Quote:
|
Mav Dog, if you are certain that the rumors aren't true because Kerry's wife would have killed him by now, then why do you worry with creating a specious semantical argument on the definition of "vows"?
|
Worry? what, me worry?
The point is that if a married couple decide they want to have an open marriage where they give each other liberty to have sexual relations with others, they are not "cheating" nor are they violating the "vows" to each other. Remember, NO ONE has been shown to have had extra marital relations...or had you forgot?
Quote:
|
You sound like Clinton and his definition of "sexual relations". Its seems that you are crafting your argument to fit what ever scenario ends up being true, because you are a Democrat and you hate the Republicans.
|
No, my argument is that the publicist such as Drudge SHOULD NOT throw out rumor as factual news. As far as your assertion of me being a Demo an "hating Republicans", it is false. I have voted for both parties during my time as a voter. I just hate sleaseballs who pretend to be journalists when they are not.
Quote:
|
I personally have no allegiance to either party, and I also don't necessarily believe that a leader must be perfect in his personal life to be an effective leader. However, I realize that some people find these things as important factors when deciding on who to vote for, so like it or not they are going to be reported.
|
When there is actual facts to support a story let er rip. To use a rumor as a foil against a candidate is unethical. If people are so narrow minded as to judge a candidate's suitability for public office by if they have a monogamous relationship with their spose, go ahead. Of course, that's part of the reason we have such poor candidates...
Quote:
|
As for Drudge and the imorality of someone passing on what they have heard from multiple sources, you can't be serious. Drudge was reporting this as a "developing "story. The reader is assumed to be intelligent enough to realize that it might be true or it might not.
|
Read the Drudge article again. The framing was not as you alude, it was portrayed as the story that will bring down Kerry's campaign. As if it were indeed fact.
Quote:
|
Stories like this come up on all news channels all day. Even when they aren't fully proven.
|
NO major news org ran with this as the truth. The true news orgs want some substantiation before running a story...this had NONE.
Quote:
|
Bush is a deserter, Halliburton is overcharging the gov, Condit killed his intern, etc....When I watch CNN, I understand that I am getting a liberal viewpoint. When I watch Fox I understand I am getting the conservative side. I don't think you are giving people enough credit to be able to figure things out for themselves
|
I am not going to give the general public that much credit for their intelligence, sorry, but the average person is very, very uninformed about the politicians and the way our government is used for their self interest.
As far as the Bush AWOL issue, my opinion is that 1) Terry MacAuliffe was wrong to bring up this issue now, as it has been looked over many times without any credibility. He acted no better than Drudge. Clark should have confronted Moore when Moore made the claim, too.
As far as Halliburton, well, just today in the Wall Street Journal, a bastion of conservatism, is an article about ANOTHER contract of theirs (food deliveries?) where overcharging has been uncovered by the GAO. That makes 3, or is that 4, times so far. This is a validated story that needs further investigation. The White House set themselves in harms way on this by not using competitive bids to award the work...now they appear culpable. Very bad form IMHO.