As mentioned - Edit 1
Before modification by nossy at 21/07/2013 12:20:07 AM
I don't mind agreeing to disagree - I don't think that he shouldn't have spoken out.
View original postNo, he did not, had he done so we'd be holding impeachment and removal proceedings. Whether or not the president committed a crime is not under discussion, whether or not he acted unwisely, displayed prejudice, or fed into existing anger is.
And I don't agree that that is what he did.
View original postOr are you arguing he served the nation better by not having said, the first time asked and never unsolicited, "This is an ongoing criminal case, it would not be proper for me to comment."?
I am not arguing that he served the nation better, worse or indifferently. I am saying that sometimes things need to be said, even if they aren't comfortable. You can agree or disagree with him however you want, but I do not think he was fanning the flames - I think he was trying to bridge the gap. "Our side" needed to understand something (baggage) and the "other side" needed to be validated. Whether or not it worked is debatable.
View original postNow you've made many points, some quite good, but the problem is they all come back to the same original screwup, speaking on the matter at all, and he hasn't acknowledged that screwup nor just let it fade out.
It's not a problem for me, because I don't see it as a screw up. I think part of the president's job is to take a stance and speak up. Sometimes I'll agree and sometimes I won't. Otherwise, why do we spend so much time teasing him for being a wienie? * shrugs *
I appreciate the conversation anyway.