Now is the time to introduce a Constitutional Amendment disallowing close relatives of a past president from running for the office of POTUS.

The Dems would probably support it because of BDS.

Speakup on October 15, 2007 at 11:58 PM

Sociopaths have no conscience.

Just what we want in our next POTUS….Integrity!

I read an article today about a book coming out by Jeff Gerth and one other, and in it, they describe an interview with a former aide who was present when the Seahag listened to an intercepted cell phone call plotting what their next move would be concerning a bimbo eruption.

This broad can listen to what she perceives her political enemies, yet refuses to allow us to listen to terrorists.

91Veteran on October 16, 2007 at 1:38 AM

Yep, this is the top story on Drudge this morning.
Ha Ha.

Maxx on October 15, 2007 at 11:55 PM

Snopes is not my only site to go to but you won’t even name one other site of the “many” sites you go to….

Hillary might get Swift-Boated by a former associate – a book will come out or something. She’s supposed to be real peach. I’m sure that she’s generated enough animus to have a few patient enemies. I mean, we’re the Vast Right Wing, aren’t we?

Dork B. on October 15, 2007 at 7:41 PM

I read an article today about a book coming out by Jeff Gerth and one other, and in it, they describe an interview with a former aide who was present when the Seahag listened to an intercepted cell phone call plotting what their next move would be concerning a bimbo eruption.

This broad can listen to what she perceives her political enemies, yet refuses to allow us to listen to terrorists.

They could be caught on tape, red handed, with 10 credible eyewitnesses and it would all disappear.

The witnesses won’t “disappear” so much as suffer Arkancide. Lloyd’s of London probably wouldn’t issue anyone a policy if they’re known to be on the Clinton (S)Hit List.

Let’s try one more time.
Do you believe that Falwell did indeed promote or distribute these videos on his television show?

That was never an issue, I don’t doubt that.

Do you believe the entire “Clintons buried bodies” theme that was mentioned in the Snopes link? If not, which parts do you doubt?

I know there is much more to some of those stories than is being presented at Snopes. And the slant in favor of the Clintons is quite vivid. Just the fact that they brush it ALL aside as nothing is absurd.

For snopes specifically on what basis or facts do you contend they are a leftie site? (I agree that Salon obviously sympathizes with the left)

See above.

And lastly what sources do you use to fact check rumors and hoaxes?

Many many sources, and of course sometime all you can get is an impression of who’s story seems to be more credible. Clearly there is no site that is going to get it right 100% of the time. I’m not saying Snopes is always wrong or even that they always support the Democrats or the leftwing, but to think of any one site as the absolute authority for all truth is kinda silly, don’t you think ? If I really want to get to the bottom of some story I will run lots of searches concerning that story and read all that I can. Obviously different sources will not always agree but some facts will be consistent and sometimes those facts are the only thing upon which to base your opinion.

If you do a search on any of those names on the “Clintons Buried Bodies” story you will come up with hundreds of hits. Then you got to use sources that have won your respect for getting it right in the past and form your opinion from there. That’s how I do it.

OK… I got to sleep.. goodnight.

Maxx on October 15, 2007 at 11:27 PM

Let’s try one more time.
Do you believe that Falwell did indeed promote or distribute these videos on his television show?

Do you believe the entire “Clintons buried bodies” theme that was mentioned in the Snopes link? If not, which parts do you doubt?

For snopes specifically on what basis or facts do you contend they are a leftie site? (I agree that Salon obviously sympathizes with the left)

And lastly what sources do you use to fact check rumors and hoaxes?

The liberal media cannot ignore her foibles for much longer.

You are of course allowed to have an opinion. I’m just surprised you willingly bury your head in the sand and say “it’s propaganda, the rumors are true” over and over.

Bradky on October 15, 2007 at 11:15 PM

Why do you alway try to put words in my mouth Bradky. Don’t you understand there is a typewritten record here that anyone can refer back to? This is the second time in this very thread you have tried to do that. Where did I say the rumors are true ? Let me answer that question for you…. I didn’t say that.

I said there was plenty that was suspicious and that the references you provided I do not trust. How can I make it any more clear?

OK… I will stick around for one more volley, but it’s getting near my bedtime, so make it a good one.