sdrebear, well lets see, K. Starr was appointed to investigate the Clintons role in Whitewater which pretty much proved nothing illegal, during that course of events the Lewinski issue popped up. I don’t have total recall but I think in part it was due to P. Jones filing a criminal suit against BC. and, that lewinski could be called to testify. I could be wrong as I said I’m not exact on the course of events.
Anyway, despite the fact that K. Starr felt it was necessary to go graphic about BC’s sexual pecadillos the underlying premise for that course of events was true. BC lied in front of a federal grand jury. Still, was it worth 40 million? I go back and forth on that point.
Now, for the most part, sure, politics was a cause. I qualify that because I can’t say (no one can say) that if BC never went into politics that Whitewater and thus the Clintons involvement would never have been investigated. I believe that started at the state level not at the federal, but again I could be wrong. There you go, a brief response.
I am aware of my prejudices/bias and I consciously make an effort to see and acknowledge their presence in any situation they might arise. It’s important for me to do so, as I can then make every possible effort to negate them. In the times I can’t, I admit to their presence. I do so/try so because if I cannot do that, it then calls into question the validity of any opinion I express, any action I might take. do I have a 100% success rate? Sadly, no.
Also, I am fully cognizant that being aware of my shadows doesn’t necessarily add any validity to my opinions. I have to be able to provide supporting data. But, I also rarely if ever, am discussing things in the terms of right and wrong here (meaning I am right, therefore you are wrong).
For the most part, I start in when I see blatantly biased and usually unfounded rhetoric and/or statements being thrown around. IMO if you can’t look into and at both sides of an issue/problem/event etc. then your conclusions are bound to be inaccurate – and deserve to be both questioned and challenged.
Diego’s comments about impeachment and Bush have no basis other than his dislike of Bush and his (Bush’s) policies
I don’t see many people here acknowledging their political prejudices do you?
no, I am not bgates, he is far better looking, intelligent,
eloquent, sophisticated and wealthy than I.
