Replies

Instead, we see folks come barging into the thread, many of whom seem to not have bothered reading the article

Barging? Well, why don't you invite who you want to post on your threads?

Did it ever occur to you that there are those of us who HAVE done our homework on Halliburton and don't need to be told, yet again, that something might be wrong by somebody who hasn't kept up with what's going on?

This forum is KNEE DEEP in article about it; perhaps you should scroll through them and see how the "valued Freepers" on this forum have debunked this POLITICALLY MOTIVATED charges.

This article is nothing more than piling on by Turley.

You upbraided me earlier this year when I said Turley was a liberal and you assured me otherwise.I will accept a nice bouquet of freesias, tiger lillies, cash, or you can blow me a kiss.Try to get Fred Mertz first ;-) It maybe like holy water to him!!lol

Barging? Well, why don't you invite who you want to post on your threads?

Well, I would appreciate it if people bothered to read the article in question first before commenting on it. I know that's asking a lot of some folks, but, hey, that's just the way I am.

Did it ever occur to you that there are those of us who HAVE done our homework on Halliburton and don't need to be told, yet again, that something might be wrong by somebody who hasn't kept up with what's going on?

Uh, Howlin, once again, Turley's commentary is not about the relative merits of the two matters (he did use the word "unproven", as you pointed out), but instead is about how the matter has been handled. So far, the Bush Administration hasn't gone very far down the Clintonista path, and the similarities are superficial. But it should still be contingent upon Bush supporters to say, Don't go there! That is my point.