In article , "Doug Kanter" wrote:

"Henry Blackmoore" wrote in message
thlink.net...


Hey, you're MAKING my point, and don't even realize it!!!!! Too funny!
I'll break the analogy down for you...just FOR YOU.....
Pete Rose spent his life in baseball, you are correct. Pete Rose,
because he spent his life in baseball, knows an awful lot about the
subject, and could EASILY be called an expert, and correctly so.

Yeah, but don't you know that one mistake erases everything you ever knew
about your profession?

One mistake may not erase everything that one knows about their profession
however depending on the magnitude of the mistake it certainly could
discredit
one from having any weight as an authority.

Just one problem: "Magnitude" is 100% subjective, unless you're talking
about a clear case of treason or other serious crime. Usually, it means that
self-righteous zeros have nothing better to do than criticize prominent
people for committing sins which they themselves would commit, given the
opportunity. So, Pete Rose gets nailed to a cross for gambling, while his
fans continue pouring money down the toilet with church bingo games and
lottery tickets. Or, Clinton is assaulted for being human, while Gingrich is
led away quietly before his shady past is uncovered (much).

So, tell me why YOU think Rose's credibility is suspect?

The topic or subject matter wasn't Pete Rose.

But since you asked; How isn't a known liar's credibility suspect???

To this day (or up onto recently) Pete has done nothing but deny the
allegations that he gambled on baseball.

Does lying about one's criminal behavior make one credible in your jaded eyes?