Text 40497, 96 rader
Skriven 2006-10-03 11:56:54 av Roy Witt (1:397/22)
  Kommentar till text 40449 av BOB KLAHN (1:123/140)
Ärende: Clinton's Hysterical Revi
=================================
02 Oct 06 23:33, BOB KLAHN wrote to ROY WITT:


 FS>>>> I saw that interview.  Chris Wallace asked a perfectly
 FS>>>> logical question, well within the context of the interview.
 FS>>>>  Bill Clinton tried bluffing his way through his answer at
 FS>>>>  the top of his voice -- he did not succeed.

 BK>>>  Clinton did not even raise his voice much. Anyone who doubts
 BK>>>  that, the video is available on Mediamatters.org, and was on fox
 BK>>>  news last I saw.

 RW>> Heh heh heh ... he didn't have to. If anyone watches the
 RW>> video, they'll see him turn red, begin to shiver and shift
 RW>> in his chair and then the 'finger' comes out shaking it in
 RW>> Wallace's face.

 BK>  Were you drinking while you were watching it?

No, unlike you, I've never touched the stuff.

 BK> The red you see is in your eyes.

Why yes, it is...while looking Clinton in the eyes, I can see that they're
red, perhaps you're seeing a reflection of his eyes in mine.

 BK> The shivering was you shaking.

No, while rolling on the floor, laughing my ass, Clinton's shaking was
definately visible on my 60" HDTV screen. BTW, the picture on that TV is
so clear and vivid, there's no mistake that Clinton's eyes were red.

 BK> It wasn't in the interview.

You must have been watching an old interview, c1992...

 BK>  And it doesn't look like the finger gets near Wallace's face.

Better look again, he actually touched Wallace's upper thigh.

 BK>>>  Clinton answered the questions...and it was a multi-part
 BK>>>  question, very well and very clearly.

LOL! Clinton couldn't control himself and blustered all the way through
his maniacal dialogue.

 RW>> And he didn't hesitate to lie, as usual.

 BK>  Show where he lied.

I already did. You didn't like that either.

 BK>>>  Wallace's original question, why didn't you do more, is
 BK>>>  illogical, not logical. There is always more anyone can do.

 RW>> Which is why Wallace asked the question. If there was more
 RW>> that could have been done, why didn't Clinton do it? We all

 BK>  Why didn't you do more? There is an infinite amoung of more that
 BK>  can be done.

That wasn't my job. Elect me president and I'll do more than Clinton did.

 BK>>> Why didn't *YOU* do more?

 RW>> I would have shut him up, but they put people in jail for
 RW>> shooting presidents.

 BK>  And they pay them visits for talking about it.

Not after the fact. Only when it's deemed to be a present threat. You
shoiuld learn the law before stuffing your other foot in your mouth.

 BK>  You might have shut him up, but we expect that from those who
 BK>  don't care for free speech.

Well, you almost got it right. 'I might have shut him up, but then there
wouldn't be any liberal liar who could match what Clinton did and become
your hero.'

 BK>  Oh, the moderator wants the politics cut off, so let's take it
 BK>  to another echo.

Moderator? There ain't no fuckin' moderator here. The one who claims to be
the moderator can't do the job and the elisted moderator doesn't seem to
be interested in the job. But don't let Ross stop kicking you in the pants
over your political views. He knows that they suck as well as everybody
else in the echo.

               R\%/itt


... ­Herman Nuet habla mierda holandesa del toro!

--- Twit(t) Filter v2.1 (C) 2000
 * Origin: SATX Alamo Area Net * South * Texas, USA * (1:397/22)