So does that mean that if there are no damning photos, such as with Hart and Rice, and there is no DNA stained dress, that the Marxist media lapdogs successfully bury the truth, except for placing blame for the story's existence on the evil Republicans, for the purpose of a cumulative negative impact on the president, along with the "Bush was AWOL" lie that they continue to spread, despite there being NO evidence to support their claims? In other words, the real story goes away and the "official" story portrays Kerry as the unfortunate victim of a right-wing plot?
You deny them because someone accused you in the first place. That's what struck me. Here again is another prominent Rat politician being forced into the denial-damage control mode because of yet another (apparently credible) accusation of sexual impropriety. I mean, "he said she said" is one thing, but "he said and she said and she said and she said and..." is getting a little ridiculous.
But I have a feeling, in the end, that, like with Clinton, it won't matter. The Rat leadership certainly won't care. They defended Scumbag against this stuff for over eight years, so they are old hands at it. And it won't make any difference to the sheeple, either, as long as Kerry promises sufficient amounts of free money.