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
