See the difference?
The intent is that Congress shall not respect religion as an establishment. In other words, Congress is to REMAIN SILENT on all things religious.

Have you given any consideration to the exclusion of millions of Americans who worship multiple gods, such as hindus, or those who worship no god at all, such as Taoists, Bhuddists, and atheists? What about the native americans who worship many spirits?

This is what we call religious persecution. Plain and simple. The idea that atheists represent only 10% of the population so its ok to discriminate against them is truely unamerican. Jews are a mere 2% of the population, and blacks are only 12.7%. Such logic would surely legitimize discrimination against these 2 minorities as well.