This is an addition. I just want to say that though I thought that Clinton did a good job in the interview, the fact that he went on the aggresive allowed him to get his point across, I just wanted to say that he was no angel as president. And I'm not talking about the Monica affair, if anything that made me feel for the guy. I don't think it's good to cheat on your wife, but even though he did it in his office, that was private business between him and Hillary, and of course the young impressionable Monica. But anyway, the way that Fox responded in this editorial on its website shows a level of childishness not seen since the last Disney cartoon. Wow. I just thought i would post it for everyone's perusing, just in case you don't already watch Fox news, or read their website (which I don't recommend, but do find entertaining in a comedic sort of way). Does this seem as biased to anyone else as it does to me? I am not a conspiracy theorist who thinks that Bush planned 9/11, and i really don't think it was his fault. I think there really were "intelligence" problems which caused the plot to be overlooked. Anyway, to blame Clinton for 9/11 (as the article does), is to ask us to subject this news outlet to the highest scrutiny. And I think we may come to the conclusion that they are well into National Inquirer territory. This is nonsense and should be labeled as such. Fox is all too happy to let the Bush White House off the hook. But they want to blame a man who was in office almost a year before. If they want us to think that Bush didn't know what was going on, how on earth can they be so bold as to tell us that his predecesor knew? A little cup of CRAZY anyone?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,215607,00.html
No comments:
Post a Comment