Would you recall

[Jim B. in Iowa]

---

@Nebrfarmr wrote:

Where is the incident report.  I recall someone on this board, claiming that people accused of things are innocent, until 'proven' guilty, and accusations are just one person's word agains another.  If it happened it school, there should be an incident report, detention records, etc.

---

That is a one way street that only the Dems are allowed to travel.

[rawhide]

he can't remember saying that

[gough whitlam]

Fancy you coming out in defence of this which happened 30 odd yers ago.  There is no doubt it happened but forget that, what about all the little girls at the same school who had some nasty expeiences with the godbotherer behind the toilets.  After all he was a bully and a liar so anything is possible.

[Nebrfarmr]

You do realize, that very link, has quotes from two of Romney's former classmates, saying that he would never do anything like that.

[Nebrfarmr]

No, no, no.  I am not coming out in defence of bullying.

What I asked, is why is there one standard for some people, where accusations do not count, and only convictions, or written record of an incident are required for there to be any 'guilt', yet for other people, a link to a news article, where they quote one guy as saying 'so and so did this', yet on the same article, two others say 'so and so would never do that', it is somehow proof enough?

I can remember an incident of a person who was sitting in jail, with a conviction, who was appealing a technicality of the case (not whether or not the crime - sex with a minor - occured) and there was someone championing the cause of not considering that person 'guilty' (of sex with a minor) because their appeal hadn't gone through completely yet.

How can that same person, then turn around, and say this happened, when there is only accusations from one guy, with no other proof?

[Nebrfarmr]

I can understand your frustration, but using bad behavior, to justify more bad behavior, only leads to more bad behavior.

[schnurrbart]

That is true but I am tired of reading garbage about "ignorant commie liberals" posted by "ignorant rambo rightwingers" who for the most part don't have a single day in the military between them but continue talking about guns and revolution, etc.  They feel that calling me names is justified but are highly incensed if I return the favor.

[kraft-t]

It doesn't matter to me whether he did or didn't. But saying he don't recall is a bit of a stretch. He should either admit it or deny it. Idon't recall is BS!

[Nebrfarmr]

If he didn't do it, he would have no memory of it.

Possibly, he had too much to drink one time in High School, and it may have happened, and he doesn't remember it.  There are documented accounts of people in high school, who got drunk, and were walking around in a daze, which I am sure prevents them form remembering everything.

Maybe, he remembers it, but doesn't want to admit it.

Any way you slice it, he used the 'safe' answer.

If he said he remembers doing it, he'll be called a bully.

If he says he never did it, he'll be called a liar.

Either way, the high school dealings of the candidates, to me seem to be a non-issue, in this election.

[kraft-t]

No! He made the phoney answer on purpose.