David Hobby wrote: > > "John D. Giorgis" wrote: > > ... > > > > Bob Z. said that no Democrat defended Clinton on this. > > > > In my mind, Bob Z.'s claim is patently absurd. Many Democrats did argue > > that any man would lie about adultery, and the only possible reason for > > making such a claim was to attempt to mitigate the charges against Clinton, > > and as such, defend him. > > John-- > I think you are splitting hairs here. I believe that > everybody else in this exchange is interpreting "defended Clinton" > as "said that Clinton was right to lie". You seem to be using it > here in the broader sense of "made any argument in support of > Clinton". With this sense, you are of course right.
A debate goes more smoothly if everyone agrees exactly *what* it is they're debating. :) Julia _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l