Originally Posted by W*GS
Spider said "Just makes it harder to deny , or to Bring up Clinton ...... Remember Clinton ?"
It's true that if any of the Republicans on the list criticized Clinton, they'd be hypocrites, at the very least. Considering that most of the Republicans (and others) who criticized Clinton (and not just about his adulterous activities) were and are not on the list, what was Spider getting at with his comment?
That "Some" in the title doesn't let him off the hook for what's nothing more than a cheap shot.
Clinton has nothing to do with the list Spider posted, despite the efforts to bring his name into every "indiscretions of politicians" thread. And many of the Republicans who criticized Clinton (the House managers) already fit into the "hypocrite" category in my book due to their own adulterous activities. At any rate adultery is not illegal; pedophilia is.
That "Some" in the thread title means that he was castigating those Republicans whose names were on the list and no one else. How is posting the truth a "cheap shot"?
It is very puzzling why Libertarians seem to take such issue with the (apparently well-justified) criticism of "some