Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
So what you are saying is the fact that Clinton denies the story is all the proof we need?Originally posted by: ayabe
"Insight attributed the information in its article to an unnamed source, who said it was discovered by "researchers connected to Senator Clinton." A spokesman for Clinton, who is also weighing a White House bid, denied that the campaign was the source of the Obama claim."
"Fox News executive Bill Shine told CNN "Reliable Sources" anchor Howard Kurtz that some of the network's hosts were simply expressing their opinions and repeatedly cited Insight as the source of the allegations."
CNN
Sorry Prof, it's false, "researchers connected to Senator Clinton", that's thinner than thin. It they want to add credibility they better come forth with the actual source, but they won't because that source doesn't exist. FNC does this all the time, with their "some people are saying" crap, i.e. our producers want to plant this idea.
I like that logic.
Let me think.... I could start to list the number of times one of the Clinton's has lied to the American people, but I don't want to waste bandwidth with such a long list.
You are a total FOOL if you take complete heed of a statement like that. Do you really expect the Clinton campaign to say ?yes, we did it!?
The leaking of damaging information about your opponent is one of the oldest tricks in the books.
Let?s look at just a few of the major instances of this happening:
The whole Foley scandal broke when someone who opposes him pushed the story into the media.
The Allen said the ?N? word-Webb is a pedophile stories were pushed by their opposition.
The macaca story came from a guy who was hired by the Webb camp to tape Allen's speeches in hopes of finding an error to exploit.
The whole Dukakis is weak on crime-furlough story came from the Gore camp.
The Joe Biden plagiarized a speech story came from the Dukakis camp.
Let me ask you one question: When the New York Times publishes its ?sources tell us? type articles do you immediately discount what the article says?
Because half the news that comes out of Washington is from these types of unnamed and unidentified sources.
Again you speak with absolute truth and clarity.
The term ignorance is bliss applies to those who would oppose what you are saying Prof.
In facxt those who would oppose what you are saying are most likely in denial as we speak or they are just too young to know any better. 13 yrs old is a tender age and most people who would oppose what you are saying are dealing with one problem and only one problem. That problem is how to get rid of there first zit or acne...lol
True to your rep, the weakest intellectual link on P&N. lol