HEARTLESS wrote: Perfect archer, where was your outrage when Clinton was in office? Our present self-propelled turd (Ritter) was a DA also and many crimes never went to trial. Where was your outrage then?
FYI....I WAS outraged when Clinton was in office....but he didn't rape the lady when she was unconscious, and he wasn't the prosecutor either. Sheesh.....you righties don't ever.....ever.....take responsibility for your own do you.
You mean like Teddy boy did when he murdered Mary Jo? You mean that kind of responsibility? Archer, you libs can smear and lie all you want, and your trying it on every opponent you can, the American people have seen through you and your party. The party starts in November for most Americans, when we take out the trash, and out ya go! :Crying:
What the hell, went into photo fish's youtube video <!-- l --><a class="postlink-local" href="
285bound.com/Forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1940&p=50895#p50895
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1940&p=50895#p50895<!-- l --> and the ken buck rape ad shows up. Damn cookies. I didn't know they used those for youtube ads.
PrintSmith wrote: That's not what the transcript of the call tells us Scruffy. Maybe you need to look at the transcript instead of taking at face value what the scorched earth progressives are tossing out because they know Bennet can't hope to win the election standing on his record.
Ah, yes, the splitting of hairs begins. "Barely conscious" is the term used in the police report, is it not? Such a big difference (in case you cannot tell, that was sarcasm there.) It's still rape. Why are you defending this man, this admitted rapist?
I wonder, Mr. Smith, if you would be splitting these hairs if it were your daughter that was asking, 5 years later, why Mr. Buck would not prosecute a criminal that confessed to a crime?
Is the term "barely conscious" her description of her condition when she was allegedly raped or the officer's assessment of her condition while she was giving the report?
Basically what it boils down to is she doesn't really know what happened, she is just unhappy that she and her bedfellow (her term to investigators) had sex that night after he had driven all the way from Colorado Springs, at her invitation, to see her. I have no doubt that she feels she was raped, and I have no doubt that she expressed her displeasure to the man in question, which is why he came to an understanding after the fact that she hadn't wanted to have sex with him that night.
You ask how I would feel if it was my own daughter, yet for some strange reason fail to inquire how I would feel if it was my own son, or give an indication how you would feel if it was your son, who thought that he was having sex with his bedfellow that night only to find out later that she was looking to have him arrested for raping her. Do you know their history together? Was it usual for them to have sex when she, or he, or both of them, had three sheets in the wind in the past? Do you know if these two bedfellows had had consensual sex in the recent past? Of course you don't, but that won't stop your rush to judgment based upon nothing more than your partisan dislike of the man who will likely be your next Senator.
