A Clinton-Dem refresher
on how to avoid the truth.

They say we did something bad.
We say: No, we didn't.
They say we did.
We say: You have no evidence.
They show evidence.
We say: The evidence is immaterial.
They demonstrate the connection.
We say: Still, it's no proof.
They prove it.
We say: This law does not apply to us.
They show that it does apply to us.
We say: We didn't know that it applies to us.
They show that we did know that it applies to us.
We say: This law doesn't mean what it says.
They show that it does mean what it says.
We say: This law shouldn't apply to anybody.
They show that it should apply to everybody.
We say: The law is unfair, let's change it.
They say that, nonetheless, we broke it.
We say: No, we didn't.
They say we did.
We say: You have no evidence, etc. etc.,
                ad infinitum, in circularis.

Each one of these cycles, with the use of weekends,
holidays, and travel (which saved us) is good for at least
a year of delay. And you can go through a cycle half a
dozen times before anyone notices. The great thing is
that in between cycles, just like the pauses when a
washing machine mysteriously does nothing (is it resting, undecided?), you can get the attorney general to distract
your accusers with her wondrous stare. She went to hypnotism school somewhere in South America, you
know, and she's totally in our corner." --Mark Helprin

                             
Political Spin Return                 Top Return