Tuesday, March 25, 2008
So..? I Made a Mistake.
It’s not the only one. I’m not going to list them here, I don’t have that much time. But this one is in the McCain category. Remember when he and probably Lindsey Graham among others went strolling through a market in Baghdad claiming it was perfectly safe, bla, bla, bla. While they were body armored up and covered by a battalion or so, on the ground and in the air. It was all BS, manufactured to sell the “Surge,” or escalation as I prefer, and believe to be more accurate. Hillary Clinton has said several times in scripted speeches that she had a dangerous, “under sniper fire” moment in Bosnia. “A trip too dangerous for the President.” She said it quite awhile ago and again recently on more than one setting and covered by the press. It has been You Tubed to death, I am sure. It will be used in ads against her if she gets nomination. It was not a misstatement, it was a lie. The kind of lie that makes me cringe. She is conflating all kinds of “experience.” And even though it has been proven to be a lie, unlike Bill, at least, she just shrugs and says, “So..? I misspoke, I’m human.” Does this response remind you of anyone?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Dear K and J, I'm so glad to have you back and commenting. Nobody gets the conversation going better than an you J and an irrational anti-Obama rant. Here's a little red meat. And just so we're clear on this. If Hillary ends up with the nomination I will vote for her. I might even volunteer for her. But it will be one of those votes where one must chose between the lesser of two evils, so to speak. But please do not insult my intelligence by calling my reasoned and sincere support of Senator Obama as my having drunk the kool aid--it is insulting.
And every time you go off on one of your irrational anti-Clinton rants (which has been much more often than your going off on very *rational* anti-McCain rants), it insults ME. It cuts both ways, U.S., so I find it interesting that you tell me how to behave when you behave the exact same way, only for the opposing candidate.
But fair is fair...if you don't want me to say you drank the kool-aid anymore, I won't. At least not about supporting Obama, which I will gladly do if he gets the nomination...and not because he is the lesser of two evils (another unfair assertion).
Because in reality--and this has only become clear to me in literally the last few seconds, as I have been writing these comments--the kool-aid you drank was not on Obama. It was on hating Hillary, that sweetest of media-constructed, empty-calorie beverages. Because it has caused you to use all of your rhetorical power to slam her against the pavement headfirst. That should not be your goal, because we have a Republican candidate who is globe-trotting Presidential-style, and lapping up independent voters in the process.
As long as people continue to vote the lesser of two evils there will never be a change from the status quo in this country. Until we can get a 3rd, 4th, 5th..........party we will be stuck with the republicrates. McCain, Clinton, Obama it doesn't matter, the corporations own them all. Wake up people if we do not break up the monopoly in DC we are all doomed. Don't vote the lesser of two evils, lets find a third party candidate and get it the % of the popular vote to have a voice. I do not go along with everything Nader has to say but at least I can trust that he will be looking out for my, john q public, interest before Mr C's.
J. Stop insulting me. I was a passionate suppoter of Bill when he was a young upstart with a thin resume who ran and won. I loved The Clintons. I hated the constant investigations, but Hillary's behavior throughout those years was not endearing then and it is even less so now that it really matters. She was her own worst enemy on the first try a universal health care. She was arrogant and stubborn. Not endearing qualities in either sex. Then there were the constant recurring sex scandals and all the while Bill was stupping a very young white house intern.
Mention the words navy blue dress to almost any adult over thirty five and they will say, Monica. Probably you do not need a lecture on history or racism. I have been a fiminist longer than you have been alive, and believe me I do not need a lecture from you on feminism or the Clintons, a discussion, yes. But a lecture. Absolutely not.
If I'm going to get shut down and silenced, why exactly do I visit this site and make comments?
Make no mistake...you and everyone else who comments on this site starts their own "lecture thread"...that is, unless we are all in lock-step and are just patting each other on the back.
You say I'm insulting you and then you play the "Hillary card"--that which you detest--by saying it's because you've been around longer and have more experience with...everything. So therefore I have no right to make any comments.
Clearly I have misunderstood what this forum is about. I will be sure to curtail my comments from now on.
Forget it Jay. Your rants are irrational broadsides of bird shot. Bring Kay back. I'm sure she'll give us detailed accounts on:
1) Hillary's trip to Tusla in 1996?
2) Hillary in Northern Ireland making peace.
3) And tell us how pleased you are that Hillary is reaching out to Richard Mellon Scaife, the owner of the paper and the man who once said that the murder of Vincent Foster was the "Rosetta stone" of the Bill Clinton administration.
On second thought, if Kay won't reappear, I'll settle for you, Jay. As a recent Clinton supporter, I really need an understanding as to how current Clinton believers think. It's rare that they are as brave as you are, daring as you do to show up out side of Taylor-Marsh.
J, I am shutting no one down. I love your comments. You did not misunderstand the purpose of this at all. We may disagree vehemently--but I have never called your support for Hillary irrational. I have called your anti-Obama stance irrational and I'm sorry for that. I used to support Hillary. I watched her as a campaigner and I grew to question her judgement. I want a female president, but I'd prefer it not be Hillary Clinton. This does not make me a misogynist, it makes me discerning. It isn't women, it's this particular woman.
Glad you'll "settle" for me, Vig. You are such a bastion of blogging goodwill.
I would be happy for K, not "Kay," to come back. She seems to make more sense to you all. I have encouraged her to contribute more.
As for me, I have reacted to the piling on I have seen happen time and again on this blog. I have responded, I have been ripped apart, and I have just about reached my tolerance level.
Well now that was a fascinating read! Personally I also support Obama, not because I hate HillDog but because he is the more qualified of the two candidates in every respect. Clearly she lied about saying she landed under sniper fire. This is not something one forgets easily. She lied! Pure and simple. Like Utah, however, if that dark day comes and she is somehow nominated I will vote for her. While she is not nearly as qualified as Obama she is more qualified than McBush to bring this country up from the abyss. Did I mention she lied?
Hey, Mike,
What were you just saying in the other post about lying? Interesting. :)
I take a different perspective than most. Most of the shitty things that happen in politics... well, its OUR fault. They give us what they think we want. Its like advertising. I could get mad 'til the cows come home about the way perfume or cosmetics are advertised, but the advertising must work because they sell billions.
Politicians lie and craft "truth"... they create political narratives to win campaigns in the same way mascara is sold to consumers. Focus on our fears and our desires and give us what makes us feel better about our fears and desires.
They are ALL beholden to special interest groups and none of them are clean. NONE of them.
Ultimately, its about voting who you think can beat the enemy, the other side... and to me, we need certain things in this country that Obama and Clinton will and can give us. I just think she has a better chance of doing it.
I refuse to act like either one of them is more saintly or cleaner or better as people... frankly, none of us really know either one of them. We know what has been constructed by them and by others ABOUT them. Period.
Rally people! Rally against the conservative "wrong" before we do irrefutable damage, and we get fucked for another 4 years.
Bravo k! Yes, the marketing aspect is true. But listen to what the candidates themselves say. Hillary has a problem with the truth and transparency. Where the hell are her tax returns. And being a First Lady counts for shit. If that counts look for Laura Bush to run. What a farce.
K. you are once again right. Your cynicism plays well and I do not mean that as an insult. On the contrary it serves to cut through the BS right to the heart of the matter. Very interesting and thought provoking. I may cross post that comment on my blog.
As long as people continue to vote the lesser of two evils there will never be a change from the status quo in this country.
Yes! I'm still annoyed that Mike Gravel, who admittedly never had a chance, joined the Libertarians. It seems high time the Green Party (no pun intended...) starts recruiting more diligently. There's a party I could support.
I like J AND K. They're thoughtful and fascinating letters.
Post a Comment