Actually, I was much more interested in the first part of your post, Diogenes, where you said “It’s not unusual for a man in a position of power to manipulate women into doing things they don’t want to do.”
I believe that’s true to a point. And I find it curious that you have been very forgiving of this flaw in President Clinton’s character. Even if you believe that his pursuits were all willing to be pursued, it is still an abuse of his power to do the chasing.
And yet, you seem to believe the worst about Bill O’Reilly, right off the bat. What reason is there for this, besides rank partisanship?
Your convoluted explanations about O’Reilly being the type to do this don’t hold up well. We all know many people who put on a good show for the public, but act poorly in private. I’ve seen you rail against these sort of people often.
Why should I believe your sincerity when you do so again?
I shudder to think what the “best evidence” rule would demand in that instance.
I imagine it wouldn’t involve testimony from Hillary 
Only one woman brought BC to court and the judge herself said that PJ had not been harrassed even if she was telling the truth.
Women who make accusations in front of cameras but won’t go to court do not deserve to have their accusations considered at all.
And all of the women that BC is more or less known to have knocked boots with all say that it was consensual and that he never tried to manipulate or force them.
Harrassment does not match his known pattern. Just because a guy likes pussy doesn’t mean he’s a rapist.
Missed the point entirely. I’m stunned, stunned, I tell ya’.
DtC is just being the partisan asshole that he is. He’s incapable of having a rationaly discussion about anything remotely related to someone he thinks is a Republican and/or a Bush supporter. He knows it. I hope he’s at least getting a good laugh out of his goading in this thread.
DtC: As much as I respect your opinion on scientific and historical matters, you have absolutely ZERO credibility in anything related to politics. Sad. Truely sad. 
Maybe she did get it recorded.
The conversations she listed in her complaint are pretty detailed and long.
Whoa! PotKettleBlack alert!
As well as you missed the point. Truce on this part? 
Just because I’m a partisan asshole doesn’t mean I’m wrong.
Let’s wait for the tapes. If I’m wrong, I’ll apologize.
DtC is a partisan asshole, but at least he’s an intelligent partisan asshole. You’re just an idiot.
Please don’t hold John Mace responsible for me agreeing with him, but I have to second the history/political opinion said of DtC
DtC, Take it from me, you are a knee jerker.
maybe, but I’ll still wait til there’s evidence of tapes Some folks (I"m one) can recall pretty clearly conversations after the fact (depending on situation). But again, if your boss does this once, it’d be pretty stupid to not tape subsequent conversations.
Well, after the second time anyway. If you decide that the first time’s a fluuke, you won’t get the recording equipment ready. But after the second time you could have the mic prepped.
Some of those converstations are extremely deatiled and they’re not characterized as being being paraphrases. They look like transcriptions.
I bet this woman does have tapes.
O’Reilly constant rants and threats against people who cross him sound pretty believable too.
To steal a line from 'lucy, Dear Universe, I know I haven’t been a good pantheist, but please, please, please let there be tapes.
Diogenes, come on. Have you heard O’Reilly’s radio show? Have you seen his hour TV show? Over the last 4 years? He hits Bush as hard as he does Sharpton, Coulter, Rangle, et al.
His interview with Bush was what journalism is supposed to be. He threw out some questions and Bush spent an hour and a half to answer everything. They were hardly softball questions. The reason some thought it was soft was most are so used to softballs lobbed by Charlie Gibson and his ilk towards Kerry that anything Bush says is portrayed as wrong.
Do I really need to bring up the ABC memo? Nah, CBS already proved a liberal bias.
Yes. Diogenes sure stands alone as a partisan. Especially among the crowd taking part in this discussion.
Most of the responses here could have been predicted if all you saw was the name on the left hand side of the screen (and I don’t exclude myself). Except for duffer. I mean, sure you know he’s going to be a right wing partisan asshole (to borrow a phrase from Centrist John Mace, but it’s just gonna be so crazy that there is no way to predict it.
If I were of a different political persuasion, I might feel compelled to liken Diogenes to a liberal Errol Flynn, buckling swashes against an onslaught of conservative pirate dogs (10 against 1!). But I am not.
Why not just let peaceful honest people pursue their own happiness in their own way?