WHY report this? (CNN, Clinton, Monica, and when)

[Shodan]

@Miller

You mean, that thing where he points out your own cite says precisely the opposite of what you think it says?

No, more like the that thing where Maximum Leader’s words must not be questioned, but obeyed.

It’s like arguing with creationists about contradictions in the accounts in Genesis. You point to where it says A and then not-A, and the response is “That’s not a contradiction!”

Certainly this is not the first time it ever happened on the SDMB, but I seem to see more and more of it as the Obama campaign starts to incorporate aspects of a personality cult. BO is expected not so much be elected to the White House as ascend to it on clouds of glory. And the corresponding expectation is that no one be allowed the heresy of questioning the beatified candidate.

Voting for a black guy is one thing; joining a cult is another.

I grant you, it hasn’t ye reached the point of Obama-ites castrating themselves, except intellectually, and some of his followers don’t have much to lose in that direction. But I wish the idea of Obama’s followers chopping off their nuts and casting them before his inaugual car was as ridiculous a notion as it would have been six months ago.

Regards,
Shodan
I see Hentor has mentioned that this all is a hijack, and I agree. Never mind.

[DSeid]

@Jackmannii

Non-blue dress aspects are being addressed in the U.S. as well:

“The papers showed she spent most of her time in 1993 and 1994 overseeing the health care task force whose eventual failure would help cost Democrats control of the House and Senate. They indicate she held meetings to help her husband pass the North American Free Trade Agreement even as candidate Clinton tries to distance herself from the trade agreement now. And while she traveled to Northern Ireland and other countries to help promote peace and women’s rights, her schedules indicate that most of her time overseas was spent on the more traditional duties of a first lady.”

The emphasis on the tired old titillation of the Monica affair is actually to Hillary’s benefit, as it obscures the evidence from her schedules that contradicts her current “experience” claims. It also creates sympathy for poor, downtrodden HRC. :rolleyes:

Yeah, after a page talking about the sexcapades aspects and in the last paragraph.

[Miller]

@Shodan

No, more like the that thing where Maximum Leader’s words must not be questioned, but obeyed.

A year ago, he said he’d heard Wright make controversial remarks. This week, he said he’d heard Wright make controversial remarks. How is it that I’m the one who’s deluded for not seeing a contradiction there?