Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!caen!destroyer!ncar!noao!amethyst!organpipe.uug.arizona.edu!lead!tip
From: tip@lead.tmc.edu (Tom Perigrin)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Slick Rushie tries to have it both ways, again
Message-ID: <1993Apr21.195905.22054@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>
Date: 21 Apr 93 19:59:05 GMT
References: <1993Apr16.192231.19781@ns.network.com> <41@cyberia.win.net> <66767@mimsy.umd.edu>
Sender: news@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu
Organization: University of Arizona UNIX Users Group
Lines: 19


Today Rush was criticizing Clinton for not claiming responsibility for the
actions and decisions of Janet Reno and the  FBI  early enough to suit
Rush.

About 2 months ago Rush was chortling over the fact that Reagan has stumped
"special persecutor Walsh" with his croaking of "I don't remember" when
asked about Ollie North.

If Rush's criticism of Clinton were to be applied to Reagan and North... 
Reagan would have been impeached while North was convicted (and overturned on
a technicality).

Gosh, Rush sure wants to have it both ways... Clinton MUST be held 
responsible, but Reagan was clever by using the "amnesia defense".

Maybe that's waht Clinton should say about campaign promises and such
"Well, there you go again Rush...  but to tell the truth, I wasn't in the
loop and I just don't remember."
