Richard Clarke: Homo

Bush's Latest Attack Line

from JoeUser Forums

This from Wonkette:

"We have it on semi-reliable authority that the Bush administration's next attempt to discount Richard Clarke's credibility will consist of alleging that he's a big gay."

Apparently the Bush administration doesn't have great intelligence, but it does have a time machine that can transport us back to 1972 when a sane person might still have considered this a "credibility" issue.

Now, some wacko southerners (or northerners or westerners or mid-westerners) might still think that this is a knock on Clarke's reliability, but they're wackos. They are already voting Republican :).

Really I think this'll just make the Bush administration seem desperate. Like that girl at high school parties; the one who keeps telling you how drunk she is.

On the other hand, if Clarke is gay, it turns out that that federal anti-gay marriage amendment was a really bad idea.
politics
4,212 views 10 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top

Let me get this straight: You have from a "source" that Bush might do X in the future but you're going to condemn him on it now even though there's no evidence of this?

I have it on a VERY factual source that Kerry zealots are going to start claiming that Bush is planning to bash Clarke by saying he's gay.

Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
Sounds like someone is a little too quick to believe rather unbelievable rumors about the Bush administration.
TouchTasks - Access tasks with ease on Windows touchscreens.
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
Hey, I was careful not to condemn him, but just to point out how stupid it would be.

Wolf Blitzer is also saying that unnamed White House officials are suggesting that "there are some weird aspects in [Clarke's] life as well." Wonkette just fills us in on the 'gay' angle.

We'll have to wait and see.
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
I prefer Adequacy.org. Long live the king of the Internet.
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
I think we should all view this as a "funny" article, and not something worth getting our panties in a twist over.

Cheers
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
Thank you, jeblackstar. Although, I don't know if putting "funny" in quotation marks is really all that flattering.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
Sorry, wasn't meaning any offense, just wanted people to realize that certain aspects of the accusation are funny, and not that you were presenting it at something that was serious, hope you weren't by the way.

Cheers
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top

lol. Re-read what you wrote, ian.  You made it quite clear that you believed this to be a fact. There is no "IF this were true..." instead you wrote:

Appartently the Bush administration doesn't have great intelligence, but they do have a time machine that can transport us back to 1972 when a sane person might still have considered this a "credibility" issue.

You condemned before the crime was even commited based on "a semi-reliable source" that this might be done.

Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
I think any issue centering around a "Time Machine" can't be viewed as entirely serious.

Cheers
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
What he said.