Re: Clinton's fake apologies (fwd)

[Anonymous <nobody@nowhere.to>]

on 20 Sep 1998 at 09:52:24 Reeza! wrote:
> 
> At 09:21 PM 9/19/98 -0000, Anonymous wrote:
> >
> >What? To tell a lie is one thing, but ...[etc]

> It was prefaced with "...to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
> but the truth...".
> Straighten out your head, you seem to be a few neurons short of a
> functional synapse.
> 
> Reeza!

I understand you think this is persuasive, but I don't understand why.

and then at Sun, 20 Sep 1998 15:26:05 Reeza! wrote:
> At 03:24 AM 9/20/98 -0000, Anonymous wrote:
> >
> >I agree it's bad. I agree it undermines the justice system a little bit.
> >But, ... impeachment?
> >
> 
> I could care less if he had an affair, personally. But he had an affair
> with a subordinate in his direct employ.
[more]

> I congratulate you for your defense of a person who demonstrably has broken
> his marriage vows, his oath of public office, and purjured himself while
> under an additional oath in a court of law.

You do remember from 6 hours earlier that we're talking about lieing?  
Your raising other issues is irrelevant. You're building up the bogey man.
[Jim Choate recently described this method as a "Strawman".] 
I suggested there are things Bill's done that are worse. Are you sure you're
disagreeing?

Do you have anything worthwhile to bring to the discussion?

> You, too, are a few neurons short of a functional synapse.
> 
> I suggest you discuss it with the maker. The best way is large caliber
> bullet at sufficient velocity to penetrate and exit the cranial cavity.
> 
> God speed, you fucking idiot.
> 

I guess not.

> Reeza!

-- an anonymous aol32 user.