Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sprocket
Sorry for contributing to the threadjack in progress.. but... seriously how long is it gonna take before people realize that Clinton did far worse than lie about a blowjob... that little blowjob is still distracting everyone from all the corruption the clintons were involved with years after the fact. Karl Rove only wishes he could be that slick. It has been discussed over and over again, yet people continue to revert to "All clinton lied about was a blowjob yadda yadda yadda".
The most recent thread that comes to mind... http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=95533
I'm not supporting bush here, but how can we take anyones crituque of the current administration seriously when you cant honestly look at the past. |
sprocket,
This thread is a text book case for what ails this forum. Observe that one side regularly posts substandard reference material, intended to strenghten
an argument. When a thorough, well researched rebuttal is posted iin response, often discrediting the original reference, usually with multiple counter references from more credible sources, the rebuttal is often ignored, and the same, flawed, and now discredited citations are repeated again, in a followup post.
I would be happy to debate a point or several from the thread that you linked. Post what you believe are reliable references that back a given accusation about Clinton or his associates, and I will either attempt to counter with equally or more reliable reference material, or I will concede to your superior (as in better researched) argument.
What I won't do is concede to blanket, unsubstantiated, partisan talking points that masqerade as legitimate arguments. Some of us care deeply about the points we make, and exhibit a self imposed standard for what we post to back up the points we try to make. Too often, we are not even afforded the courtesy of a reply that concedes to, or challeges our postiing.
Instead, as this thread demonstrates, there is no response to our effort.Did the articles and arguments that I've attempted to rebut on this thread, rise to a level of reliability where it was better to leave them unchallenged? Maybe "better" for those who posted them, here....but in hindsight, what would that have indicated about the quality and reputation of this forum.
It is unavoidable that a "politics" forum will have passion and partisanshiip as some of it's hallmarks. I am much more troubled if there is more BS displayed here, than substance.