Biden's Wife was NOT killed by a drunk driver.

[rparmfamily]

I agree with Suzy's post. But it does make one question the integrity of Biden when he does this with this particular tragedy. Is nothing off limits for him?

You weren't voting for him anyway, so BS.

 

[TCPluto]

You weren't voting for him anyway, so BS.

Huh? What does this mean?

No, I wasn't. But by the same token, I don't think you were voting McCain/Palin either. But that's no reason for not setting the record straight for those peering into the thread. For some, if they hear it often enough uncontested, it becomes truth. You konw, like Biden was trying to do. It just isn't working out so well for him.

 

[DawnCt1]

So can you please post the FACT about the driver's breathalyzer? Also the FACT of blood taken from the driver?

Why? Do you intend to pursue charges posthumously, when the police, the prosecutor, who is now a judge, has stated emphatically that alcohol wasn't involved?

 

[DawnCt1]

In reality, this is not really revelant to the campaign - but the news media has made it relevant. They are running stories about Biden saying that the man was drunk - there is NO evidence that he was and I believe Biden's campaign even admitted as much.

So the question is why has Biden made these statements? B/C it makes a better news story and makes him more human and sympathetic to the general population. Even in his accusation he pretty much admits it is speculation. I think it speaks to his character using his dead wife and child as a campaign tool but others might not - everyone should form their own opinion.

Dawn is not low for bringing it up - it is a current and relevant news story - there are quite a few articles out therea about it.

Exactly, it is a tragic event that stands by itself. There was no need to enhance it.

 

[yeartolate]

You're really obsessed with this BAC argument, aren't you? I'll rely on my 29 years experience on the topic, thank you.

Search the net. He's made the remark several times. He knows it's a lie, and has tacitly admitted that in his recent response.

The truck driver was hospitalized apparently, a medical draw was available. Guess what. No alcohol.

But what does it matter how many times Biden has told this lie? Isn't telling the lie once enough to question his motive and credibility? Why, yes, it is.

His use of the word "allegedly" doesn't change anything. He intimated, purposely, that the guy was drunk. He sued this awful tragedy from the past to garner present day sympathy.

A grieving father and husband was told some probably wrong information. He repeated it a few times. HE was corrected. He stopped . What is your issue? I have been a critical care nurse for 25 plus years and I can tell you in these crisis situations you cannot count on what information that people will latch on to. The issue is that we can never really know what he was told 36 years ago and to focus on it now is just wierd.

You seem to be telling me that if sosmeone in good faith gives some information they believe to be accurate they are liars. Sorry, but that is just obsucure. The moral "ickiness" iMHO would only come if when they found out the information to be false they kept repeating it.

 

[DawnCt1]

A grieving father and husband was told some probably wrong information. He repeated it a few times. HE was corrected. He stopped . What is your issue? I have been a critical care nurse for 25 plus years and I can tell you in these crisis situations you cannot count on what information that people will latch on to. The issue is that we can never really know what he was told 36 years ago and to focus on it now is just wierd.

You seem to be telling me that if sosmeone in good faith gives some information they believe to be accurate they are liars. Sorry, but that is just obsucure. The moral "ickiness" iMHO would only come if when they found out the information to be false they kept repeating it.

He apparently STOPPED, and then started again. I think by 2007, he knows the truth. He stated it when campaigning in Iowa last year.

 

[luvmy3]

Thats what bothers me about Biden making these statements. I'm sure he believes that this man is at fault, who wouldn't but he has stated that he believes that the rumors of alcohol use are false. The facts are that this man was never charged and the investigation stated alcohol played no part. So, why is that Biden brings it up again anytime he is campaiging? Is it to get sympathy from voters? It just makes me wonder.

 

[TCPluto]

A grieving father and husband was told some probably wrong information. He repeated it a few times. HE was corrected. He stopped . What is your issue? I have been a critical care nurse for 25 plus years and I can tell you in these crisis situations you cannot count on what information that people will latch on to. The issue is that we can never really know what he was told 36 years ago and to focus on it now is just wierd.

You seem to be telling me that if sosmeone in good faith gives some information they believe to be accurate they are liars. Sorry, but that is just obsucure. The moral "ickiness" iMHO would only come if when they found out the information to be false they kept repeating it.

You make my point very well, thank you.

The accident was over three decades ago. He knew, a least within months of the accident, what the facts were and that alcohol was not a factor, the truck driver had not been drinking.

Biden continues with the drunk driving comments as recently as last year, therefore triggering the "ickiness" factor you speak of.

 

[Disney Doll]

So can you please post the FACT about the driver's breathalyzer? Also the FACT of blood taken from the driver?

You are putting the emphasis on the word FACT, so I will too.

Actually, it would be very helpful to have the FACTS of the other driver's Blood Alcohol Level & breathalyzer, if either were done.

Since it doesn't appear that we have those FACTS, then on what FACTS are Senator Biden basing his statement that the other driver "drank his lunch"?

If the side that you disagree with needs these FACTS to "prove" their argument, then the side that agrees with you should need these same FACTS to prove their argument as well. What Senator Biden "heard" at that difficult time should still not be enough to excuse him from making a statement about another person, which can tarnish that person's reputation, if that statement may not be true. He is then making a statement not based on the FACTS that you are so vehemently requiring from the "other side".

Please understand that I have the utmost sympathy for Senator Biden for what I am sure was a horrible, tragic loss. There are no words to describe what he went through. But put yourself in the position of the other man's family. Their loved one is now dead and there is a public political figure insinuating that his family was killed by this man because he was drunk. If that was not true, I wouldn't want it to be said about my late father, no matter how tragic the accident, no matter how tragic the circumstances.

And since there don't seem to be FACTS to back that up...at least none that are being made public...then a public statement about the other driver should not be made either. It has nothing to do with liking or disliking Senator Biden...I actually think he seems like a wonderful family man and has had a lot of very pertinent political experience & would make a great VP because of his life and political experience...but if it is abhorrent to speak about his late wife and her possible part in this accident, why is it not as abhorrent to insinuate that the other driver was drunk without the FACTS to back it up.

Since there are no FACTS to back up either side's argument, then about the only thing we CAN say for certain was that it was a tragedy on many levels, for both families.

 

[Mermaid02]

You are putting the emphasis on the word FACT, so I will too.

Actually, it would be very helpful to have the FACTS of the other driver's Blood Alcohol Level & breathalyzer, if either were done.

Since it doesn't appear that we have those FACTS, then on what FACTS are Senator Biden basing his statement that the other driver "drank his lunch"?

If the side that you disagree with needs these FACTS to "prove" their argument, then the side that agrees with you should need these same FACTS to prove their argument as well. What Senator Biden "heard" at that difficult time should still not be enough to excuse him from making a statement about another person, which can tarnish that person's reputation, if that statement may not be true. He is then making a statement not based on the FACTS that you are so vehemently requiring from the "other side".

Please understand that I have the utmost sympathy for Senator Biden for what I am sure was a horrible, tragic loss. There are no words to describe what he went through. But put yourself in the position of the other man's family. Their loved one is now dead and there is a public political figure insinuating that his family was killed by this man because he was drunk. If that was not true, I wouldn't want it to be said about my late father, no matter how tragic the accident, no matter how tragic the circumstances.

And since there don't seem to be FACTS to back that up...at least none that are being made public...then a public statement about the other driver should not be made either. It has nothing to do with liking or disliking Senator Biden...I actually think he seems like a wonderful family man and has had a lot of very pertinent political experience & would make a great VP because of his life and political experience...but if it is abhorrent to speak about his late wife and her possible part in this accident, why is it not as abhorrent to insinuate that the other driver was drunk without the FACTS to back it up.

Since there are no FACTS to back up either side's argument, then about the only thing we CAN say for certain was that it was a tragedy on many levels, for both families.

 

[LuvDuke]

This is sick.

 

[yeartolate]

Since there are no FACTS to back up either side's argument, then about the only thing we CAN say for certain was that it was a tragedy on many levels, for both families.

That is the most intelligent thing said on this thread .