You didn’t answer whether OJ is a murderer or not. There are still plenty of people that believe he was either a) a rapist, or b) generally a less than wholesome guy. Not my vote for president. It is usually frowned upon to have one party ask for the other to step down. That is why it is roundly hated that some Democrats asked Nader not to run. Some Republicans did ask Clinton to step down, but more just wanted to impeach him after the fact.
he=Clinton in my last post. Nobody thinks OJ is a rapist (that I know of).
I really should preview these things.
I didn’t answer because I don’t know if OJ is a murderer or not. The court says he isn’t, and we’ll leave it at that. I did not pay attention to the trial at the time, and I have not looked into it, so in all honesty I know very little about the case. Wildly speculating on court decisions from years ago when I don’t have the knowledge of the case that I would need to make an even remotely reliable guess as to the proper verdict is pointless, even moreso in a thread about divorce records.
And as for people who believe Clinton is a rapist… well, that’s not what you said. You flat-out called him a rapist, but now you’re backpedaling, saying only that people “believe” he was a rapist.
See if you can quote anywhere I said Clinton and Rapist in the same sentence. I may have implied, but it can also be construed that anyone who is a rapist is bad. I think he is a rapist, but apparently my opinion doesn’t count to anyone but me, according to GLWasteful. I’m not backpedaling on this issue here.
Ok.
Diogenes, in all practicality all I did was a google search for Clinton and Rape. Lots of sites come up. I just picked 4 off the first page, two from WorldNet. And since I hadn’t read that paper before, but I did read those articles, it seemed fairly moderate to me on that topic. Would you like me to link to every article I find?
Let me get this straight.
All of the evidence for your position is based on a 15 second Google search?
No, I had a position before the search. I just did a quick one because apparently you have to have evidence on this board before making any statement.
Other 15 second google search
Based on what?
Yea, we’re wild and crazy like that. O_o
Well, seeing as how I was in middle and high schools during the presidency, partly due to media reports of the allegations, and partly from my parents, or more specifically, my dad. Didn’t listen to any Rush Limbaugh on the school bus or anything, don’t listen to talk radio much because it is all boring. Not much recent media coverage on it, but it wasn’t a stretch for me to believe he could have done what was alleged, seeing as how he didn’t admit to the affair until there was no way anyone would believe him that it wasn’t true anymore. He lies to cover his ass. Everyone does. I didn’t see him file a countersuit for libel though, so I don’t think he’s completely innocent.
Any google search is going to turn up the Juanita Broaddrick allegation, but that’s an allegation which was never substantiated. It was exploited by the right with the worst possible spin- and the least critical examination of Broaddrick herself- but it still never rose above the level of a verbal accusation. There was much more than accusation involved in the OJ case.
You say you believe Clinton is a rapist based on a single, unsubstantiated allegation. Do you also believe that Ronald Reagan was a rapist given that exactly the same evidence existed in his case (a single. unsubstantiated allegation)?
Hmm, backpedaling on every issue and doing random Googling for “evidence” without even bothering to look at what you were posting? Sheesh. For all you knew, those could have been kinky sex fiction stories. Articles about Clinton’s (Bill or Hillary) positions regarding violence against women. I Googled for “Bush” and “methamphetamines” and got 4200 hits - does that mean Bush is a meth dealer? Oh here we go - here’s a Google result for Bush and rape which turns up a ton of links about a woman who accused Bush of raping her. Of course, she also happened to be a lunatic, but hell, if you can Google it, it must be true, right? Head over to a forum like MPSIMS and try out the soft forums before you hit the ones that require more intellectual rigor.
IMO, Jack Ryan’s real crime was lying to members of his own party, and in an unbelievably stupid manner (right before the papers were to be released and he knew it). He got leaders of his party to believe in him and make statements supporting him, and they got slapped in the face for their trouble.
He didn’t even bother trying to refute the allegations of going to sex clubs - he refused to issue a denial when the news hit. Hmm, he did quite a job of denying it in those papers. If he’d have told the truth to people in the IL Republican Party and said when the press came calling, “Hey, I made my statement in those papers, that still stands, it comes down to a he-said-she-said thing at a time when we were arguing, I loved her though and never would have hurt her intentionally” then this wouldn’t be such a big freaking deal. (He still would have lost though. Guy had no experience in politics and came off as a smarmy ass. Obama looks polished and intelligent, and can discuss the issues well.)
Oh, come on! This is even weaker than the junk you were bringing up previously! It proves you don’t know anything about 1) politics and 2) libel.
In reverse order: our legal system is set up so that it’s very difficult to prove you’ve been libelled or slandered if you’re a public figure. This is done to protect free speech. When you’re a figure as prominent as the President, it would be well-night impossible. And suing in response to charges like these would only bring them more publicity, meaning it’s not worth it in the political calculus (and probably the monetary one as well).
Ferret,
If you remember the OP, I didn’t go into this planning on backing up any claims of rape from Governor Clinton. You’re right, the intellectual rigor is a bit tough, probably shouldn’t be trying to argue with people whose official position is “not mine” no matter what I say and go to medical school at the same time. Jack Ryan didn’t deny it because it was true. President Clinton did deny it, it was found out to be true after the denial (in the Lewinsky incident). Yes, Reagan and Bush have had single allegations, Clinton had more than one allegation of sexual misconduct, even though only one was alleged as rape.
He [Clinton] also paid Paula Jones $850,000 to settle a suit. In 1998. Completely innocent. He’s Father Theresa. This thread still isn’t about him.
I’ve said it before–could be our first black president!
Ryan did deny it to Illinois GOP leaders. He didn’t deny it to the public, but that’s because by then it was too late and he knew his ship was sunk.
You can’t prove Bill Clinton committed rape by talking about unrelated incidents. Some, uh, PROOF would be required.
Argh?
Anyway, what does any of that have to do with Kerry?
To be really picky about it, settling a suit doesn’t require you to be guilty.
Buddy, YOU mentioned him first, and you’ve falsely accused him of rape. Don’t try and blame other people for the sidetracking.
I was considering this on the way home from work, and I’m starting to think it could be possible down the road.