JLA: If you're going to post bash-trash as news, at least source it. I'm referring to the "story" you posted, "Clinton Got Frisky with Teenage Girl on Oslo Tour." The source of this story, of course, is newsmax.com. Need I say more?
I went to the Sunday Times Web site and found the story from which newsmax.com "manufactured" the story you posted. The telltale "frisky" paragraph was mentioned in passing in the latter end of the story, which carried the headline "Bill's Big Bucks." The story can be found at www.sunday-times.co.uk/. The focus of the story is about Clinton's money-making in recent months, not about his well-documented inability to keep his John Henry in his pants. And yet newsmax.com saw this as an opportunity to unethically bash the ex-president.
The Sunday Times had this to say about Clinton in Oslo:
"Witness what happened in Oslo after Clinton gave his speech two weeks ago. Rather than retiring to bed, Clinton went out to dinner with some students at a branch of TGI Friday, the American restaurant chain. A 19-year-old girl presented him with a tulip. Clinton gave her a hug. "You're too beautiful to only get a hug," he told her."
From this one paragraph that newsmax.com lifted from the Sunday Times, the story grows that Clinton "got frisky" with the girl ... that he "put his arms around her" (which is different than giving someone a hug), and that he "hinted he'd like to have sex."
(I would also point out that the Sunday Times story offers no attribution for what happened in Oslo. Who said this happened? Who gave this account of the conversation? Where did this account originate?
Fact is, there are a number of logical, non-sexual explanations for the "you're too beautiful to only get a hug" remark.
Bottom line: If you're going to post bash-crap in your "moderated" chat room, then you must assume some degree of responsibility to ensure that the report, indeed, is "accurate."
In this case, the story has more holes in it than a half-pound of Swiss cheese.
Or to put it another way: You're an attorney by profession. Would hearsay like this hold up in court? Of course not. So why are you trying to pass it off as "legitimate" in SI Land?
Do try to do better in the future. |
