Yesterday Thom Hartmann opined that he has observed several
instances of Clinton attacking Obama "below the belt," he has not
heard of him doing likewise to her. He was defining "below the
belt" as an attack that does damage not only to the candidate but
also to the party's ability to win the election.
What do you think?
FurPaw
--
The plural of anecdote is not proof.
To reply, unleash the dogs
