You apparently refuse to acknowledge that the staff’s answer wasn’t “None of your business”, it was “Bush would have been able to pass the FBI background check (which includes the drug question, ya know) during this period”. Horse, meet water.
No, all you need is common sense.
They never claimed to be making that point. Why do you bother with telling such a cheap falsehood? Never mind,.let’s proceed.
Can *you * not see that it was *not * a “rumor” but a question? One which was not beneath the dignity of every other candidate to answer, even with a yes? And that every other candidate who did answer yes was not responsible for both enforcing and politically promoting a law that requires locking up people who do answer yes, for extended periods? Nope, apparently you are that blinded by your own partisanship. You’re not alone in that, sure, but that should not be a comfort.
The short version: There is only one reasonable interpretation of Bush’s non-answer and his staff’s evasiveness. You, and Brutus, are long overdue to come to grips with that. Now don’t say any longer you haven’t had it laid out right in front of your own eyes.
Except that he DID respond to a rumor. And he very very easily could have said “I have never smoked cocaine”. But he didn’t.
There’s a difference between:
Q: Have you ever done cocaine
A: My private life is none of your business and that question is beneath the dignity of the campaign
and
Q: You’ve admitted that you made many mistakes in your youth. Was one of them using illegal drugs?
A: I did nothing that would have disqualified me from a security clearance in 1989
A’s Staff: To clarify, A is stating that he has not used drugs since 1974
A: (getting flustered) And I refused to respond to rumors about my private life
By the way, can anyone provide a link to the direct quote from Michael Moore about Iraqis and founding fathers and so forth that is being so discussed? I’d like to see it in its original context.
No, we fully understood your weak-ass ‘logic’ before you so kindly laid if right in front of our eyes, but it still doesn’t address the point: You have no proof. At all. All you are doing is drawing an inference and getting your panties in a twist because some of us have higher standards of ‘proof’.
Higher standards of proof? Interesting. Did you apply them when Bush claimed there were WMDs in Iraq? Did you apply them to the claims of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth? When someone introduces themself and tells you their name, do you ask for documentation? Do you bring a portable food-sampling machine with you to verify that the entree you order at a restaurant is what it appears to be and not a plastic model?
The whole POINT of “standards of proof” is that legally convicting someone of a crime is an important and solemn thing, and it’s better to let 10 guilty men go free than convict one innocent one. That’s why there are standards of proof, for legal situations. This is not a legal situation. We’re just discussing whether we think Bush used cocaine. To say that there’s a “standard of proof” is ridiculous for many reasons. Heck, why don’t you apply your “higher standard of proof” to the proposition that Bush DIDN’T use cocaine. To start with, you could take his word for it… no, wait he never DENIED using cocaine.
(Higher standard of proof my ass. That’s particularly galling coming from someone like you who avoids actual intellectual discussion the way a vampire avoids sunlight.)
Brutus, you need to learn about the concept of “*circumstantial * evidence”. Perhaps you’ve even heard of it. People have been convicted of murder using nothing but, in fact.
Now, *do * you have a different *reasonable * explanation than the one laid out for you? Or is your entire position “You haven’t proven this beyond a shadow of a doubt, therefore you’re just Bush-bashing again, nyah nyah nyah”? What is so goddam precious to you about this subject?
His problem is that he actually BELIEVES the “people who use drugs are BAD BAD BAD criminals who HATE AMERICA because they FUND TERROR” business, and the idea that George W Bush, who just gets more and more wonderful in his mind as liberals criticize him more and more, could have ever used drugs does. not. compute.
“He was wrong”? That’s the best you can do for a guy who equates the Founding Fathers with rapists and terrorists and assassins? Gee, could we get any more limp-wristed than that?
And yet, thirty seconds later, you’re willing to toss out this gem:
Call me crazy, but I think equating George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin with folks who target school buses and kill doctors is far more offensive than anything Michael Moore has ever uttered.
Of course, whether it’s close to anything Ann Coulter’s ever spewed is a different matter. But apparently wild-ass assertions are okay if the speaker is a Republican…
You miss the point. You’ve probably never been asked that question, and it probably wouldn’t matter (in terms of your life goals) if people did know you shot ponies and ate them.
A better illustration would be this: what if it was highly personally advantageous for people to believe that I did not shoot ponies and eat them? What would it reasonably say to you if I repeatedly and pointedly refused to answer the question?
How’s that go again? “Absense of evidence is not evidence of absence.” And how in the hell did this turn into a debate on whether or not Bush used drugs? Oh yeah. I remember now.
A pointless line about an unproven rumor. Thanks Lib, you’re a dear.
Does anybody actually have a cite proving the ole Pres did lines? If not, can we drop it?
As a devoted Red Wings fan, to you I say NEVER! The Leafs get too screamy over every call. They start arguing before they even know what the call is. And of course Vancouver has Bertuzzi. They’d be a good team otherwise, but not now. Calgary is too grabby. Edmonton just stinks. Montreal’s goalie is too pretty to even be playing hockey.
Canada can conquer us once they get a better team…and a nuclear shield. Those things are sweet, eh?
As I live very close to Canada, I have access to secrets those in the lower states do not. I believe it is spelled “eh.” Apparently they also worship some fellow named “Wayne Gretzky” and have no idea what bacon really is.
Yes, I’m trying to make a different point, the point I was making in the post you responded to, not your hijack about who had a better vietnam service record.
So wait a minute, you’re saying those dear Iraqi insurgents aren’t the type of people who target school buses and kill doctors?
What the hell do you want from me? I say he was wrong to say it, and yes made himself look like an asshole, and still its not enough, its never enough. Stick it up your ass you ditzy motherfucker.
I don’t care, its a terrible thing to say whilst Iraqis and Americans out there are getting killed by these fuckers, for a well known personality such as Michael Moore to say they’re actually people who are comparable to such persons like the founding fathers, is deeply offending.
