wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@>
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
<shempmcgurk@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
> > <shempmcgurk@>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine
> > > <salsunshine@>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We're talking about two different people here, Tucker
> Carlson
> > > (TV
> > > > > talk
> > > > > > show host) and Curtis Mailloux (former DC TM Center
> Chairman,
> > > now
> > > > > a
> > > > > > blues musician in VA). The two have absolutely nothing
in
> > > > common,
> > > > > > except that I thought they looked sort of similar.
> Carlson
> > > was
> > > > > the one
> > > > > > accused of sexual shenanigans, and, as Shemp said, they
> were
> > > > > unfounded
> > > > > > or dismissed...Although the accusation itself did have a
> very
> > > > > profound
> > > > > > effect on him, as I recall, and led to him becoming at
> least
> > > > > somewhat
> > > > > > more aware of unfounded accusations being tossed at
> others,
> > > like
> > > > > > Clinton
> > > > >
> > > > > Which accusations against Clinton were unfounded?
> > > >
> > > > Were you on vacation on the moon back in the '90s,
> > > > perhance?
> > >
> > > No, again, I'm wondering which accusations against Clinton were
> > > unfounded?
> >
> > Yes, you said that the first time. And I asked whether
> > you were on vacation on the moon back in the '90s.
> >
> > > The ones regarding Monica?
> >
> > Huh?? He *admitted* to those regarding Monica. Why
> > on earth would you ask whether those were unfounded?
> >
> > > Kathleen Willey?
> > >
> > > Juanita Broderick?
> >
> > Both of these were extremely dubious,
>
> ...as was the case of Lewinsky.
>
> Except for one small detail: semen on a blue dress. Without that,
> people would still be disbelieving her (as Linda Tripp aptly
> pointed out).
Oh, some few would, no doubt. However, the *other*
evidence for the affair was overwhelming; the semen
stain, the absolute clincher, came almost as an
anticlimax (you should pardon the _expression_). And
there was virtually no evidence that could have been
used to argue the affair had *not* occurred.
In the cases of Willey and Broaddrick, the evidence
*for* the incidents was by no means overwhelming, and
there was a good deal of evidence to the contrary.
(Read "The Hunting of the President" sometime.)
> It's funny how women are often never believed when it comes to
> accusations of rape by powerful men.
It's often a tough call when there's no hard evidence,
because the men have very strong motivation to deny
the charges, and the women may well have equally
strong motivations to make a false accusation. Not
to mention the significant gray area regarding what
does and does not constitute rape, including the issue
of consent.
> But then again we're dealing with Judy Democrats-uber-alles Stein.
> I wonder, Judy, what your position at the time of their accusations
> was regarding Clarence Thomas and that Oregon Senator?
Um, let's see now, are you suggesting that Democrats
are more likely to disbelieve women's accusations against
powerful men than Republicans?
I'll be happy to respond to your question once you've
answered mine (my response would be the same whether
you answer yes or no; I'm just not positive you really
thought through what you said).
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
SPONSORED LINKS
| Maharishi university of management | Maharishi mahesh yogi | Ramana maharshi |
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "FairfieldLife" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
