Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Right, it's time we cleared up a few things here guys.  Yeah sure - after 12 years and probably tens of thousands of speaking engagements and press conferences, and as sleep-deprived as I'm sure she must be these days - Hillary misspoke at an event on the 17th and for that people have been jumping down her throat.

She said they went into a camp under sniper fire but as she's said on lots of occasions before - the sniper fire was in the nearby hills and the Army had snipers around the air field as she landed for protection.  But let's get one thing clear here boys & girls - she was flying into a combat zone. Something that I'm pretty sure her rival for this nomination has ever done and (I'm pretty sure) never will do any time soon.

Take a look at what CBS reported at the time...

Now some of Hillary's critics are claiming this wasn't a case of her getting it wrong - that she'd been reading from a prepared text so that proves this was done on purpose.  They point to this page as proof but if you'll follow that link you'll see that these were her remarks as delivered.  The part about Bosnia was NOT in her prepared remarks that day.

Now I've done a little digging and found a few things on the Net.  Check it out...

Lissa Muscatine, who served as Hilary Clinton's chief speechwriter in 1996 and accompanied her on the Bosnia trip, feels that I have failed to provide a full picture of what took place. She gave me her "vivid recollections" of the arrival in Tuzla, which I quote below:

I was on the plane with then First Lady Hillary Clinton for the trip from Germany into Bosnia in 1996. We were put on a C17-- a plane capable of steep ascents and descents -- precisely because we were flying into what was considered a combat zone. We were issued flak jackets for the final leg because of possible sniper fire near Tuzla. As an additional precaution, the First Lady and Chelsea were moved to the armored cockpit for the descent into Tuzla. We were told that a welcoming ceremony on the tarmac might be canceled because of sniper fire in the hills surrounding the air strip. From Tuzla, Hillary flew to two outposts in Bosnia with gunships escorting her helicopter.

Source

And this from the FactHub...

Hillary recently misspoke about her trip to Bosnia. She accurately describes the trip in her book, Living History:

'Due to reports of snipers in the hills around the airstrip, we were forced to cut short an event on the tarmac...' "Security conditions were constantly changing in the former Yugoslavia, and they had recently deteriorated again. Due to reports of snipers in the hills around the airstrip, we were forced to cut short an event on the tarmac with local children, though we did have time to meet them and their teachers and to learn how hard they had worked during the war to continue classes in any safe spot they could find. ... We were then off to the fortified American base at Tuzla, where over two thousand American, Russian, Canadian, British, and Polish soldiers were encamped in a large tent city." [Living History, p. 343]

Contemporaneous news accounts confirm that Hillary's trip to Bosnia was a dangerous situation:

Hillary's trip to Bosnia marked the first time since Eleanor Roosevelt that a first lady traveled to a potential combat zone. Accompanied by singer-songwriter Sheryl Crow and comedian Sinbad, Mrs. Clinton traveled to this northwestern Bosnian town on a morale-boosting tour for the 18,500 U.S. troops participating in the NATO-led peacemaking operation. She heard a poem of peace from a Bosnian girl and praised U.S. troops for 'showing what American leadership is.'...This trip to Bosnia marks the first time since Roosevelt that a first lady has voyaged to a potential combat zone. During World War II, Roosevelt toured the devastated streets of London and the southwestern Pacific, bringing cheer to U.S. troops. [Washington Post, 3/26/96]

Hillary was 'protected by sharpshooters' in a 'military zone' when she visited troops in Bosnia. "Protected by sharpshooters, Hillary Rodham Clinton swooped into a military zone by Black Hawk helicopter Monday to deliver a personal 'thank you, thank you, thank you' to U.S. troops. 'They're making a difference,' the first lady said of the 18,500 Americans working as peacekeepers in Bosnia. Mrs. Clinton became the first presidential spouse since Eleanor Roosevelt to make such an extensive trip into what can be considered a hostile area, though others have visited hot spots..." [Charleston Gazette, 3/26/96]

And a comment left in an open thread at TalkLeft on Sunday - apparently, Sinbad (the guy who set all this off) wasn't on the entire trip with Senator Clinton - just part of it...

I did some research on Lexis Nexis last night (5.00 / 6) (#131)
by standingup on Sun Mar 23, 2008 at 04:45:19 PM EST

The trip she made to Bosnia was on March 25, 1996.  I can't find anything in the press reports that supports the exact account that Hillary has recollected but Sinbad's account might be underscoring the risk too.  She did visit two outposts outside of the base camp in Tuzla without the celebrities there for the USO tour.  

Protected by sharpshooters, Hillary Rodham Clinton swooped into a military zone by Black Hawk helicopter Monday to deliver a personal "thank you, thank you, thank you" to U.S. troops.
...
But this was a day of celebration and celebrities - a day for the U.S. troops helping to uphold the Bosnian peace accord. Mrs. Clinton hosted a USO show with comedian Sinbad and singer Sheryl Crow and briefly addressed the gathering.
...
But the highlight of her trip were visits to two fortified posts outside the U.S. base in Tuzla. Even President Clinton, restricted to the base by bad weather in January, did not see as much of this war-wracked region as Mrs. Clinton did Monday.
...
Riflemen rushed to the brush line as the helicopter landed and surrounded her as she walked into the post. Located in a "separation zone," the U.S. outpost nestles between two tree lines. Just months ago, one was Serbian territory, the other Bosnian.

Security was tight - fighter jets accompanied her C-17 cargo plane to Tuzla - but officials said the first lady took no extraordinary risks on the trip.

Lexis - By RON FOURNIER, Associated Press, March 25, 1996

Another report:

THE First Lady of the United States, Hillary Clinton, visited her country's troops at their fortified outposts in north-eastern Bosnia today and said their peacekeeping work was "extraordinary to behold".

Mrs Clinton's helicopter flight to Camp Alicia, home of a mechanised infantry outfit and a combat engineer batallion 15 miles east of Tuzla, took her over burned out villages and farm houses whose roofs had been blown off in the fierce fighting before last December's Paris peace agreement ended the 43 -month-old war in Bosnia.

A machine gun emplacement guarded the entrance of the outposts and marked Bosnian minefields were visible outside its perimeter.
...
After lunch with the troops in a makeshift dining hall surrounded by sandbags, she flew on to Camp Bedrock south of Tuzla to visit an army field hospital.

Mrs Clinton, who later returned to Tuzla for a show starring singer Sheryl Crow and comedian Sinbad, said she was "amazed at how much has been accomplished in such a short period of time" by US troops in Bosnia.

Source - Lexis - The Herald (Glasgow), March 26, 1996

And she did spend some time in the cockpit ;-)

So it was probably no accident that the C-17 pilot was a woman, Capt. Cheryl Beineke of Ohio. She is among just four female C-17 pilots out of about 100 in the Air Force.

"I'm loving every minute of this," the pilot said after Mrs. Clinton spent several minutes in the cockpit.

Source - Lexis - By RON FOURNIER, AP International, March 25, 1996

Ok now why don't we take a look at some of the instances where St. Obama's misspoken, eh?

Just Embellished Words: Senator Obama's Record of Exaggerations & Misstatements

Once again, the Obama campaign is getting caught saying one thing while doing another. They are personally attacking Hillary even though Sen. Obama has been found mispeaking and embellishing facts about himself more than ten times in recent months. Senator Obama's campaign is based on words -not a record of deeds - and if those words aren't backed up by facts, there's not much else left.

"Senator Obama has called himself a constitutional professor, claimed credit for passing legislation that never left committee, and apparently inflated his role as a community organizer among other issues. When it comes to his record, just words won't do. Senator Obama will have to use facts as well," Clinton spokesman Phil Singer said.

Sen. Obama consistently and falsely claims that he was a law professor. The Sun-Times reported that, "Several direct-mail pieces issued for Obama's primary [Senate] campaign said he was a law professor at the University of Chicago. He is not. He is a senior lecturer (now on leave) at the school. In academia, there is a vast difference between the two titles. Details matter." In academia, there's a significant difference: professors have tenure while lecturers do not. [Hotline Blog, 4/9/07; Chicago Sun-Times, 8/8/04]

Obama claimed credit for nuclear leak legislation that never passed."Obama scolded Exelon and federal regulators for inaction and introduced a bill to require all plant owners to notify state and local authorities immediately of even small leaks. He has boasted of it on the campaign trail, telling a crowd in Iowa in December that it was 'the only nuclear legislation that I've passed.' 'I just did that last year,' he said, to murmurs of approval. A close look at the path his legislation took tells a very different story. While he initially fought to advance his bill, even holding up a presidential nomination to try to force a hearing on it, Mr. Obama eventually rewrote it to reflect changes sought by Senate Republicans, Exelon and nuclear regulators. The new bill removed language mandating prompt reporting and simply offered guidance to regulators, whom it charged with addressing the issue of unreported leaks. Those revisions propelled the bill through a crucial committee. But, contrary to Mr. Obama's comments in Iowa, it ultimately died amid parliamentary wrangling in the full Senate." [New York Times, 2/2/08]

Obama misspoke about his being conceived because of Selma."Mr. Obama relayed a story of how his Kenyan father and his Kansan mother fell in love because of the tumult of Selma, but he was born in 1961, four years before the confrontation at Selma took place. When asked later, Mr. Obama clarified himself, saying: 'I meant the whole civil rights movement.'" [New York Times, 3/5/07]

LA Times: Fellow organizers say Sen. Obama took too much credit for his community organizing efforts."As the 24-year-old mentor to public housing residents, Obama says he initiated and led efforts that thrust Altgeld's asbestos problem into the headlines, pushing city officials to call hearings and a reluctant housing authority to start a cleanup. But others tell the story much differently. They say Obama did not play the singular role in the asbestos episode that he portrays in the best-selling memoir 'Dreams From My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance.' Credit for pushing officials to deal with the cancer-causing substance, according to interviews and news accounts from that period, also goes to a well-known preexisting group at Altgeld Gardens and to a local newspaper called the Chicago Reporter. Obama does not mention either one in his book." [Los Angeles Times, 2/19/07]

Chicago Tribune: Obama's assertion that nobody had indications Rezko was engaging in wrongdoing 'strains credulity.'"...Obama has been too self-exculpatory. His assertion in network TV interviews last week that nobody had indications Rezko was engaging in wrongdoing strains credulity: Tribune stories linked Rezko to questionable fundraising for Gov. Rod Blagojevich in 2004 -- more than a year before the adjacent home and property purchases by the Obamas and the Rezkos." [Chicago Tribune editorial, 1/27/08]

Obama was forced to revise his assertion that lobbyists 'won't work in my White House.'"White House hopeful Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) was forced to revise a critical stump line of his on Saturday -- a flat declaration that lobbyists 'won't work in my White House' after it turned out his own written plan says they could, with some restrictions... After being challenged on the accuracy of what he has been saying -- in contrast to his written pledge -- at a news conference Saturday in Waterloo, Obama immediately softened what had been his hard line in his next stump speech." [Chicago Sun-Times, 12/16/07]

FactCheck.org: 'Selective, embellished and out-of-context quotes from newspapers pump up Obama's health plan.'"Obama's ad touting his health care plan quotes phrases from newspaper articles and an editorial, but makes them sound more laudatory and authoritative than they actually are. It attributes to The Washington Post a line saying Obama's plan would save families about $2,500. But the Post was citing the estimate of the Obama campaign and didn't analyze the purported savings independently. It claims that "experts" say Obama's plan is "the best.""Experts" turn out to be editorial writers at the Iowa City Press-Citizen - who, for all their talents, aren't actual experts in the field. It quotes yet another newspaper saying Obama's plan "guarantees coverage for all Americans," neglecting to mention that, as the article makes clear, it's only Clinton's and Edwards' plans that would require coverage for everyone, while Obama's would allow individuals to buy in if they wanted to." [FactCheck.org, 1/3/08]

Sen. Obama said 'I passed a law that put Illinois on a path to universal coverage,' but Obama health care legislation merely set up a task force."As a state senator, I brought Republicans and Democrats together to pass legislation insuring 20,000 more children. And 65,000 more adults received health care...And I passed a law that put Illinois on a path to universal coverage." The State Journal-Register reported in 2004 that "The [Illinois State] Senate squeaked out a controversial bill along party lines Wednesday to create a task force to study health-care reform in Illinois. [...] In its original form, the bill required the state to offer universal health care by 2007. That put a 'cloud' over the legislation, said Sen. Dale Righter, R-Mattoon. Under the latest version, the 29-member task force would hold at least five public hearings next year." [Obama Health Care speech, 5/29/07; State Journal-Register, 5/20/04]

ABC News: 'Obama...seemed to exaggerate the legislative progress he made' on ethics reform."ABC News' Teddy Davis Reports: During Monday's Democratic presidential debate, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., seemed to exaggerate the legislative progress he has made on disclosure of "bundlers," those individuals who aggregate their influence with the candidate they support by collecting $2,300 checks from a wide network of wealthy friends and associates. When former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel alleged that Obama had 134 bundlers, Obama responded by telling Gravel that the reason he knows how many bundlers he has raising money for him is "because I helped push through a law this past session to disclose that." Earlier this year, Obama sponsored an amendment [sic] in the Senate requiring lobbyists to disclose the candidates for whom they bundle. Obama's amendment would not, however, require candidates to release the names of their bundlers. What's more, although Obama's amendment was agreed to in the Senate by unanimous consent, the measure never became law as Obama seemed to suggest. Gravel and the rest of the public know how many bundlers Obama has not because of a 'law' that the Illinois Democrat has 'pushed through' but because Obama voluntarily discloses that information." [ABC News, 7/23/07]

Obama drastically overstated Kansas tornado deaths during campaign appearance."When Sen. Barack Obama exaggerated the death toll of the tornado in Greensburg, Kan, during his visit to Richmond yesterday, The Associated Press headline rapidly evolved from 'Obama visits former Confederate capital for fundraiser' to `Obama rips Bush on Iraq war at Richmond fundraiser' to 'Weary Obama criticizes Bush on Iraq, drastically overstates Kansas tornado death toll' to 'Obama drastically overstates Kansas tornado deaths during campaign appearance.' Drudge made it a banner, ensuring no reporter would miss it." [politico.com, 5/9/07]

Twelve instances... when oh WHEN will they start doling out Pinocchios for these, eh?

U P D A T E

Wow - all these comments - all this outrage over what Hillary said and yet not one WORD about the 12 times (see above) where Obama got it wrong!

I've gotta say gang - the silence is deafening!

Seriously - you've got outrage to spare here. Can't you find even a little outrage for all those times when Obama got it wrong? Misspoke? Embellished? Exaggerated?

Notice I didn't jump the gun here and accuse him of lying without proof here?

If you're as sick of the double standards as I am, and it's been a while since you last donated, check your wallet and see if you can spare a fiver for the cause eh?

DONATE NOW!

Thanks! ;o)

Tags: 2008 elections, Barack Obama, Bosnia, Hillary Clinton, president, tuzla (all tags)

Comments

334 Comments

Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

One freakin' misstatement and they're making this big a deal out of it?

Stack that up against BO's stuff - no contest.  No way in hell.

by alegre 2008-03-25 06:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements
It's not one misstatement. She told the same story four times.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0 308/Sniper_fodder.html
by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 06:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

You listed the 3/17 speech fine.

The one after that wasn't the same comment - she said they moved a ceremony inside because of snipers and if you'd read my diary you'd know that she went on two separate trips without the celebs.  SO you don't know for a fact that she was wrong in that instance.

Your third example is video footage regarding the first instance on 3/17 - not a separate insident and again - you have no way of knowing whether she was talking about the main location of some of the outposts she visited.

As to the fourth case - again, this refers to her speech on 3/17.  Your link takes us to teh washington post fact checker post that started all of this dust-up.

Soooooooo your claim that this was said on four sep. occassions - NOT TRUE!

Nice try though.

(Didn't think I was going to follow your link - did you?)

by alegre 2008-03-25 07:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

I linked to a story. I didn't list anything.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Yeah but here's the thing...

You claimed that the story proved she misspoke FOUR TIMES.

Not true.

by alegre 2008-03-25 07:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements
The story says that she misspoke four times but, yes, you are right, it provided only two links.  
Don't worry, there will be a story soon with all four of them identified.  After all, CBS and other networks have found that she did tell the same false story four times.
by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:49PM | 0 recs
Yes, Alegre was right.

Can't wait to hear the "story" about all of Obama's mis-statements! LOL

by KnowVox 2008-03-25 08:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes, Alegre was right.

Yes. Except:

1. That list is largely BS from the Clinton campaign.

2. Those are legislative exaggerations. This was Hillary Clinton claiming to run into sniper fire. There's a difference....politically...between lying about these two things.

by Sinbad Sinbad 2008-03-26 04:33AM | 0 recs
Re: Yes, Alegre was right.

Sorry:

1. The source of documenting Obama's mis-statements is irrelevant. They're still lies.

2. Obama's "legislative" exaggerations are still whoppers. And frankly, grossly exaggerating your resume is grounds for firing at most respectable companies. Obama shouldn't be "hired."

by KnowVox 2008-03-26 06:19AM | 0 recs
Alegre is a Republican

How is quoting Hillary's book, and people working for Hillary proof that her account of what happend is accurate?

by munodi 2008-03-26 09:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Alegre is a Republican

How is Al is a republican any kind of answer?  If you accept Mr. obama's talking point that she is 'deeply flawed' and 'will do anything to be elected' then you can pick and chose what to believe and what not to. But most people see a preponderance of evidence, consistency and very few 'examples' of her misstating anything and no example of her not self-correcting, and think Obama is being a creep. That's way some of her supporters say they'll have a hard time voting for him, he's not honest about her and he's clearly the negative one.  She speaks about issues and he speaks about her character. Well, I guess if you have little positive to run on, going into the gutter looks high minded?  

by anna shane 2008-03-26 01:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes, Alegre was right.

Yes, there is a difference.  Lying about legislative accomplishments is worse than remembering an event inaccurately, but basically truthfully. Al Gore going to a disaster area with a FEMA guy, but he just named the wrong city, as I recall.  

Basically she went to a dangerous place wherever the snipers happened to be.  

But saying that you "stood up to powerful interests" to protect the people of Illinois from nuclear leaks was reported in the New York Times.  He said it to win the Iowa caucus.  It fit his image, but it was a big old easy lie.  

Whoever gets the nomination, they will be in for the "exaggerator" attacks by the press.  So we better get our McCain whoppers ready to lock and load.

by Feral Cat 2008-03-26 11:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

That's not what I said at all.

There are in fact three other links at ben smith's site.

One deals with an incedent that may or may not be the one Sinbad flew in to.  For all we know it could relate to one of her trips to those outposts in a chopper.

The other two deal directly with the first on the 17th.

But the fact remains - there are 12 similar incidents listed above where BO got it wrong.  So WHY can't I get you to comment on any of those?

I mean you're clearly worried about politicians who get it wrong or make mistakes.  So why all this outrage over Hillary but yet when it comes to BO...

CRICKETS.

Come on - just one or two comments re BO here.  Don't you have ANY concerns or problems with what's posted above????

by alegre 2008-03-25 08:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Do you really want me to repost my response to your multiple asking of the same question below?  It's not any different up there than it was when I posted it earlier down below.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 08:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

But the fact remains - there are 12 similar incidents listed above where BO got it wrong.  So WHY can't I get you to comment on any of those?
The BO statements are a smokescreen obscuring the core issue.  Did HRC tell a lie/misspeak/exaggerate about her trip to Bosnia?  "Yeah, but he did it too." is not a valid defense, nor does it have any relevence whatsoever to the facts in HRC's case.

If your diary were truly about mistatements by politicians and cited examples of several candidates to support a hypothesis, objective reporting of BO incidents might be worthy of discussion (and if they weren't straight off HRC's website).  As it is, however, you're merely citing HRC spin about BO to justify/obscure the unresolved (and that's being generous) issue of HRC's truthfulness on the Bosnia trip.

by rb608 2008-03-26 05:01AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

An admirable attempt to change the subject!

I'll just take one of Senator Obama's "misstatements" -- that he referred to himself as a professor when he was only a lecturer.  

I spent a decade in a large research university as doctoral candidate, teaching assistant, and administrator.  As part of my administrative work, I managed lists of professors in all of our ten graduate schools.  "Lecturer" is a title related to someone's place in the academic hierarchy, akin to "Assistant Professor," "Associate Professor," or "Full Professor."  No one actually uses these titles when speaking about a professor, unless their specific focus is the academic hierarchy.  No one would ever refer to someone as "Assistant Professor Smith" or "Lecturer Obama," for that matter.  Certainly, the titles get used when the focus is on the person's place in the hierarchy, but it's not what people think of first -- unless they're focused on tenure or something like that. The simple way to think about is that, when professors talk about what they do, they call themselves "professor"; when they're focused on their seniority, they use titles like "lecturer" or "assistant professor."

In other words, all of Obama's students would have called him "Professor Obama."  When asked which professor taught a class, they would have said, "Professor Obama," rather than pointedly saying, "It's not a professor teaching the class.  It's Lecturer Obama."

Thus, there is absolutely no misstatement in Senator Obama's having referred to himself as a constitutional law professor.  If the follow-up question had been, "Were you tenure track?", he would have said, "No, I was a lecturer."

This whole "Obama called himself a professor when he was really just a lecturer business" business is silly.  Even if there were something to it, which there isn't, it's a pretty pathetic counterpart to Senator Clinton's false statements regarding Tuzla.

by deminva 2008-03-26 05:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

This is the lead off "misstatement" from Obama?  That he called himself a "professor" when he was a "lecturer"?  Really?  

Pardon me while I piss my pants laughing.

When I taught as a lecturer I was introduced as "professor" by colleagues in classes as well as during faculty-only meetings where I was introduced to a colleague ("Jim, hey, I want you to meet our newest professor, Lars Thorwald.  Lars is a lecturer this semester in the new regulatory course...").

Ask a tenured professor whether he or she thinks it is a misstatement.  

Now ask a veteran whether telling a tall tale about ducking and running to a car without a greeting ceremony because you were taking sniper fire (Clinton: "That is what happened") is a misstatement.  Or if they care.

You will get too very different answers.

This diary is the worst sort of parsing and dissembling I have read in a very long time.  It's Clintonian.  

by LarsThorwald 2008-03-26 06:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

er, two very different answers.  Pardon the typo.  I was...sleep deprived.  

by LarsThorwald 2008-03-26 06:36AM | 0 recs
Keeping the Record Straight

I have an attorney in Pennsylvania.  When I was considering hiring him I asked what his qualifications were.  He listed being an "adjunct law professor" at Duchesne University, a perfectly correct title.

Later, in an e-mail to associates, copied to him, I referred to him as a "law professor". He was quick to correct me.  "I'm not a full professor.  I'm a lecturer."

An honorable man would leave no doubt as to what his actual status was.  My attorney certainly didn't, and he wasn't running for President.

by creeper1014 2008-03-26 06:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Keeping the Record Straight

Your attorney's two responses capture exactly what I'm talking about.  On a resume, an honorable person would be precise and write "Lecturer, University of Chicago School of Law."  But when you're talking about what you're doing, you don't say "I'm a constitutional law lecturer."  No one does--just as Lars says.

A simple way to think about the distinction is whether or not the word you're using should be capitalized.  Obama's title was "Lecturer," but his job was as a "constitutional law professor." In the same vein, I have a Ph.D. in English, so if anyone actually knew this, they might choose to refer to me as "Doctor Deminva," although I certainly don't work as a doctor.

As your attorney's response indicates, it's not uncommon for an adjunct professor to include the word adjunct when talking about what he or she does -- precisely because it's just an adjective added to the common word, i.e., professor.  

Bottom line: If you or anyone else can find any campus in the US where students say things like "Hey, who's the lecturer for that course?" or "Hi, Lecturer Jackson!", then you may have a case.  

Note, too, that as a state legislator, Senator Obama most likely had the title of Lecturer because he wasn't full-time faculty or because his legislative duties precluded his involvement in the sorts of things that tenure-track faculty do besides classroom teaching.  It wasn't that he couldn't get hired as an Assistant or Associate Professor at Chicago.

by deminva 2008-03-26 11:16AM | 0 recs
Re: "Hi, Lecturer Jackson"

Your bottom line is not relevant to the question.

Bottom line: If you or anyone else can find any campus in the US where students say things like "Hey, who's the lecturer for that course?" or "Hi, Lecturer Jackson!", then you may have a case.

We are not talking about common usage among college students.  We are talking about a statement made by the candidate himself as recently as 2007  

"`I was a constitutional law professor, which means unlike the current president I actually respect the Constitution,' Obama told an audience at a campaign fundraiser." (Brendan Farrington, "Obama: Bush Fails To Respect The Constitution," The Associated Press, 3/30/07)

as well as in those earlier direct-mail pieces alegre mentioned, issued for Obama's primary [Senate] campaign.

Source:  Chicago Sun Times, Aug. 8, 2004 (Lynn Sweet, "Obama's Book: What's Real, What's Not" )

If my lawyer could be honest about it, why couldn't Barack Obama?

by creeper1014 2008-03-26 01:07PM | 0 recs
Re: "Hi, Lecturer Jackson"

He was a constitutional law professor -- with the title of Lecturer.  It's the difference between asking someone what they do and what their rank is -- many of us have precisely analogous job names and separate official titles.  I used to joke with my mother about how proud she must be to have a son who was an "Agency Management Analyst -- General."  That was my official title from HR's perspective.

by deminva 2008-03-27 03:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Article in Sun Times: February 12, 2007

http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/ob ama/253391,CST-NWS-prof12.article (same Sunday Times that said he calls himself a professor when he's not)

Professor Obama was a listener, students say

'nuff said.

by Tommy Flanagan 2008-03-26 07:35AM | 0 recs
Because it shows

this is tactic of any defense of a liar.

I used to hear this all the time when I was a prosecutor. It is the first thing anyone does when they are caught.

It is an attempt to evade responsibility for the lie.  It is what children do when they are caught with their hand in the cookie jar.  It was what defense attorneys do when they know thier clients are guilty.

Hillary Clinton has lied about her experience in a fundemental way. It will be used again and again to attack her.

It's not her first lie (the Michigan example I have provided many times here, and I have NEVER had a response from a Clinton supporter here about that).

by fladem 2008-03-26 10:06AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

H Rodham Clinton's Campaign.

This is a campaign?

I thought it was a long suicide note.

What a political joke the Clintons have become.

Malcolm

by malc19ken 2008-03-26 05:31AM | 0 recs
Okie-dokie

Follow this one

http://www.jedreport.com/

Sorry, can't figure out how to link... and bye the bye I really like your work and admire your efforts.

Keep it up.

by UrbanRedneck 2008-03-25 08:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

And here's the CBS News follow-up coverage showing more errors in what Clinton said - http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/ main500251.shtml?id=3968001n

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

This one shows that while she JUST TOLD a Philadelphia newspaper that she stopped to great a little girl and then left, without lingering on the tarmac - the video footage shows her taking plenty of time to shake hands and take pictures.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Interesting how you don't even attempt to defend all the misstatements made by Obama in this diary. Can't blame you... they're indefensible.

by KnowVox 2008-03-25 07:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

You are trying to deflect attention. It reminds me of how my kids try to get out of things by blaming their brother or sister. I don't put up with that sort of thing at home, so I don't see why I should here.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Half of this diary deals with Obama's multiple "mis-statements." You failed to address a single one. Supporting a candidate who's told so many whoppers, it's understandable why you'd want to avoid the topic of this diary.

by KnowVox 2008-03-25 08:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Are you a parent? If so, what do you do when one kid tries to get out of a problem by blaming a sibling?  I don't fall for that kind of thing myself.

And if Clinton supporters actually want to help her deal with this story, they would encourage her to get the details right asap and to admit they blew it. Otherwise, the media will double down and find more footage about this and other similar stories. The only way to wrap this up is to get it DONE. And you don't get it done by saying "The other candidate lied, too."

Sheesh. This is good advice and applies to basically every political problem that's generating a lot of media attention.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 08:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

So where were YOU, "Mom," when Obama started telling his string of outrageous whoppers? Funny how you didn't develop a conscience about candidates lying until you started pointing the finger at someone else. Start at home. Give your candidate a lecture about how it's not in his best interests to tell tall tales about his resume, positions and policies.

by KnowVox 2008-03-25 08:31PM | 0 recs
I read this whole thread
do you obfuscate this much with your children? Just curious?
by linc 2008-03-25 09:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Wow is this how you hide lies during discussions with your children? That must be very bad parenting!

Ignoring 50% of what one said, and harping on one single point is childish. I hope kids dont call you a hypocrite sometime soon.

by Sandeep 2008-03-25 11:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Holy shit, you're right! My God, he called himself a professor, when, in actually, he merely TEACHES COLLEGE. Quick, roll this whopper out to all the presses. TENURE-GATE! It makes Hillary's lies that re-enforce a nationally perceived career of lying (There IS no relationship) and deceptions look like paltry nuance compared to Obama's thunderous deceptions! Surely, once the MSM picks this one up Obama's ratings will plummet, and Hillary's will skyrocket, giving her the 65-70% victories she needs in every remaining state to talk back the pledged delegate lead and cinch her the nomination fair and square! Thank God we all woke up from our deluded dreaming!

by TheSilverMonkey 2008-03-25 08:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

all of this is pure nutsville, but for the sake of accuracy it is not true that only tenured professors carry the title.  Assistant Professor is the most common non-tenured rank, but there are lots of other titles like:
visiting professor
visiting assistant professor
senior lecturer

the differences would only be important in a formal application

and making a fuss about the tarmac remark is standard disinformation and seems to be the way the game is played, to everyone's disservice

by fernan47 2008-03-25 09:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

I pretty much agree with you that it is nonsense. I don't think the lack of specificity about the fineries of academic titles can truly be called an Obama misstatement. As for making a fuss about the tarmac, I don't see any real way to parse it. She exaggerated in response to claims that her trips were largely ceremonial ("I don't recall anyone serving me tea as I ran from sniper fire," "When it's too dangerous to send the President, you send the first lady," etc.). Now, she did, in fact, still make the trips. And I would say meeting with foreign officials and war zones definitely equates to some degree of foreign policy cred (though I would personally argue how important it is in terms of running the country, cred is cred). The real problem, however, is if these are legitimate claims, why did she need to embellish them so and not just present them as they were? This is definitely a big perception problem for HRC, especially considering polling where 53% of Americans already view her as untrustworthy, and I think that's why MSM is running with it like they are. Considering how much they harped on Obama pledging to pursue an agreement on campaign finance, it's little wonder how they're reacting here.

by TheSilverMonkey 2008-03-25 10:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Well said, SilverMonkey.

by fogiv 2008-03-26 06:51AM | 0 recs
She made stuff up

to make herself sound more presidential.  Hillary supporters, don your Kevlar, it's going to be a tough week for you.  The bullets will be flying thick and fast.  The media are finally getting sick of this charade.  The NAFTA thing has got new legs as well.

by ReillyDiefenbach 2008-03-25 09:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

The other problem with defending Obama's misstatements is that he is a SERIAL liar and misstater.  It is easy for the MSM and Obama followers to focus on ONE misstatement from Hillary but if a guy lies and misstates every time he opens his mouth, he gets away with it because it happens all of the living time.

It will be such a releif when he is finally forced to drop out of the primary campaign as the bigger criminal connections start to be revealed.

by macmcd 2008-03-26 04:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

There was sniper fire in the area, the plane did a typical landing for a combat zone, and the ceremony on the tarmac actually was cut short.  I think she accidentally conflated this event with the other one on the same trip where riflemen escorted her from a helicopter to the building where an event was held.  That one fits better with her description of running from the tarmac because of potential sniper fire.

And only someone eager to deny her all her real experience would deny that a trip where you have to be escorted from a helicopter by riflemen is pretty impressive for anyone, but especially for a first lady.

by Mike Pridmore 2008-03-25 07:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Watch the video linked above. It's a follow-up.

It clearly shows the arrival ceremony was NOT cut short.

Hillary lingers, shaking hands and posing for pictures. There is no feeling that she is rushing to do this quickly.

And if it was so unsafe, why did she leave her daughter out there? Why was there a large group of kids there with whom she took a picture?

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

It clearly shows the arrival ceremony was NOT cut short.

What're you kidding me?

And you know this how?  Were you privy to the original plans for that ceremony?  Did you have inside information that the ceremony went on for the intended length - contrary to what she claims?

Give - me - a - BREAK!

Sorry but you've got nothin' here kid.  Add to that the fact that you've made loads of comments here without a SINGLE WORD about the misstatements, exaggerations, or whatEVER you want ot call what BO said.

Seriously - I can't believe we're even having this discussion.  It's beyond absurd given the number of times BO's done this without anyone calling him on it.

So what - he gets a free pass here?

C'mon - talk to me.

by alegre 2008-03-25 07:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

So write a diary on that subject.

As I say below, if one of my kids brought up someone else's mistake when we were talking about what he or she had done, that would be a sign to me that he or she was not taking responsibility for his or her action.  

By the way, have you looked at the video yourself and seen Clinton taking her time with people taking pictures, shaking hands?  

There's something else to note: There are people on that trip who don't work for Hillary Clinton and they've become pretty big time reporters. And they say her account is bunk.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

C O L !!!!

Umm... I just did.

No comment????

by alegre 2008-03-25 08:31PM | 0 recs
Re: ZING!!!!!!!!!!

Great diary, Alegre! LMAO!!

by KnowVox 2008-03-25 08:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

I don't want to be a party crasher, but she did give the same story in Iowa in DEC, and Texas in FEB.

Tomorrow there will be a revealing expose in PA with Tuzla Veterans that will discuss Major General Walter Stewart's claim that this was  "valor theft"

This was a closed case, but HRC let it live when she told Pittsburgh media that she only misspoke once.

I suggest you all read: http://pennsylvaniaprogressive.typepad.c om/my_weblog/

They get all the great scoops in PA, and I am guessing they will have more news tomorrow AM.

by Veteran75 2008-03-25 07:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

The rule is -- When you're in a hole, stop digging.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Grave diggin'

Astute advice you should take.

by KnowVox 2008-03-25 08:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Seriously - I can't believe we're even having this discussion.  It's beyond absurd

Finally, Alegre, you've said something for which I'm in total agreement. But that could frankly be said of any of your diaries of late.

by bookish 2008-03-26 07:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Here's how the CBS story ends:

News Anchor Harry Smith: "In the end doesn't this really come down to a matter of can you trust what she says?"

Reporter Sharyl Attkisson: "I think so. I think that one reason political observers think this is so important is that Hillary Clinton has of course made experience her issue in this campaign saying she's the one that's best suited to answer that three-in-the-morning phone call."

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Yeah right because we all know the MSM are sooooo objective in this election - right?

Gimme a break.

by alegre 2008-03-25 08:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

That is not my point. It's that this is how the media are treating the story.  I rather doubt this is the kind of commentary that serves Clinton well.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 08:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Do you have any shame at all? Why not accept the situation for what it is instead of constantly giving your one sided commentary on this blog which used to be evenhanded?

by Pravin 2008-03-25 09:25PM | 0 recs
CBS

CBS is being too cute by half with its coverage of Clinton's "lies".  Last weekend they linked to a story in the WaPo with even-handed coverage of mis-statements by both Clinton and Obama.

Here's that story:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/2 4/politics/washingtonpost/main3961010.sh tml?source=search_story

Now CBS follows that excellent story with a hatchet job on Clinton.  And not just one story but two, cleverly crafted to do maximum damage to Clinton and provide maximum publicity to CBS.

First comes "Clinton Misspoke on Bosnia Trip".  
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/2 4/ap/politics/main3964859.shtml?source=s earch_story
It was coverage of her admission that she did, indeed, err in her description of portions of the Tuzla trip.  By itself it was certainly justified, even though it devoted one sentence to her acknowledgment of the error and eleven paragraphs to replaying it.  She was wrong and she said so.

Then CBS showed its true colors with a rehash, complete with film they forgot/neglected/refused to put in the first story (maybe to wring as much mileage out of it as possible?)..."CBS News Video Contradicts Clinton's Story".  
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/2 4/eveningnews/main3964921.shtml?source=s earch_story

Note who got mentioned first there.  

S'funny...we're trashing each other's candidates for lying when the biggest liars of all are the reporters we cite in "reliable" links.

by creeper1014 2008-03-26 08:05AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Why is anyone still believing anything that CBS or any of the other networks report.  Just like reports from the NYTimes, LATimes, and WashingtonPost.  These are the same "reporters (?)" who reported all the lies about the WMD that have resulted in at least 4000 US soldiers dead (read that they only count those who actually died in Iraq and not those who die later as a result of the wounds) and over a million Iraqis (but who's counting) and this country in super debt to the Chinese and Saudis.

by BARB 2008-03-27 03:37AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

The same misstatement multiple times.  As if she was remembering the event wrongly and unintentionally misspeaking about it.  What she actually did is impressive enough.  And she wants to claim that impressive experience because Obama supporters have tried to pretend all she did was have tea parties.  She obviously went into some pretty scary situations to represent the country, and it wasn't all tea and crumpets.  

This is not an intentional embellishment but is simply a 60 year old woman who is very tired misremembering some of the details of a trip from 12 years ago.  Simple as that.

by Mike Pridmore 2008-03-25 07:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

If she can't remember this traumatic event, maybe this 60 year-old woman, as you describe her, should not be answering that 3am phone.

by mefck 2008-03-25 07:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

She accidentally conflated two events from the same trip.  That's pretty easy to do.  And in this trip she went into a combat area to visit the troops.  And another time she met with the national leaders there to discuss the plight of refugees.  She said she negotiated to open the border.  Then some pointed out the borders were already open when she arrived.  Then it was pointed out that she did meet the national leaders to discuss the plight of the refugees, and the press ignored that last part and tried to call her a liar then too.  

She has the experience and was not just having parties with tea and crumpets.  Obama doesn't even have enough experiences to conflate two of them together by accident.

by Mike Pridmore 2008-03-25 07:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Why are making up this explanation?  Clinton hasn't given this explanation but somehow you know what actually happened with her memory?

And besides your patched together story doesn't explain why she made up new details about rushing off after greeting the girl that is at variance with the new video released by CBS news.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

She misremembers this event.  And there is plenty of stuff on this trip that we should be talking about, but somehow her experience in a combat zone is meaningless because she accidentally misremembers part of it.  What kind of bizarro world is that?  Do you really think she is intentionally giving stories that seem to contradict new footage from the time?  Why on earth would she do that?  To embellish a trip that needs no embellishment?  You must have a pretty low opinion of her to come up with that sort of explanation.  I think my explanation makes a lot more sense.

by Mike Pridmore 2008-03-25 07:56PM | 0 recs
You don't misspeak four different times.

That's called lying, plain and simple.

by ReillyDiefenbach 2008-03-25 09:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Do you really think she is intentionally giving stories that seem to contradict new footage from the time?

Absolutely. It has happened multiple times. The only person who is willing to back up her side was a former speechwriter, while several journalists who accompanied her are making it clear that her version is complete bullshit.

I haven't been willing to indulge the theory that she's tearing the party asunder to create a 2012 opportunity, because I didn't want to believe someone could be that selfish. But after her decision yesterday to make hay with the Wright issue, I'm beginning to wonder, and so is Mo Dowd.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/26/opinio n/26dowd.html?hp

by bookish 2008-03-26 03:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

It was 12 years ago.

Maybe we should ask BO what he was doing that day.  Oh wait - we can't.  He won't say and he claims all his schedules etc have been "lost."

by alegre 2008-03-25 08:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

That won't make the media stop asking these questions.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 08:36PM | 0 recs
Re: COL!

Now you're part of the media? LOL! You've made so many "mis-statements" in this diary alone tonight, you should seriously consider looking into the mirror before criticizing one of our leading candidates on anything she might have "mis-spoken."

by KnowVox 2008-03-25 08:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Look, I'd actually default to this position were it not for the fact that she is claiming that her and her only child were basically dodging sniper fire. I don't remember how I spent my night two weeks ago and if I struggle I can usually remember what I had for lunch the day before, but I know that if I and my child were subjected to mortal danger it would stick in my head quite clearly no matter how much time passed.

by tessellated 2008-03-27 03:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Why was this TR'ed?

Because he dared speaketh negatively about Queen Hillary?

Uh-oh, here come the one-spot's!

by doschi 2008-03-25 11:12PM | 0 recs
The Big Deal

The "big deal" is that Obama's "misstatements" and distortions are the REAL "big deal."

by KnowVox 2008-03-25 06:58PM | 0 recs
Re: The Big Deal

Why are Obama's "misstatements and distortions" a bigger deal than Clinton's or McCain's?

by bawbie 2008-03-25 06:59PM | 0 recs
Re: The Big Deal

C'mon... you guys are always talkin' about the math right?

She messed up once.

There are 12 separate things listed in my diary above where he messed up.

Do the math ;o)

by alegre 2008-03-25 07:08PM | 0 recs
Re: The Big Deal

Actually she repeated it at least 4 times, but besides that, are you really stating that Hillary has not made a single misstatement this entire campaign until this week?

Really?

by bawbie 2008-03-25 07:10PM | 0 recs
Re: The Big Deal

Not true, as you admitted upthread.

by KnowVox 2008-03-25 08:07PM | 0 recs
Re: The Big Deal

I'm the one who said that, yes, that link didn't show four times. But plenty of news organizations have shown them and have reported that there were four times when she said it.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 08:09PM | 0 recs
Re: The Big Deal

No - she didn't repeat it four times.

See discussion up-thread.

by alegre 2008-03-25 08:34PM | 0 recs
Re: The Big Deal

I'm pretty sure I saw four clips back-to-back on CNN last night, but I'll take a look at the "discussion".

by bawbie 2008-03-26 04:07AM | 0 recs
Re: The Big Deal

I could go over to FactCheck.org and copy/paste some of the other Clinton misstatements they have catalogued, too. You've spent some time over there, so you know it's not really 12 to 1.

by jdusek 2008-03-25 08:00PM | 0 recs
Re: The Big Deal

Yep:  Here's a few from FactCheck.org:

*Clinton claims to have "negotiated open borders" in Macedonia to fleeing Kosovar refugees. But the Macedonian border opened a full day before she arrived, and her meetings with Macedonian officials were too brief to allow for much serious negotiating.

Clinton's activities "helped bring peace to Northern Ireland." Irish officials are divided as to how helpful Clinton's actions were, and key players agree that she was not directly involved in any actual negotiations.

Both Bill and Hillary Clinton claim that Hillary privately championed the use of U.S. troops to stop the genocide in Rwanda. That conversation left no public record, however, as U.S. policy was explicitly to stay out of Rwanda, and officials say that the use of U.S. troops was never considered.

Clinton's tough speech on human rights delivered to a Beijing audience is as advertised, though Clinton herself has been dismissive of speeches that aren't backed by solutions.

On the heels of a big win in Ohio, Hillary Clinton said in an interview that "no person has ever won the White House without winning the Ohio primary, in either party." Her campaign is pushing a slightly amended version: "No candidate in recent history, Democrat or Republican, has won the White House without winning the Ohio primary."

We don't know how Clinton is defining "recent history," but you only have to go back to 1968 to find an exception. That year, Ohio Gov. James Rhodes won the state's Republican presidential primary. But Richard Nixon went on to win the nomination and the presidency.

*Democrat Hillary Clinton ran an ad claiming that National Guard and Reserve troops had no health insurance before she went to work, when in fact most of them did.

by fogiv 2008-03-26 07:23AM | 0 recs
Re: The Big Deal

There's a difference between mispeaking and lying! That was a flat out lie what she said, its like my 8 year who's in peewee saying he hit 4 home runs in a game when in fact he only got a single. Its not misspeak its called lying!

by anujtron 2008-03-25 07:08PM | 0 recs
Re: The Big Deal

BS.  This is like your kid hitting four homeruns and getting the details confused about what he did each of those four times.  She did really great stuff there and in other places that the Obama camp is eager to dismiss or distract from.  She hit her homeruns on a regular basis but you guys keep trying to pretend it was T-ball, all tea and crumpets.

by Mike Pridmore 2008-03-25 08:02PM | 0 recs
Re: The Big Deal

What are the 4 home runs here? The four times she told the same false story?

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 08:10PM | 0 recs
Re: The Big Deal

When was the last time you went to an area so dangerous that you flew in in a helicopter and were escorted directly from the helicopter to a structure by riflemen?  Just doing that is a homerun or two in my book. And only a basehit if you are looking to deny her bravery.  And she did two visits by helicopter that I know of that day in addition to the events in Tuzla with Sheryl Crowe and Sinbad.

by Mike Pridmore 2008-03-25 08:36PM | 0 recs
Re: The Big Deal

Tell that to anyone who has ever served in the Military under combat. It's a big deal.

by Wild Starchild 2008-03-26 02:33AM | 0 recs
Re: The Big Deal

And you know this was a lie... how?

She said it once.  It was NOT part of her prepared remarks.  She DID fly into a combat zone and there were several stops during that trip - two to outposts that had snipers up in the hills.

And yet you KNOW she was lying in that speech right?

Sorry - given a choice I'm going to have to go with her account and say this was an honest mistake.

by alegre 2008-03-25 08:36PM | 0 recs
It's...

Why are Obama's "misstatements and distortions" a bigger deal than Clinton's or McCain's?

... the Clinton Rules.

by kraant 2008-03-25 07:09PM | 0 recs
by indus 2008-03-25 07:21PM | 0 recs
Re: The Big Deal
Here's one big difference:
Obama's Friday lies about Wright, about what he knew and when he knew it, were intended to cover up, to protect him from the damage of the truth.  He did it on camera, in several different interviews.  4 days later -- not 12 years later -- having realized he would get caught in Friday's lies, he spun a version of the truth, though still not the whole truth.  
Lying to cover up and save your ass is different.  
by oh puhleeze 2008-03-25 09:28PM | 0 recs
Re: The Big Deal

That would be really compelling if you could document a lie. Of course, you can't, since Obama's statements are both internally consistent and consistent with the facts as we know them.

Nice try though.

by Texas Gray Wolf 2008-03-25 09:37PM | 0 recs
Re: The Big Deal

okeydokey, here you go, no time tonight for all of it.

You know the speech part: (sorry don't know how to make those lovely colored boxes)

"I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy. For some, nagging questions remain. Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely - just as I'm sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.
But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren't simply controversial. They weren't simply a religious leader's effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country - a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America; a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam.
As such, Reverend Wright's comments were not only wrong but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity; racially charged at a time when we need to come together to solve a set of monumental problems - two wars, a terrorist threat, a falling economy, a chronic health care crisis and potentially devastating climate change; problems that are neither black or white or Latino or Asian, but rather problems that confront us all.
Given my background, my politics, and my professed values and ideals, there will no doubt be those for whom my statements of condemnation are not enough. Why associate myself with Reverend Wright in the first place, they may ask? Why not join another church? And I confess that if all that I knew of Reverend Wright were the snippets of those sermons that have run in an endless loop on the television and You Tube, or if Trinity United Church of Christ conformed to the caricatures being peddled by some commentators, there is no doubt that I would react in much the same way."

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0 803/14/acd.01.html

back to the pre-speech era:
Pre-speech: analysis of original huff post by obama:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/03/d econstructing_obamas_lawyerly.html

March 14 interviews (some samples)
 Anderson Cooper:

COOPER: (AUDIO GAP) ... was created by the government to kill black people. He's called America the number-one killer around the world. He's said that black people shouldn't sing "God Bless America," but say God damn America;There's a lot of folks in America right now who have heard that. And I want to ask you why you have been listening to this pastor and close to him for nearly 20 years?
SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D-IL), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, first of all, Anderson, you know, I strongly condemn the statements that have been shown on the tape& I have to confess that those are not statements that I ever heard when I was sitting in the pews at this church. This is a church that I have been a member of for 20 years. This is a well-established, typical, historically African-American church in the South Side of Chicago, with a wonderful set of ministries;And what I have been hearing and had been hearing in church was talk about Jesus and talk about faith and values and serving the poor...

COOPER: Did you not know, though, that, I mean, a couple days after 9/11, he said, you know, this was America's chickens coming home to roost, a result of what he called American terrorism around the world?
COOPER: I mean, you may not have been there, but have you -- you must have heard that he had said these things?
OBAMA: You know, I confess that I did not hear about this until -- until I started running for president....
OBAMA: And, as I said, Anderson, if I had heard any of those statements, I probably would have walked up, and I probably would have told Reverend Wright that they were wrong; But they were not statements that I heard when I was in church.
COOPER: So, no one in the church ever said to you, man, last week, you missed this sermon; Reverend Wright said this; or...
OBAMA: No.
COOPER: I mean, I think I read in your books that you listened to tapes of Reverend Wright when you were at Harvard Law School.
OBAMA: I did.
COOPER: So, you had no idea?;
OBAMA: I understand. I did not. Well, I want to be clear that, when I ran for president, some of these statements started surfacing.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0 803/14/acd.01.html

Olbermann interview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lk3Rra3Cg MA

Fox, Garrett after speech with quote:
GARRETT: But that's a notable re-calibration of Obama's statement to Fox on Friday as to whether he'd ever witnessed the words from Wright he now so strenuously condemns.
OBAMA, ON FRIDAY: None of these statements were ones that I had heard myself personally in the pews.
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-b aker/2008/03/18/extraordinary-obama-spee ch-gift-thats-confronting-race-america-h onesty

*************
So ok, go right ahead and deny this:
Obama used carefully crafted lawyerly words on Friday March 14 in a number of press interviews to deliberately create the false impression that he had not heard/was unaware of Wright's controversial statements till very recently.

On Tuesday in his speech, knowing the damage would be worse if he was caught, he crafted another set of slippery words to admit that he had heard/was aware of the same statements, while still maintaining some  deniability as to exactly which statements and when.

He did no follow up interviews where he could be asked specific questions.

by oh puhleeze 2008-03-25 10:53PM | 0 recs
Re: The Big Deal

I just found the great diary on this subject I was looking for.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/3/19/1347 /02727

by oh puhleeze 2008-03-25 11:02PM | 0 recs
You are so full of shit

This is very simple.

In his first round of interviews he said, clearly, that he was not in attendance for the remarks in the clips they were playing over and over again.

In his speech he said, clearly, that he heard Wright say controversial things.

How on earth is that a lie?

It's not even really "lawyerly parsing" (meaning of is "is", anybody?).

by bawbie 2008-03-26 04:12AM | 0 recs
Re: You are so full of shit

Troll-rated for "full of shit".  This is supposed to be a civilized blog.  That is not a civilized comment.

by creeper1014 2008-03-26 07:21AM | 0 recs
Re: The Big Deal

You wasted an awful lot of space to prove yourself incredibly inattentive to what was actually said.

by bookish 2008-03-26 07:12AM | 0 recs
I'll step up and take a crack at all 13

I'll do one better and accomodate for Sen Clinton's in the spirit of Dem Unity even though I favor Obama.  My diaries both here (under my name) and @ dKos where they are cross-posted should be able to stand for my position on Dem Unity my comments may be another matter because I have to focus on unity because this campaign has degenerated into one based on personality.  Both candidates positions on the issues are extremely similar compared to Sen. McCain's.  

Now onto the 13 points in the diary they are random in order but I address every one.  Some I will dodge due to a lack of info presented/lack of appropriate context.

First:  the professor one.  At my undergrad school (a small liberal arts school on the prairie with a fairly decent rep (it is top 5 for public liberal arts schools), there was an instructor (she didn't have her PhD) who was referred to as professor when she was teaching due to the fact that everyone else teaching at the college was a professor (it was due to that she was teaching and I see this has been referred to but since I am just out of college I thought I would mention that again)

Second: The Illinois State Health Care one:  First off knowing what is in the ellipse is important and the meaning of the rest it is vague (though I could be getting tired) but I get that Obama supported a bill that would mandate universal health care by 2007.   Is your claim that he put Illinois on a path to Universal Health Care, or that he supported legislation that would have covered the numbers mentioned?  I am not sure what the claim is but would be happy to attempt it once I am informed.

Third: The health care quotes: Didn't Robert Reich say the plans were equivalent (not that Obama's was better but that they were equivalent) Isn't he an expert as he was labor sec for Pres. Clinton's first term and one would think that labor secretaries would know something about health care
(I could be wrong about this as I am too lazy (literally it is almost 3 am here, 2:41am) to get a link, but I think I remember this from one of the debates it was a point Hillary brought up)

Fourth: The lobbyist one:  Sen. Obama in his rhetoric bashed lobbyists as part of Old-Washington-style politics, if you believe he is truthful why would he want them working in his Administration.  Does he have any working in a prominent position on his campaign? (again the 3am thing keeps me from getting a citation as I am going to crash once I finish my point here).  I know he is more anti-lobbyist than Sen McCain who surrounds himself with his lobbyist friends (see Charlie Black that is the one I can think of now but I know he has at least 10 others on his campaign staff) and Sen-Clinton whose chief pollster/Strategist is Mark Penn (I can't think of any others but would gladly appreciate their names)

As for the others:  

The Kansas tornado one doesn't list how many he claimed vs. how many died more info so I can make a proper defense if you want me to attempt.

Legislative process on ethics: He was willing to disclose how many bundlers he had did any other candidates (aside from gravel who probably didn't have any bundlers) and is it his fault that he isn't president to sign the bill into law or control the house to pass the bill (I am not sure where it failed the 3 am thing again)

Chicago Tribune:  The whole article (I read this at RCP) paints a slightly different picture and praises him for his forthrightness though wonders why he didn't talk earlier and gives a reason for it about privacy.

Selma:  I give, This was before my time and I don't have a great understanding of the complete Civil Rights movement (my being a young whippersnapper and all)

Exelon:  He supported the passage.  The info presented here doesn't say what the final bill is, and to properly defend this I would need to have a summary of that bill (what was left in and what got taken out)

Here is the 13th misstatement's defense the one by  Clinton:  She went into a recently pacified War Zone.  There were precautions taken on landing.  While she did repeatedly embellish/misremember (Note I am not saying which one) about the tarmac, the media should stop playing gotcha on every single statement like the idiot Dan Abrams @ MSNBC.  The media did this to Vice Pres. Gore which is why we have an English Mangling hawk for a president.  Aren't we better than Dan Abrams as a community?  Are we able to debate something on the issues and yes I hold Obama supporters to this as well.

I be honest here and say that I didn't hit all 13 I probably dodged on 6 but gave answers in hopes of being able to answer once the information is provided (I'm not hunting it down @ 3:14am I need to get some zzz)

So in brief, EVERYONE SHOULD STOP PLAYING INTO THE GOTCHA MEDIA MENTALITY THAT EVERY WORD A PERSON SPEAKS HAS TO BE 100% ACCURATE!!!!  I would hold true to getting the gist of what you say to match up with what your policy positions, as long as it is not an attack.  Attacks due to their divisive nature should be held to the perfect standard.

By the way thank you for the thought exercise Alegre (it took a lot , it is good to do late at night, it helps keep the grey matter (cell bodies) and white matter (myelinated axons) working at peak efficiency.  Also as I have said in at least 2 other comments you should do a reaction or at least an annotation to Sen. Clinton's speech on Monday about Home foreclosure because you write fairly well and would be a way be able to claim to be influenced by your better angels (writing a honest to goodness "pro" diary instead of a defense diary like this or a "anti" diary like some of your ones attack that at the very least to an Obama supporter look like they are Sen. Obama.

Peace,

Student Guy

by Student Guy 2008-03-26 12:17AM | 0 recs
the real 13th

I am sleep deprived (I've been up since 9 and it is after 3:30)

About the community organizing:  I'll give, something Obama wrote in his book that happened before he went into politics and that hasn't to my knowledge been mentioned in the campaign, it was just in the book was an exaggeration, but even non-fiction books are changed such as several people are compiled into a composite character (possibly Ray in "Dreams From My Father" by Sen Obama.

And again I will plead with everyone to read the end of post this replies to about the whole thing that sank Al Gore and we should not use it against eachother.

One last thing!  Sen Obama and Sen Clinton have both visited a war zone more recently than this.  It is called Iraq and I am fairly certain both have gone at least once.

by Student Guy 2008-03-26 12:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Thanks for the diary. Obama supporters should actually be afraid of what they wish for. Those videos are quite powerful and if the media plays them over and over again, people will get impressed that she went there in the first place -- that she had the intellectual curiosity to learn about the combat situation and the dedication to thank the soldiers on behalf of all of us. She could have sat in her WH residence sipping tea with the ambassador's wife, you know.

by pm317 2008-03-26 04:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

No alegre, a misstatement happens maybe once or twice, NOT five or more times.  See the problem here is that she LIED and was going to continue lying until she got caught.  People are angry because this has been her argument as to why she passes the CIC "threshold."  Her argument is squashed when stories like this come out.  

Again, in the real world, if someone lies on their application or resume and gets caught, they are fired.  No one gives a damn if they misspoke because they could have corrected the error long before. A great example is of the former CEO of Radio Shack.

by kristannab 2008-03-26 06:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Nice diary. I'm assuming you're a diarist on kos, you should try posting this there, just to drive the obamabots bat shit insane!!! :)

Seriously, I've been rather taken aback at all this Hillary hatred, she's been a committed democrat longer than most of these people have been alive and they're acting like she's the anti-christ for chrissakes.

by bobbyk 2008-03-26 08:11AM | 0 recs
Carl Bernstein on Hillary Clinton

http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/26/hi llary-clinton-truth-or-consequences/#mor e-470

"Hillary values context; she does see the big picture. Hers, in fact, is not the mind of a conventional politician,"  I wrote in A Woman In Charge. "But when it comes to herself, she sees with something less than candor and lucidity. She sees, like so many others, what she wants to see."

by mady 2008-03-26 08:28AM | 0 recs
Bernstein has finally jumpstarted his
career that never went anywhere except circling the toilet bowl by doing hit jobs on Hillary Clinton.  
He's someone whose wisdome I deeply value :-)
by blah blah 2008-03-26 08:56AM | 0 recs
Re: Bernstein has finally jumpstarted his

Well, to answer succinctly in that vein, :-.

by mady 2008-03-26 09:40AM | 0 recs
About Superdelegates

Alegre,

I have a question kind of off topic but I'll relate it to what you've written about today.  I've been reading your diaries for some time now, both on Daily Kos and now on MyDD, and I love reading them.  

But here's what I wanted to ask you to write a diary about and encourage other big bloggers for Hillary like yourself to do: I was watching David Gregory's new show and in it there's a segment where callers can ask the panelists questions.  One caller asked a question that struck me.  He asked if he could contact superdelegates himself to urge them to vote for Hillary.  As soon as I heard it, I thought to myself that it's exactly what Hillary supporters should be doing.  I don't think superdelegates know the fervor with which many of us support Hillary, and I think Obama's people are lobbying them more effectively.  Superdelegates across the country need to be flooded with calls from Hillary supporters telling them why WE think they should vote for Hillary and why they should endorse her now.  One argument to bring up would be Obama's vulnerability in the general election (ie how he's already "misspoken" 12 times in one month, though I know there are much better arguments and this was my attempt to tie your diary in :) ).  But we could simply talk about Hillary's strengths and why she's not only be the better president, but the better candidate against John McCain.  I think something you could do would be to get names and numbers of superdelegates out there so people could call them themselves.  Hillary supporters were very effective when David Schuster said Chelsea had been pimped out on MSNBC, and I know we can be effective again.  Hillary needs us, and we should come to her aid here.  If we can call supporters of hers to get out the vote, we can certainly make quick phone calls to superdelegates urging them to support her.  

Cheers, and thanks for all that you do.

by Change101 2008-03-26 09:01AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Just because Clinton states that she only "misspoke" does not make it true. What she said was a LIE. No if's and or buts.

by munodi 2008-03-26 09:41AM | 0 recs
The definition of misstatement

is :
to state wrongly or misleadingly; make a wrong statement about

versus the definition of lie

  1. a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood.  
  2. something intended or serving to convey a false impression; imposture: His flashy car was a lie that deceived no one.  
  3. an inaccurate or false statement.  
  4. the charge or accusation of lying: He flung the lie back at his accusers.  
-verb (used without object) 5. to speak falsely or utter untruth knowingly, as with intent to deceive.  
6. to express what is false; convey a false impression.  
-verb (used with object)
7. to bring about or affect by lying (often used reflexively): to lie oneself out of a difficulty; accustomed to lying his way out of difficulties.  
--Idioms

This was no misstatement, as Clinton repeated this story once, twice,
three times.

It was a lie.

by fladem 2008-03-26 09:55AM | 0 recs
It was a BALDFACED LIE not a misstatement

You should learn the difference.

by Lefty Coaster 2008-03-26 01:25PM | 0 recs
oh, and theres only been attention paid

to Obamas statements for the last few months... and already multiple whoppers...  But of course, the media doesnt cover it. ever.

by rigsoHC 2008-03-25 06:51PM | 0 recs
Re: oh, and theres only been attention paid

They never do.  Double standards are all over the place in this election and yet Hillary's still standing.

Just think of how she'd do on an even playing field!

by alegre 2008-03-25 07:09PM | 0 recs
Re: oh, and theres only been attention paid

Keep telling yourself that. The endless loop of Wright snippets? the free media replay of the disgusting 3 am ad? the curiously times NAFTA-Canadian right wing gov't non-scandal? Hillary is no victim. It's quite insulting for you to even suggest it.

by brimur 2008-03-25 08:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Tornadoes

As a Kansas, the fact that Obama didn't have a clue what went on here in his adopted "native" state in the aftermath of one of the most destructive tornadoes in our history was incredibly eye opening.

by KnowVox 2008-03-25 06:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Tornadoes

How is a native state "adopted" when his mother and grandparents lived there?

by bawbie 2008-03-25 06:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Tornadoes

Ok I admit - I might have missed something here but...

Did BO ever - you know - live in Kansas?

by alegre 2008-03-25 07:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Tornadoes

Nope, at least not much.  His grandparents lived there and he may have spent some time with them there.  

So it's not a "native" state, adopted or otherwise, any more than PA is for Hillary.

by bawbie 2008-03-25 07:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Tornadoes

Well, there he goes lying again. The whole time he was campaigning here, he refered to Kansas as his "adopted native state."

by KnowVox 2008-03-25 07:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Tornadoes

Funny.  I googled Obama and "adopted native state" and only your post came up.  

If Obama used that phrase, it doesn't reside online.

by bawbie 2008-03-25 07:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Tornadoes

Try adopted home state and there are some references.

by Mike Pridmore 2008-03-25 08:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Tornadoes

But actually no quotes from him. Man, you guys suck at this.

by brimur 2008-03-25 08:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Tornadoes

So he had nothing to do with people saying it was his adopted home state?  Even I remember hearing him say that.  Denial isn't just a river in Egypt I guess.

by Mike Pridmore 2008-03-25 08:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Whoopers

Indeed he DID say it. Repeatedly. Of course, to neophyte Obamacrats, if it's not on the internet, it must not be true! LMAO!

by KnowVox 2008-03-25 09:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Whoopers

Here's the thing.  I'm not going to believe something just because YOU say it because you have been known to be wrong.  Often.

In the reality based world I live in I expect people to source something if they are going to call public officials liars.

by bawbie 2008-03-26 04:06AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Whoopers

Obviously you failed to read the entire second half of this diary, which EXTENSIVELY documented just that.

by KnowVox 2008-03-26 06:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Whoopers

HA! </tweety>

by bawbie 2008-03-26 06:17AM | 0 recs
Obama never lived in Kansas

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/polit ics/obama/chi-obama-quiz,0,234858.trivia quiz

Maybe you need to take this quiz to learn more about Obama

by indus 2008-03-25 07:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama never lived in Kansas

I'm not the one who called it his "native" state.

by bawbie 2008-03-25 07:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama never lived in Kansas

Nope. He did. You'd better set him straight before he tells any more whoppers.

by KnowVox 2008-03-25 07:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama never lived in Kansas

What a stupid silly thing to quibble about.

But also,  I looked and looked online and couldn't find one place where Obama called Kansas his "native" or "adopted native" state.  

If you are going to accuse him of lying, you'd better make sure he actually said it.

by bawbie 2008-03-25 07:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama never lived in Kansas

adopted home state

by Mike Pridmore 2008-03-25 08:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama never lived in Kansas

Nope, try again.

Almost everything there except blog posts refer to Illinois as Obama's "adopted home state" and New York as Clinton's "adopted home state".

I couldn't find one non-blog reference to Kansas as Obama's "adopted home state".

by bawbie 2008-03-26 04:04AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Who cares!!!  The media is making a killing dividing us like this.  By the weekend we will have some news story about how Obama has "misspoke" too.  Diarists like you will bash Obama over the head for it all weekend while the Pro-Obama people will give you a dozen times she has done the same.  Come Monday they will go after Clinton again.

BOTH candidates are awesome and greatly flawed.  BOTH candidates have said or done some stupid things.  BOTH candidates are negatively affected by either sexism or racism.  BOTH candidates are also positively effected by their individual races or gender.  

Support whoever you want, but we really need to stop nuking everyone any time something relatively negative comes out about our particular candidates.  They are receiving ridiculous amounts of support and this election will go down in history.  

I am an Obama supporter who just wants everyone to put their proverbial guns down and realize that over the hill the Republicans are laughing their butts off at us.  

by Xris 2008-03-25 06:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Turn the Tables

Funny how Obama fans are only worried about "nuking" when their candidate is getting "nuked."

by KnowVox 2008-03-25 07:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Turn the Tables

LOL, I came on here actually trying to show how little I cared about the Bosnia stuff.  I just want peace between the camps.  I don't expect you to quit supporting Clinton and I am not demanding she drop out, I just want people to chill out a bit.  

But go ahead and keep picking fights where they don't exist.  

by Xris 2008-03-25 07:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Turn the Tables

Look I want peace between the camps too - but have you checked out the national news tonight?  And I'm not even talking cable here.

Or looked at the top of the rec list?  I don't even need to look at the diary or comments to know what they're saying about Hillary over one screw-up.

I consider it my job as a volunteer on her campaign and as a blogger to do what little I can to help set the record straight and put this into perspective here.

by alegre 2008-03-25 07:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Turn the Tables

Listen, I totally respect what you are trying to do.  I also respect your dedication to Senator Clinton.  The only reason I came to MyDD as an Obama supporter was to try and show that at least some of us are not concerned with obliterating Clinton.  What better place to do this than a very pro-Clinton site?

The media has roasted and smeared both candidates and will continue to do so.  ALL republicans want to see negative stories about our candidates.  At least 2/3 of our party want to see negative stories about one or the other democratic candidate.  The media is simply giving the masses what they want.  This will NEVER stop until we have a candidate.  I am not saying they won't still try to railroad our candidate, but it will be more like 50/50 between us and McCain.

I respect your blogging and writing Alegre, I just hope we can count on you to help us if Obama wins the nomination.  

by Xris 2008-03-25 07:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Turn the Tables

And when Hillary wins the nomination, we know you'll be right there defending her -- just like you are in this diary! LMAO!

by KnowVox 2008-03-25 07:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Turn the Tables

Where have I criticized Hillary in this diary?  You really seem determined to find something to fight about.  

To be honest, this is a pretty bad story politically for Hillary.  But I am standing here as an Obama guy saying it is crap and we need to quit peddling in this kind of stuff.  

If you want to fight with someone there are tons of people here who would probably love it.

But lets pretend you are not being sarcastic.  If Hillary wins the nomination I will defend her and fight for her because a Democrat winning is the main gaol of all this, I just happen to support someone else from the same party.  

by Xris 2008-03-25 08:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Turn the Tables

Xris is spot on with this. I also respect Clinton supporters' dedication to their candidate. I have not, and will never, demean their choice. I ask the same in return.

I also ask that everyone realize that both candidates are getting crucified in the press in comparison to McCain. Yes, Clinton is getting grilled this week about Bosnia. Last week Fox & Friends literally spent ALL MORNING attacking Obama. It's not one-sided.

Anyone (Alegre, I'm looking at you here) who suggests that their candidate is suffering while the other gets a free pass is out of touch with reality.  

by jdusek 2008-03-25 08:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Turn the Tables

It is ridiculous how much of a free ride McCain is getting.  His favorables are shooting through the roof.

by Xris 2008-03-25 08:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Turn the Tables

I know. The story on his relationship with the lobbyist -- gone. His Iran/Al Qaeda mixups -- barely mentioned. I could go on.

Point is, there are real, meaningful stories to explore, but meanwhile we've got Democrats right here in this very thread trying to enumerate how many lies our party's candidates have told. Arguing about which lies were big lies and which ones were permissible. Claiming that they will do whatever it takes to make sure undecided Democrats know just how bad and terrifying the other candidate is. It's sad.  

by jdusek 2008-03-25 08:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Turn the Tables

Exactly.  We can't pretend the Republicans aren't listening to our crazy debate either.  Everything both sides say against each other will come back to haunt us.  It also leaves open huge demographics for McCain to exploit no matter who we nominate.  That is why it is vital we start coming together.  I am not suggesting clinton give up or that people like Alegre should stop defending their candidate.  We just need to focus on the issues and who best represents us.  

McCain is not super clean, and we need to wake the rest of America up to that fact.

by Xris 2008-03-25 08:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Turn the Tables

How many positive ratings do you think these comments will get here? : )

by jdusek 2008-03-25 08:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Turn the Tables

Not only are republicans talking about the blogs Im sure they are actively participating as sock puppets.

I really wonder how many posters on blogs like mydd and kos are actually republicans stirring the pot out of boredom.

by routerdude 2008-03-25 11:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Turn the Tables

Here's The Page's summary of the national news -- and it looks like Clinton better get her story straight quick.  Unfortunately she added more details shown to be untrue.

NBC: Led with "politics and the pastor" story of Clinton weighing in on Rev. Wright. Suggested she did so because she was behind in the math. Mentioned her further clarifying about Bosnia trip. Russert weighed in, said Clinton woke up awash in Bosnia stories, Obama releasing his tax returns and made "an attempt to change the subject" and get focus back on Obama. Noted conservative setting of Pittsburgh paper where she made the remarks, deep distress supers have about devisiveness. Broadcast also highlighted McCain's Reagan endorsement, economy speech. Package looked at Obama, Clinton's proposals on housing, mortgage crisis. Noted Chelsea Clinton on Lewinsky question.

CBS: Led with almost sarcastic package on Clinton's Bosnia comments saying her one "misstatement" wasn't the only one. Showed video of her using Bosnia to boost her national security creds several times throughout campaign. Pointed to another discrepancy in her telling Philly's Daily News that she greeted the girl and immediately left the tarmac, when video shows she lingered. Says voters may now question her trustworthiness. Covered CBS delegate count, back-and-forth between campaigns, Clinton's Rev. Wright remarks, e-mail battles and McCain "watching with relish." Noted Chelsea Clinton's Lewinsky question, Reagan endorsement, McCain economic speech.

ABC: Led with Clinton's Bosnia "embellishment" and her brushing off pressure to drop out. Said "substantive policy proposals" are being "all but drowned out" by the damage control she's being forced to do. Noted Clinton's Wright comments, how she's likely to face more foreign policy scrutiny. Tapper weighed in, said "jury is still out" on the harm the Bosnia flap will do. Said she needs to worry about her biggest weakness (perceived trustworthiness) undercutting her biggest strength (national security). Quoted one Democratic operative saying Clinton only has "Tonya Harding option" left, which is to knee cap Obama.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:58PM | 0 recs
You want peace between the camps?

You are insincere.

You have posted diaries and comments claiming that Obama has nothing more to offer than a slogan and a speech.

You have repeatedly responded to any criticism of your candidate with laundry lists of negative claims about Obama.

You have said that you think it's fine for the candidates to go negative against each other.

You boycotted DK because you felt you were being treated unfairly, yet your behavior here mirrors exactly the type of negativity you claim to be against.

And you promoted the boycott on high-visibility sites in a self -serving attempt to garner publicity while ignoring the fact that it makes the party look fractured and weak.

These are not the actions of someone who is looking to heal relations between the camps.

by jdusek 2008-03-25 08:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

IMHO Obama has done so much to damage Hillary Clinton that years of setting things straight as Alegre is trying to do won't do the job.  Obama started attacking Clinton when he started the racist accusations in SC.  The campaign circulated a memo outlining just what statements could be spinned to make the Clintons appear racist.  His wife continued it herself with the pushing the fairytale mime.  I saw her giving a speech at a black awards ceremony on television, expanding the entire fairytale thing into encompasing Obama's whole campaign.  It went downhill from there.  It will take a million diaries like this to undue the damage he has done to her with the help of the media.  It is too late to call a truce now.

by Scotch 2008-03-25 07:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

We have all been complicit in trashing the Democratic Party.  Obama and Clinton supporters have flung mud at each other for months now.  Even I said some pretty crappy things about Clinton in the beginning that I wish I could take back.  Both campaigns have attacked one another and I don't care enough to keep a score card on who has been more "unfair".  

We can rise above this and continue to debate who would be a more effective president or who could do a better job beating McCain.  But lets talk about kicking the crap out of McCain and stop talking about destroying each other.  

I have said it many times but I will gladly vote for whomever the Democratic nominee ends up being.

by Xris 2008-03-25 07:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Each diary like this one only makes it worse.

by Quarterbackjoe 2008-03-25 09:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

You know how you mention there were two visits to military outposts without the celebrities? You know what that's called? Big picture. Context. The whole story. A-to-Z...

That's what everybody failed to look at or investigate with the Wright "debacle".

by lizardbox 2008-03-25 06:53PM | 0 recs
Oops!

Make that "Kansan." LOL

by KnowVox 2008-03-25 06:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Oops!

I liked it better when you were a Kansas. You caucus state you.

by lizardbox 2008-03-25 07:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Oops!

Yep, in my bright red state of Kansas, we had a lot of Rethugs who followed Obama's advice and voted "DEMOCRAT" for a day.

And we all know that if Obama is the nominee, he'll win Kansas by a landslide in the General! LMAO!

by KnowVox 2008-03-25 07:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Oops!

tsk. I had high hopes for you.

by lizardbox 2008-03-25 07:59PM | 0 recs
Who cares? CBS News follows-up

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/2 5/politics/main3967223.shtml

New CBS Video Contradicts Clinton Again
March 25, 2008(CBS/AP) Hillary Rodham Clinton said Tuesday she made a mistake in claiming that she came under hostile fire in Bosnia 12 years ago, as rival Barack Obama's campaign continued to challenge her credibility.

In a recent speech and interviews, the New York senator described a harrowing scene in Tuzla, Bosnia, in which she and her daughter, Chelsea, had to run for cover as soon as they landed for a visit in 1996. But video footage of the day showed a peaceful reception in which a young girl greeted the first lady on the tarmac.

Clinton told reporters in Pennsylvania on Tuesday that she erred in describing the scene, which she now realizes after talking with aides and others.

"So I made a mistake," she said. "That happens. It proves I'm human, which you know, for some people, is a revelation."

She claimed she misspoke and was sleep deprived, but CBS News has found several times in the past few months Senator Clinton used the Bosnia trip to try to show her international experience, reports Sharyl Attkisson. Clinton did so in Iowa in December, Texas in February and also last week.

After CBS News video showed what really happened when she landed and greeted officials, Senator Clinton maintained there were risks but explained to the Philadelphia Daily News why she was seen on the Bosnia tarmac greeting a young child if it was really so dangerous.

"I was also told that the greeting ceremony had been moved away from the tarmac but that there was this eight-year-old girl and I said, 'Well, I, I can't, I can't rush by her, I've got to at least greet her,'' Clinton said. "So I greeted her, I took her stuff and I left. Now that's my memory of it."

Once again her memory doesn't match CBS News videotape, Attkisson reports. She and her daughter Chelsea lingered on the tarmac to greet U.S. military officials, took photos, and then walked to the armored vehicle where she did, eventually, duck and enter.

The more important issue, Clinton said, is whether she would be a better commander-in-chief than Obama or Republican presidential candidate John McCain. Clinton and Obama are competing for votes in Pennsylvania's April 22 primary.

Clinton's aides had tried to control the Bosnia flap Monday, saying the New York senator "misspoke."

   Couric & Co.: Read Attkisson's Full Account Of The Clinton Bosnia Trip
    Watch Attkisson's Original Report

But Clinton had to address the issue herself Tuesday, after repeated airings of the 1996 video clips caused critics to ridicule her.

Reminded that she had said it was the first time she had misspoken in 12 years, Clinton told reporters: "I was joking. Lighten up, guys."

In a March 17 speech in Washington, Clinton said of the Bosnia trip: "I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."

That account was still posted on her campaign Website Tuesday.

Clinton told CNN last week, "There was no greeting ceremony, and we basically were told to run to our cars. Now, that is what happened."

Several news outlets disputed the claims.

Clinton began retracting the remarks in a series of private interviews Monday and Tuesday before addressing about two dozen reporters here after a speech.

She told the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review: "I was sleep-deprived, and I misspoke."

She told KDKA radio in Pittsburgh: "You know, I have written about this and described it in many different settings, and I did misspeak the other day. This has been a very long campaign."

The Obama campaign fueled the Bosnia brouhaha Tuesday, sponsoring a conference call with Pennsylvania reporters that featured retired Maj. Gen. Walter Stewart of the Pennsylvania Army National Guard. Stewart said he was assigned to the Army's European headquarters when Clinton visited Bosnia as first lady in 1996. He said her claim that she landed under enemy fire insulted U.S. soldiers charged with her security.

Clinton's explanation that she misspoke was "really astonishing," said Stewart, who supports Obama.

"She has no sense of what a statement like that does to soldiers," Stewart said. "She is insulting the command in its entirety."

"Believe me, heads would have rolled all over" if the military put the first lady and her daughter in a position of "unacceptable risk."

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 06:55PM | 0 recs
Soooooooo...

No comment on all those things BO got wrong eh?

Didn't think so.

by alegre 2008-03-25 07:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Soooooooo...

You are trying to avoid fessing up on Clinton.  This a typical strategy of the Clintons to try to turn people's attention away from what they do, to try to avoid taking responsibility.  

By the way, are you still peddling the line that Clinton helped pass the Family and Medical Leave Act? That claim got creamed pretty good. And evidently there's going to be a big piece coming out about it in the American Prospect this week.

Why did Hillary make those claims about FMLA, by the way? Was she tired then, too?

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Soooooooo...

Heh, now who's trying to change the subject.

Just tell us - what do you have to say about all those times BO got it wrong?

by alegre 2008-03-25 07:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Soooooooo...

I'm tired of posting the same response to you through this.

No, I'm not allowing you to move the focus away from Clinton because it reminds me of what kids do when they try to avoid taking responsibility.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 08:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Soooooooo...

It's OK. Really. Nobody blames you for not wanting to address the topic of this diary, especially considering all the "mis-statements" you're candidate has been guilty of.

by KnowVox 2008-03-25 08:57PM | 0 recs
YOU are trying to avoid Obama's

lies and manipulations. I'm part of the Clinton campaign in Indiana. You can best believe, I'll be doing everything I can to spread the word about your flim-flam artist candidate. But then again, most people I have talked with here are well acquainted with his underhanded ways and continue to be apalled by Wright. Obama country? Not so much, really.

by Soitgoes 2008-03-25 08:06PM | 0 recs
Re: YOU are trying to avoid Obama's

Sniper fire! Over there!  And watch out! There's an angry black pastor with a podium!

DUCK!

by Tommy Flanagan 2008-03-25 08:58PM | 0 recs
Bosnian ex-acting President talks Clinton Visit

Foreign correspondent Eric Jansson interviews Ejup Ganic, the former acting Bosnian president who greeted Hillary Clinton when she visited Tuzla in 1996. The whole thing is worth a read:

By now it is well established that Clinton, speaking on the campaign stump, exaggerated the dangers she faced when landing in Bosnia. Ganic's e-mail adds yet more evidence of this.

However, his e-mail also fills in some additional blanks. He provides circumstantial detail which, if known to Clinton at the time of her trip, might understandably have heightened her perception of danger and sense of adventure.

"Although the NATO troops were in Tuzla, we still believed that some positions on the hills were occupied by radical Serbs, so I was worried about the overall safety. I was the main host and the originally planned welcoming ceremony was shrunk down," Ganic writes.

Sniper fire or no sniper fire, it is not every day that a first lady jets into a recent war zone where, to the best knowledge of local officials, armed rebels continue to occupy the surrounding hills.

Ganic continues with a personal assessment of Clinton. She was "up to date on many issues" and "handled herself much better than many senators who visited us during that time," he writes.

by indus 2008-03-25 07:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Who cares? CBS News follows-up

"She has no sense of what a statement like that does to soldiers," Stewart said. "She is insulting the command in its entirety."

Oh puhlease.  Are you gonna fall for an obviously sensational hit piece like that?

Why no mention of this, from AP?

"MARKOVICI, Bosnia-Herzegovina - Protected by sharpshooters, Hillary Rodham Clinton swooped into a military zone by Black Hawk helicopter Monday to deliver a personal "thank you, thank you, thank you" to U.S. troops."

[...]

"But the highlight of her trip were visits to two fortified posts outside the U.S. base in Tuzla. Even President Clinton, restricted to the base by bad weather in January, did not see as much of this war-wracked region as Mrs. Clinton did Monday."

http://wvgazette.com/News/200803110472?p age=1&build=cache

You know, there's more to the Internet than Obama's website.

***A

by adrienne4dean 2008-03-25 08:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Was that a CBS opinion piece?

Because it was really snide and didn't present both sides.  And never did it say, yes, she was flying into a combat zone.  It may have been a secure area, but it was still a combat zone.  And how about talking about why she was there?  Which was really the point of the whole mission.  Hmmm, an article of fact, and not answer the most basic question (let's see, who, when, where, but no what or why?)  No, the author didn't want to say anything nice about her.

by Larissa 2008-03-26 04:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Thanks for another great diary!

Keep getting the truth out and never mind those who don't like it.

There are still many, many voters who need this information to make an intelligent decision.

by ProudMilitaryMom 2008-03-25 06:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Well I'm doing what I can to help increase the traffic on this site.

Here's hoping folks will see what I wrote.

Thanks! ;o)

by alegre 2008-03-25 07:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

One of the most disagreeable things about Hillary is her refusal to admit error and accept responsibility for it. You are being an exceptionally good surrogate for her, because you are behaving in precisely the same way. Oh no, can't just accept responsibility for the errors and move on. Instead, you have to find something to blame Obama about.

It's childish in the extreme. But it's Hillary in the usual.

by Quarterbackjoe 2008-03-25 10:02PM | 0 recs
great work

I have been admiring your posts for a while.

Great job clarifying the Bosnia mission. Actually, when you replay the original 1996 video, Hillary comes off as strong, stalwart and experienced. I especially loved the part about "not even the President made it this far into the war torn region."

Don't you think this is the same tactic the VRWC used in 2004 against Kerry and his recollections of being in Cambodia during Vietnam.

It's funny to see how Obamacrats pillary Hillary using the same tactics as Rove and co. in 2004. And the media plays on...

by njsketch 2008-03-25 06:58PM | 0 recs
Re: great work

There is clear video evidence that what Clinton said is not true. And she already admitted it was not true!!  

So how can that possibly be like what happened to Kerry?  He never said that what the Swiftboaters said was true and that his initial story was incorrect and there was no video.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:04PM | 0 recs
Re: great work

Oh my gawd!  That's a great point - the swift-boaters did the same damn thing to Kerry as BO's camp are doing to Hillary now over Bosnia.

Who'd a thunk "progressives" would stoop so low?

by alegre 2008-03-25 07:26PM | 0 recs
Re: great work

The swiftboaters made things up. Kerry always said they were lies. Hillary has admitted that what she said was not true.

There is video evidence that what Clinton said is not true. But certainly there was none for the claims on Kerry.

So how are these two things similar - at all?

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:30PM | 0 recs
Re: great work

Jeebus H. Crisco, alegre. Have you lost your mind?

by Quarterbackjoe 2008-03-25 10:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

You know, when I was growing up, I never heard of the word misspoke. My dad insisted I was accountable for my words and my deeds. Senator Clinton tried to brush off Sinbad's account of the trip and she casually dismissed his account by calling him a comedian. Am I to presume that precluded all comedians from telling the truth? She claimed Bill had never been to the base she was at yet he had been there well prior to her visit. Finally, she wants us to believe her visit was life threatening. Sorry, I'd never take my 15 year old daughter to an unsafe location. This is the perfect definition of an assertion that doesn't pass the smell test.

Sinbad may be a comedian but in this case, the joke's on Hillary.

by tharr 2008-03-25 07:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Sooooooooo... nothing to say about all those times BO got it wrong then?

Sorry but if one joke's on Hillary then I'd say BO's struggling under a pile of a dozen jokes there.

by alegre 2008-03-25 07:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Just like Clinton can't admit that she made a mistake voting for this tragic war, her supporters are unable to straight out admit that she messed up.

When one of my kids makes a mistake, if he or she tries to point to one of the other kids and said he or she made one, too...well, that doesn't make me very happy. It's just a way to try to avoid taking responsibility...just like you're doing.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Right let's try this one more time...

What (if anything) do you have to say about all those times BO got it wrong?

ANYTHING?

by alegre 2008-03-25 07:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

"But he did it, too" is the way 9 year olds talk and in my house, that kind of thing doubles the punishment.

Why not just fess up?

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:39PM | 0 recs
So why then do you keep pointing at her?

He's asking about your candidate and you're just saying "she did it too."  And repeatedly!!! Can you not even see what you're doing?

by Trickster 2008-03-25 08:01PM | 0 recs
Re: So why then do you keep pointing at her?

Untrue. I'm not even getting distracted into that discussion. I haven't said a thing about her Obama claims so I certainly couldn't have said that she did it, too.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 08:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Funny you mention children, because I was just thinking how much work Alegre puts into spoonfeeding nutritious facts, only to watch O-fantiles push them out with their tongues like two-year-olds.

Truth veggies must taste nasty compared to all those sugar-coated fantasies.

***A

by adrienne4dean 2008-03-25 08:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Yeah! Good old facts! You heard the lady, she didn't receive any tea at that tarmac! She got poems and flowers from eight year olds - much more sinister - probably worse than sniper fire! And thank God for that bastion of impartiality that is the Hillary FactHub, run by the objective HRC For President campaign! So much better than CBS News, CNN News, Washington Post and all the other ultra-sexist tabloid media outlets that push these shameless stories!

by TheSilverMonkey 2008-03-25 08:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

We have such a lazy press that they would never think to put this much effort into researching the real story.  Thank god you had some time, Alegre.  

You sortof left out a part where Obama mispushed too. He said of some of his votes while in the state senate, that he pushed the wrong vote button on about 5 or 6 occassions, voting the opposite of what he meant too.  Damn.  Do you realize that that means Obama is imperfect, too.  Several times, even.

by Scotch 2008-03-25 07:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

"The real story" - What can you possibly mean?

Hillary Clinton has admitted that her story is not true. Are you somehow claiming that she is confused and that it really is true?  

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

The story behind the faux popular story as in the story that is playing now in the media,, as in the real story like Alegre tells it, as....did you read the damn diary?

by Scotch 2008-03-25 07:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Well, I read the cut and paste from the Clinton PR operation posted above, if that's what you mean.

Sure.

But none of it goes to the heart of why Clinton repeatedly told a story that's untrue and even made up new details about getting something from the 8 year old and rushing off the tarmac that are also not true -- as established by clear video evidence.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

You should perhaps read the whole thing.  Twice.

by Scotch 2008-03-25 07:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Still wondering if you have any thoughts on all those times BO got it wrong.

ANYTHING?

by alegre 2008-03-25 07:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

But he did it, too!!!  The cry of a child who can't take responsibility....

If only Clinton could admit error about her Iraq war  vote, etc.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Huh.  You're repeat-trolling your own diary.  

by haystax calhoun 2008-03-25 07:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

They have their talking points, and anything that makes those talking points useless gets ignored.  

by Mike Pridmore 2008-03-25 07:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

This is kind of fun - they accuse us of dodging an issue I confronted head-on here tonight, and yet they've avoided addressing all of BO's mess-ups like the plague.

by alegre 2008-03-25 07:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

so are we conceding that she misspoke in Iowa and Texas?

. . . we need to get past this and KUMBAYA in JULY!!

by Veteran75 2008-03-25 07:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

You mean the Clinton talking points, right? Personally I don't get my diaries from cutting and pasting from a candidate's "fact-check" spin web site.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements
No one ever said Obama was perfect,including himself..This nom is not about "perfect",no pres ever has been perfect.
What's not perfect? Well not much~ he's black and he's proud, he doesn't take $$$ from lobbyists(unlike Hill who has taken more $$ from lobbyists than all the other candidates combined..Dem&Rep.)He agrees with Hillary about clean coal tech.,
BHO is not supported by corp. but by 90% individual donors making contributions of $100 or less. Clinton on the other hand pays bus boys to donate to her campaign so she can get around campaign finance laws.
Just admit it...BHO wouldn't be all that bad. How can u hate this guy???It boggles my mind.The guy is well educated and has a grassroots organization like we have not seen since the 60's.Ready and in place on day one.
by Wild Starchild 2008-03-26 02:31AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

The spin is that she made up details to make her trip seem bigger than it was.  My question, is "Why on earth would she have need to make this bigger than it was?  It is plenty big as is."

My take on all this is simple.  There was sniper fire in the area as she said, the plane did take evasive maneuvers as she said, and she mentioned again today that although it wasn't cancelled altogether the celebration on the tarmac was scaled down from what was originally planned.  

The only part that is questionable at all is the part where she said they ran from the plane to the car because of sniper fire and that there was no celebration.  She could easily have confused two events in the same trip, like the one mentioned above where she was escorted by sharpshooters straight from the helicopter to a building.  

Riflemen rushed to the brush line as the helicopter landed and surrounded her as she walked into the post.

That sounds a lot like an event where she did run, or at least walked pretty fast for a first lady, because of the potential of sniper fire, and that could have gotten conflated in with the other one, the one that everyone has seen the news clips of, in her memory.  Fatigue can mess with your memory of events from 12 years ago sometimes.

by Mike Pridmore 2008-03-25 07:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Great point Mike.

She went into a combat zone.

Wonder what BO was up to at the time.

Oh that's right - we'll probably never know.  He claims he lost his papers heh!

by alegre 2008-03-25 07:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

except for you left out a major part of this:

BEFORE March 17th Clinton told the sniper fire story, the Obama campaign called her out on it, and clinton defended saying it happened.
lets do the time line:

March 11th - Obama campaign releases the memo disputing Clinton experience claims namely

"Bosnia:

Senator Clinton has pointed to a March 1996 trip to Bosnia as proof that her foreign travel involved a life-risking mission into a war zone. She has described dodging sniper fire. While she did travel to Bosnia in March 1996, the visit was not a high-stakes mission to a war zone. On March 26, 1996, the New York Times reported that "Hillary Rodham Clinton charmed American troops at a U.S.O. show here, but it didn't hurt that the singer Sheryl Crow and the comedian Sinbad were also on the stage.""

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/11 /obama-camp-clinton-forei_n_90894.html

The Clintons defended said it did happen,

Then
Sinbad Speaks Out On Trip To Kosovo With Hillary - Politics on The Huffington Post
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/11 /sinbad-speaks-out-on-trip_n_90974.html

Sinband who was on the trip said 'Hillary there was no sniper fire, when its to dangerous for the president you dont send the first lady!'

instead of retaking her position and seeing she may have misspoken no Hillary once again admits it did happen

March 17th-
Clinton Responds To Sinbad - Politics on The Huffington Post
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/17 /clinton-responds-to-sinba_n_91879.html

namely she said:

"He's a comedian, you know," she said, recalling that she was moved into the cockpit for safety, that the plane made an evasive maneuver, and that there was no greeting ceremony."

Take note of that last part, THERE WAS NO GREETING CEREMONY.

so now she has thought about the situation and still she says there was no greeting ceremony

Then we hit where we are now

March 17th, she gives the speech that she docked for sniper fire,

THEN

the news video of the actual greeting ceremony surfaces.

now Hillary says she mispoke in the march 17th date, which would have been fine had it ONLY been the march 17th

but THIS IGNORES THE PREVIOUS 6 DAYS.

She re-affirmed the claim when obama challened it in a memo.

She re-affirmed it when Sinbad came out and said hillary it happened,

she repeated it on the March 17th press confrence

THEN a video comes out and she remembers it correctly now? no 4 times is not a mistatment,

she lied, you cannot address why she defended it against the memo and sinbad and some how not her OR her daughter remember the event ( that she wrote about in her book), untill after a video surfaces.

no she lied and got caught.

and its stupid too, all she did was pad her experience a bit, rather then admit to a small embellishment. she lied to hide it, and got caught.

by TruthMatters 2008-03-25 07:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Big bad Sinbad didn't even go on part of the trip with her.  At the time he was talking about how tense things were there at the base where they landed.  And he didn't even take the helicopter trips out into more dangerous areas.  I like Sinbad but I think he has spoken out of turn on this one because he, whether on purpose or not I can't say, leaves out the important part about her doing other things he was not a part of.  And I think she accidentally confused the landing he was a part of with one of those other trips she took while he stayed behind in comparative safety.

by Mike Pridmore 2008-03-25 07:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

"And I think she accidentally confused the landing he was a part of with one of those other trips she took while he stayed behind in comparative safety."

how can she accidentally be confusing this landing with another landing, when at the end of the sentence you are saying he wasn't there because he stayed behind in safety?

and anyways it was in all the papers it was clear we were talking about tarmac in Tuzla

SHE HERSELF had a miltary person come out and defend her account of the tarmac in Tuzla

so no she knew it was about the tarmac in Tuzla

but still she said Sinbad was wrong this happened. and then the video comes out and THEN she remembers that we are talking about the tarmac in Tuzla?

please who buys that?

by TruthMatters 2008-03-25 07:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

OK, so what were you doing 12 years ago today.  Please give precise details and if you confuse some details I will call you a liar.  How fair is that?  Look, when people are tired, and she is doing 18 hour days most of the time lately, they sometimes misremember details.  Have you never been at a family reunion where people talk about something that happened a long time ago and disagree over the details?  It's pretty common.

And really, the only point of focusing on her misstatement is to score political points.  If this were someone else we would just chalk it up as accident ly misspeaking and move on.

by Mike Pridmore 2008-03-25 07:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

are you asking me was I SHOT AT 12 years ago while my 16 year old daughter ran at my side and some how we both have forgotten that this happened?

who could ever not remember whether or not they were shot at! what kind of 16 year old girl can be in another county and have snipers going off at her and not have that memory burned into her brain!

how was THIS not on the fronts of every newspaper in America! The First Lady and Daughter Shot at by snipers!

so no this is not like forgetten what happened 12 years ago at a BBQ

you don't some how get tired and completely forget if you and your only child were shot at or not!

and yes I can tell you for certain that I was NOT shot at 12 years ago, its just not something I would forget.

by TruthMatters 2008-03-25 07:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

In sept of 93' I flew into Somalia as a solider in the Army.

On the C-130 we were briefed that the airfield was consider a red zone as it received mortar and sniper fire from time to time.  We were instructed to hit the tarmac at double time and head for waiting transportation.  

Physically being in this type of situation gets you extremely ramped up. You dont miss anything.  I still vividly recall everything from the dust in the air to the smell of the country.

I seriously doubt if Senator Hillary was in this situation she would "misremember" any of it.

by routerdude 2008-03-26 12:01AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

It must be really hard to see the world through that pinhole.

Hillary lied about this multiple times attempting to give herself some foreign policy credibility, and despite being caught and called out continued to fabricate thinking she could get away with it. It's a tack that has worked pretty effectively for our current president, but I think the American people are a little fed up with being treated like they're stupid. At least some of us are.

by bookish 2008-03-26 05:01AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

thank you! excellent diary - highly recommended!

by engels 2008-03-25 07:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Wow, that video is awesome. I'm so very impressed and so very proud of her visit to Bosnia.  

Thank you for another wonderful diary.

Many of my co-workers that saw last night's CBS Bosnia clip told me that Hillary and Chelsea looked great in the clip and that they very much appreciated her trip promoting peace and supporting the peace-keeping American troops.  I get the impression that they love her more for it.  I live in Massachusetts.  We LOVE Hillary here.   :)

by Hurdy Gurdy 2008-03-25 07:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Yes, as you have said several times. But as I have said each time you posted this story, this works for true believers (as we see here), but not for people who are not strongly committed or who are undecided.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

and i just noticed

That Facthub

it says that "Hillary recently misspoke on Bosnia"

but it doesn't tell you what the misspeak was, then it gives you 3 sources that supposedly tell us she did accurately describe the misspeak in her book. but it never tells you that she said, there was no event because she had to run and duck for sniper fire,

and it doesn't address the issue that she had said this same "misspeak" on 4 total occasion since December of last year.

so yes there may have been a situation while she was in the air, but none of those quotes deal with what happened on the tarmac when she landed. they all skip it.

I wonder why?

by TruthMatters 2008-03-25 07:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

I can't speak for facthub, but Hillary addressed this in an interview today.  She said the ceremony on the tarmac was shortened from what was planned.  And she also said that her staff is telling her she misremembers the event.  Given that there is no need for embellishment, and that she was escorted from the helicopter to a building by riflemen a short while later on a separate trip, I think she has accidentally conflated those two events in her mind.    I think they are just putting up what info they have at facthub and will fill out more details later.

by Mike Pridmore 2008-03-25 07:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

I'm curious why you will take Hillary at her word, but not Obama at his.

by shalca 2008-03-25 08:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

We can go back and forth on the minutia of details of events a dozen years ago with supporting links. Under fire vs. under threat of fire, half hour ceremony or one cut short due to threats, ducking for cover or being prepared to duck for cover etc.

Bottom line, Hillary has traveled the world for the USA, accomplished much, was on the front lines while her empty suit of an opponent was accomplishing nada.

Once some bright reporter finds Elmer Gantry's schedule the week the FLOTUS was touring the front, the comparison will be both stark and laughable in the gravitas war. Can't wait!

by Newport News Dem 2008-03-25 07:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

no because what this does is

"Yes, she flat out lied to everyone's face but lets drop this now before she ever admits to actually lying"

she has been defending the sniper fire at the tarmac in Tuzla for a week BEFORE the video came out! she has repeatedly defened and had surrogates come out and defend that there was sniper fire and they had to run and get to the cars

you cant not defend it by saying she mis-spoke when she called sinbad wrong when he said there was no sniper fire

by TruthMatters 2008-03-25 07:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Clinton is the one that claims that she is superior because she has experience. And she cites certain incidents to support that claim. When those are shown to be incorrect, it goes to the heart of her own rationale for her candidacy.

Obama never made those claims about himself.

Sure, for folks who think experience is most important, Clinton has been their candidate. But not everyone thinks that is the prime criteria - and now her experience claims are being undermined by her overhyping what she really did do.  

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:43PM | 0 recs
Alegre....good grief

   she's said it at least 4 times, not to mention printed it in her own memoir. It simply didn't happen. It's not a misspeak. It's a lie. Nice try!
by southernman 2008-03-25 07:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

And here's another video, this one on Clinton's false claims on her position on NAFTA -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YG00SWAqc vw

I have the feeling she is going to get vetted, which, of course, has to happen now because the Republicans sure would do it.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 07:52PM | 0 recs
Misspoke=Stretching the truth

She didn't need to exaggerate this.  Period.  It wasn't a misstatement either, it was deliberate to drive home the point of her foreign policy experience, but she may have, in the end, slightly underminded it.  She didn't need too, she also didn't need to mention sleep deprivation either.  You don't go through an experience like that and forget the details....on multiple occasions.

As far as her campaigns press release of Obama's misstatements/lies, every single on should be thoroughly investigated.  If only these people could just be honest, in the end their unneccessary lies will do them in.

by venavena 2008-03-25 07:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

God Alegre, isn't vetting fun??! :)

by amiches 2008-03-25 08:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

By the way Alegre, do you think her schedule's going to slow down in the extremely unlikely event she ever gets anywhere near the Oval Office ever again? No, she'll have more speaking engagements and more meetings to attend than she does now, and probably will be more sleep-deprived.

How can we trust this woman to answer the 3 am red phone competently if a little exhaustion makes her tell a bald-faced lie on four separate occasions? She'll be telling Medvedev or Hu Jintao (while surely mispronouncing their names) that if they act up, they can expect her personally to be on the front lines.

Christ, the Clintons make me sick. You just know that the decision to tell that story was focus-grouped over and over in an effort to make her look tougher, more presidential - when in reality it was a photo op featuring an entire seventh grade class, a 16-year-old First Daughter, a 9-year-old schoolgirl, Sinbad and Sheryl Crow.

Utterly laughable.

by amiches 2008-03-25 08:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Yep - As the NEW CBS story shows, rather than rushing off after talking to the 8 year old, she posed with an entire seventh grade class - and none of them look like they're nervous or taking security precautions. Smiles all around.

http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/ main500251.shtml?id=3968001n

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 08:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ie5X4fWtH iQ

This one should work.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 08:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

You Clinton folks have really terrible political instincts.

You have a candidate who is seen as less trustworthy than the other two major candidates. Her husband, while liked for what he did as president, is also seen as untrustworthy and had been for many years.

Yet you think that the best way to handle VIDEO EVIDENCE that her story is wrong is to point at the other guy?

This never, ever works. The only way to get this story off the news is to say, ungrudgingly, gee, I guess I messed up. If she can do that in a light way, there is the chance of it going away. But if she continues to embellish it -- I stopped to talk to the child and then rushed away -- when the video shows that's not true, then there's at least another day of coverage. And blaming the other candidate - well, then, there's an excuse for the media to repeat the story that she told a tale. It also prompts reporters to do pieces on other claims she's made and for pundits to start saying things like they did on CBS tonight about whether she is trustworthy.

You don't want people to remember that they worried about trusting the Clintons again. You want this story to go away.  And what you're doing does not do that.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 08:18PM | 0 recs
Ohhh. a big scary list

The below is posted for satire reasons...
---
The following is a partial list of deaths of persons connected to President Clinton during his tenure as Governor of Arkansas and/or while President of the United States and thereafter. Read the list and judge for yourself.

BARBARA OLSON - Author of "Hell to Pay" - a book critical of Hillary Clinton, killed in the Pentagon bombing.

DARLENE NOVINGER - Former FBI operative, January 23rd, 2003. Novinger was known to hold sensitive information on the Clinton and Bush I administration's drug operations. Her husband murdered March 1987 when she went public with initial reports. Her father died July 8, 1993 four hours after Darlene was a guest on the Tom Valentine show. Suffered retaliation after reporting discussions by government protected drug smuggler who described contacts with Vice President George Bush and his son, Jeb Bush.

DAN MULLONEY, a television news photographer who shot footage of the 1993 Branch Davidian siege.

CHARLES RUFF - White House Counsel and Clinton defense attorney during the Monica Lewinsky scandal and the impeachment trial. Of apparent natural causes.

JAMES MCDOUGAL - Clinton's convicted Whitewater partner died of an apparent heart attack, while in solitary confinement. McDougal was a key witness in Kenneth Starr's investigation.

MARY MAHONEY - A former White House intern was murdered July 6, 1997 at a Starbucks Coffee Shop in Georgetown. The murder happened during the pre-trial publicity surrounding the Paula Jones lawsuit days after Newsweek's Mike Isakoff dropped hints that a former White House staffer was about to go public with her story of sexual harassment in the White House.

VINCENT FOSTER - Former White House counselor, and former colleague of Hillary Clinton at Little Rock's Rose law firm. Foster was found dead July 20, 1993 of a gunshot to the head ruled a suicide. Rumours were that Foster and Hillary had an affair.

RON BROWN - Secretary of Commerce and former DNC Chairman. Reported to have died by impact in a plane crash. A pathologist close to the investigation reported to the Bob Grant Radio Show a hole in top of Brown's skull resembling a gunshot wound. At the time of his death Brown was being investigated, and spoke publicly of his willingness to cut a deal with prosecutors.

C. VICTOR RAISER II - Former National finance Co-Chairman, Clinton for President Campaign and son MONTGOMERY RAISER died in a private plane crash in Alaska, July 30th,1992. Raiser was described as a major player in the Clinton organization by Dee Dee Meyers.

JEREMY "MIKE" BOORDA, President Clinton's former Chief of Naval Operations allegedly committed suicide by shooting himself in the chest with a .38 caliber pistol on his front lawn in May 1996. The unauthorized wearing of valor pins was the alleged reasoning behind the suicide. By 1998 this reasoning was proved false after the Navy issued a report that said Boorda earned the right to wear the pins afterall.

PAUL TULLEY - Democrat National Committee Political Director found dead in a hotel room in Little Rock, Arkansas September 24, 1992, Described by Clinton as a "Dear friend and trusted advisor".

ED WILLEY - Clinton fund raiser-found dead November 30, 1993 deep in the woods in Virginia of a gunshot wound to the head. Ruled a suicide, Willey died on the same day his wife Kathleen Willey claimed that Bill Clinton groped her in the oval office in the White House. Ed Willey was involved in several Clinton fund raising events.

JERRY PARKS - Head of Clinton's gubernatorial security team in Little Rock. Gunned down in his car at a deserted intersection outside Little Rock. Parks' son said his father was building a dossier on Clinton. He allegedly threatened to reveal this information. After he died the files were mysteriously removed from his house

JAMES BUNCH - Died from a gunshot wound. Reported to have a black book of people containing names of influential people who visited prostitutes in Texas and Arkansas.

JAMES WILSON - Was found dead by hanging May 18, 1993. Was reported to have ties to Whitewater.

KATHY FERGUSON - Ex-wife of Arkansas Trooper Danny Ferguson died in May,1994 was found dead in her living room with a gunshot wound to her head. It was ruled a suicide even though there were several packed suitcases, as if she was going somewhere. Danny Ferguson was a co-defendant along with Bill Clinton in the Paula Corbin Jones lawsuit. She was reported a possible corroborating witness for Paula Jones case.

BILL SHELTON - Arkansas state Trooper and Fiancee of Kathy Ferguson.Critical of the suicide ruling of his fiancee, he was found dead in June, 1994 of a gunshot wound also ruled a suicide at the grave site of his fiancee.

GANDY BAUGH - Attorney for Clinton friend Dan Lassater died by falling out a window of a tall building January, 1991. His client was a convicted drug distributor.

FLORENCE MARTIN - Accountant subcontractor for the CIA related to the Barry Seal Mena Airport drug smuggling case. Dead of three gunshot wounds.

SUZANNE COLEMAN - Reportedly had an affair with Clinton when he was Arkansas Attorney General. Died of a gunshot wound to back of head, ruled a suicide, was pregnant at the time her death.

PAULA GROBER - Clinton's speech interpreter for the deaf from 1978 until her death December 9, 1992. She died in a one car accident.

DANNY CASOLARO - Investigative reporter, investigating Mena airport and Arkansas Development Finance Authority. Found dead with slit his wrists in the middle of his investigation.

PAUL WILCHER - Attorney investigating corruption at Mena Airport with Casolaro and the 1980 "October Surprise" was found dead on a toilet June 22, 1993 in his Washington DC Apartment. Had delivered report to Janet Reno 3 weeks before his death.

JON PARNELL WALKER - Whitewater Investigator for Resolution Trust Corporation. Fell to his death from his Arlington, Virginia apartment balcony August 15, 1993. Was investigating Morgan Guarantee scandal.

BARBARA WISE - Commerce Department Staffer, worked closely with Ron Brown and John Huang. Cause of death unknown. Died November 29, 1996. Her bruised nude body was found locked in her office at the Department of Commerce.

CHARLES MEISSNER - Assistant Secretary of Commerce who gave John Huang special security clearance, died shortly thereafter in a small plane crash.

DR.STANLEY HEARD - Chair National Chiropractic Heath Care Advisory committee died with his attorney.

STEVE DICKSON - Died in a small plane crash. Heard, in addition to serving on Clinton's advisory council personally treated Clinton's mother, stepfather and brother.

BARRY SEAL - Drug running pilot out of Mena, Arkansas. Death was no accident.

JOHNNY LAWHORN Jr. - Mechanic, found a check made out to Clinton in the trunk of a car left in his repair shop. Died when his car hit a utility pole.

STANLEY MUGGINS - Suicide. Investigated Madison Guarantee. His report was never released.

HERSHELL FRIDAY - Attorney and Clinton fund raiser died March 1, 1994 when his plane exploded.

KEVIN IVES and DON HENRY - Known as "The boys on the track" case. Reports say the boys may have stumbled upon the Mena Arkansas Airport Drug operation. This controversial case where initial report of death was due to falling asleep on railroad track. Later reports claim the two had been slain before being placed on the tracks. Many people linked to the case died (see below) before their testimony could come before a Grand Jury.

THE FOLLOWING SIX PERSONS HAD INFORMATION ON THE IVES/HENRY CASE:

KEITH CONEY - Died when his motorcycle slammed into the back of a truck in July, 1988.
KEITH McMASKLE - Died, stabbed 113 times, November 1988.
GREGORY COLLINS - Died from a gunshot wound, January 1989.
JEFF RHODES - He was shot, mutilated and found burned in a trash dump in April 1989.
JAMES MILAN. Found decapitated-Coroner ruled death due to natural causes.
JORDAN KETTLESON - Was found shot to death in the front seat of his pickup truck in June 1990.
RICHARD WINTERS - Winters was a suspect in the Ives/Henry deaths. Was killed in set-up robbery in July 1989.

THE FOLLOWING FORMER CLINTON BODYGUARDS ARE DEAD:

  • MAJOR WILLIAM S. BARKLEY JR.
  • CAPTAIN SCOTT J.REYNOLDS
  • SGT. BRIAN HANEY
  • SGT. TIM SABEL
  • MAJOR GENERAL WILLIAM ROBERTSON
  • COL. WILLIAM DENSBERGER
  • COL. ROBERT KELLY
  • SPEC. GARY RHODES
  • STEVE WILLIS
  • ROBERT WILLIAMS
  • CONWAY LeBLEU
  • TODD McKEEHAN

And finally, BUDDY, the Presidential Dog, killed when he was struck by a car after having escaped his kennel.

-----

I refuse to address each of your long list of Obama accusations until you discuss and disprove this entire list of suspicious deaths.

Isn't argument via BS lists fun, not at all as boring as actually admitting your candidate made a mistake and not deflecting the discussion to off topic bullplop.

by furiousxgeorge 2008-03-25 08:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Ohhh. a big scary list

Wait a minute... what's good for the goose is good for the gander? Or perhaps, is that the reverse? Anyhow, try as you might to rationalize that lists of meaningless attacks are exactly the style of underhanded nonsense attacks that made these folks defensive of the Clintons in the first place, all us tried and true Hillary supporters see through your shennanigans. You can't spell Anti-Right-Wing-Attack-Machine without Right-Wing-Attack-Machine. Which is exactly the machine you and your shadow-president Obama are. But your ultra-right-wing-yet-too-liberal-Robo-No minee will never be able to escape the shattering truth of Tenure-Gate.

by TheSilverMonkey 2008-03-25 08:45PM | 0 recs
Wow!!!
I cried when I got to Buddy...I had no idea he
was killed by a car!!
by nikkid 2008-03-25 08:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Ohhh. a big scary list

Someone will pay for killing Buddy.

by rfahey22 2008-03-26 06:12AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About

Is there a rule at MyDD about diaries that only copy and paste research from other sources? Why not simply list links to HRC's www page - after all, that would increase traffic to the site, encourage browsing other pages to actually learn about Hillary and her policies (since these diaries never really do that...they simply repeat campaign talking points and memos released to the press).

Just a suggestion.

By the way - I think NAFTA is coming back -so you may want to recopy and repasted the HRC propaganda.

by Newcomer 2008-03-25 08:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About

Yep - Here's a new NAFTA story from NBC -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YG00SWAqc vw

The thing is, if Clinton has fessed up completely and quickly, she might have been able to avoid having reporters check out all of her policy claims.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 08:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About

I saw a fairly balanced commentary on this - and the bottom line is that these things cycle through and right now the MSM is thirsty for some Clinton dirt....for the last 2 weeks it was all about Obama and HRC was getting a free ride.

The problem here - of course - is that John McCain is the one getting the free ride.

Can you believe he outdistances BOTH BHO and HRC on the Economy in a recent Bloomberg poll. And this is someone who admitted he knew nothing about the economy!

Clearly this drawn out democratic primary is killing the party right now...hopefully it will shift as things settle...whenever that happens.

by Newcomer 2008-03-25 08:54PM | 0 recs
Oh, Alegre

Dear, dear. It's okay.

Whatever will you write about when Obama gets the nomination?

by ragekage 2008-03-25 08:41PM | 0 recs
Alegre, thanks for putting this all together.
Ignore the trolls! You did a great job on this.
by cjbardy 2008-03-25 08:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Alegre, thanks for putting this all together.

Yes - because cutting and pasting is the best way of doing a diary!!  It's quick and easy!! No troublesome research from multiple sources or independent analysis!!

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 08:52PM | 0 recs
Alegre - I LOVE YOU!!!

You had me a Tuzla!!!

by nikkid 2008-03-25 08:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

From Wikipedia -

An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. The process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject.

Sounds like a certain website, namely, facthub.hillary.com which is generously reproduced in this diary.

by shalca 2008-03-25 08:53PM | 0 recs
&quot;I'm not worthy! I'm not worthy!&quot;

Alegre, you're the bomb. Keep speaking the truth.

by Scan 2008-03-25 08:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

....its amazing what silly delusions the Hillary horde has resort to in order to make themselves feel better..

by NCDEM29 2008-03-25 08:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

The most incredible response from her supporters is that the reaction to Hillary is like the swiftboating of 2004 - except in this case, Hillary has admitted that her original story wasn't true and there's video evidence that it wasn't accurate.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-25 09:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

haha..good point

by NCDEM29 2008-03-25 09:05PM | 0 recs
More and more desperate each time

She told this story four times as part of her "battle-tested and ready-to-go" campaign narrative.  It was a complete and total lie, and she knew it was.

And you're trying to compare that to Obama saying he was a professor when his official title was "lecturer" when he taught law at the University of Chicago?  You're comparing that with using the term "Selma" as a metonymy for the civil rights movement?  Or overstating once the death toll of a tornado for something that isn't designed to be the central part of a campaign narrative?

You disappoint me increasingly. Like I said, Hillary's huge problem is that she has told this Bosnia story repeatedly as a major butress to her campaign narrative and  completely overdramatized it to make it seem like she has been in a really dangerous, dramatic situation, and repeatedly told this even though she knew it was a total fabrication.

And trying to dredge up any possible example you can of Obama misspeaking won't change that in the least.

Pathetic.

by hekebolos 2008-03-25 09:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

do you just repost the Hillary talking points verbatim, or what?

She's told these lies multiple times at this point.

by thereisnospoon 2008-03-25 09:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

I thought the Selma comparison was especially convincing..hahahaha

ohhhh you silly, silly Hillary horde

by NCDEM29 2008-03-25 09:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

If anything, they are misstatements on his part.  She repeated her comment 3X - do you expect me to believe she misspoke 3 times - over a period of a month?!?  Cmon dude ... please ... a bit of intellectual honesty is needed on the diary.

by stryan 2008-03-25 09:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

And Obama misspoke several times about the extent of his associations with Rezko, about whether he had witnessed his pastor make controversial statements, about whether he had ever supported single-payer health insurance going forward, about his stance on free trade agreements, about his timeline for troop withdrawal from Iraq, about any number of issues, both substantive and silly.

If you want to make this election about honesty, you may be going down a road you will regret.

by Inky 2008-03-25 10:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

If you want to make this election about honesty, you may be going down a road you will regret.

Are you kidding me?  We have a litany of Clinton half-truths - and outright lies -  dating back to the 1992 presidential election.  This pains me because I have been a Clinton apologist in my family since his first election.   But - in reality, it now seems some of the REPUB talking points, may be in fact, true.   She wants to run on 'experience' fine, it has to include the good, bad AND UGLY of the Clinton administration ... and all the triangulation it gave us ... which, btw, set the progressive movement back at least 8 years.  
Remember it was more important for Hillary to get her Senate seat than elect Al Gore.  

There are instances when Obama may push the envelope on experience and happenstance, sure.   I personally dont believe he is purposefully misleading ... whereas she has a history of lying.  

by stryan 2008-03-26 01:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

 Hey Alegre nice job thanks for all the work. I had been wondering just how much BO had been embellishing and for how long.

 You guys really crack me up, most of the time as I was reading your responses (Obama supporters) I just sat here laughing to myself-
I do appreciate those of you who are less antogonistic though.

  So she suppossedly misspoke all of 4 (FOUR) times on one issue- wow- hold the presses-
 d-a-m-n....? Yep, that's it can't trust her-JHC she went into a friggin' combat zone-hello does that count for anything? Apparently not to you Obama supporters.

 And how long has Obama been saying he was a Professor? How many leaflets/fliers went out with this included? That's just one of his "misspeaks"
how about the others-and you all are concerned re: with what ONE of hers.

 BTW has Sen. Obama been to any war zone yet-Iraq, Afghanistan. I am not being facisious here as I really do not know.
  But your are correct in saying that she really did not need to embellish anything just going was impressive enough for me and apparently for those soldiers she met with as well.
 

by artsykr 2008-03-25 09:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

There's nothing wrong with calling himself "a professor," using the lower case, since that simply means someone who teaches at a college or university.

If he was claiming a title that he had not been granted, such as Assistant Professor, Associate Professor or Professor, that is different.

But in academia, it is perfectly acceptable to say that someone is a professor when they teach at the academic institution.  

This is a very, very weak criticism.  

by politicsmatters 2008-03-26 03:32AM | 0 recs
I Heard She Invented the Internet, Too

During a hail of Republican gunfire. Upon landing, she had to run into the terminal while the bullets were a-flyin'

No? You mean she misspoke? Oops.

And what did she do when confronted with her misspeech? Why, she hauled out the tried 'n true race card. Hillary Clinton, what a cheap shot.

by cwilson 2008-03-25 09:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Keep those videos coming

Well, if I were Obama, I'd be plenty mad about all the airplay she's getting, all those video clips ----- of Hillary, 12 years ago, on the front lines, in her flak jacket, supporting the troops, the troops really appreciating her, visiting with them in the hospital, in the mud, tanks and guns and helicopters, looking calm and compassionate and leader-like.  Keep those videos in heavy rotation.  

Oh and let's see, what WAS Obama doing right around then? Oh, yes, hunkering down with the good old boys in the back rooms of Chicago dumping longtime progressive activist Alice Palmer off the ballot.  

by oh puhleeze 2008-03-25 09:45PM | 0 recs
From a Veterans perspective

The absolute LAST thing a soldier wants is some publicity seeking politician coming to a war-zone forcing me to shine my shoes and press my uniform just so they can smile beside me in front of the cameras.....but thats just me..but you can call that  patriotism if you like.

by NCDEM29 2008-03-25 09:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

The Clintons are destroying the Party....period!  It is over.

by gorebeatbush2 2008-03-25 09:47PM | 0 recs
more silly season

I'm very strongly for Obama, but I think this whole Bosnia thing is more nonsense ... more gotcha politics ... more shallow, soundbite crap foisted on us to distract us from the real issues.

I think this, and Wright, and all the other anti-Obama stuff in this thread and anti-Hillary stuff elsewhere should all be addressed with three words:

NOT
THIS
TIME

It's time to grow up - this whole nation has a grade school mentality.

by obsessed 2008-03-25 10:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

This is such a ridiculous charge against Hillary it's BOs strategy - equate Ferraro with Wright, Equate a Hillary misspeak with BO's lying about being in the pews, about his professorship, about his relationship with Rezko, about his legislative record, about NAFTA and about Iraq and we are supposed to say, oh, their both the same, there's no difference.

But, honestly, everyone who reads this -- there's a huge difference. BO lies over and over again, I don't even know if he knows it. The press doesn't call him on it, but that doesn't mean when he says he never heard Rev Wright and then he says of course he did that he ever tells the truth. We have no idea what this man stands for. All we know is that he's spent 20 years as a member in good standing of an anti-american, racist and anti-semitic church.

There's no way he wins in the general, and if you really want to get out of Iraq you'll vote Hillary.

by seattlegonz 2008-03-25 10:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Alegre, thanks so much for all the wonderful work you do for us! Sure is appreciated.
by Nobama 2008-03-25 10:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Excellent post. And you didn't even mention all the times he lied about Rev. Wright. The first few days the story broke, he told a different lie everytime he talked to the press. Then finally had to confess when he gave the speech, in which he told other whoppers including his grandmother. (Compare that story with what he said about the incident in his book. Not the same).

Then of course, we've had many, many more lies about Rezko in addition to the ones you mentioned. It started out as just 5 hours of legal work. Then gradually we find out Rezko actually went to the mansion with him. Then we have all the different figures about how much money he actually got from the man. It started out at $26,000. Then went up to $80,000. Then $150,000. It is now up to $250,000. Is that the end? Who knows, I expect any day to hear that the number is even more, because Mr. Obama has already shown that he will not tell the truth about anything that hurts him until he's backed up to the wall.

There are also the NAFTA lies that the Canada TV station caught him in that infuriated the Ohio voters. I would bet that's also going over real well in Pennsylvania.

Then the lies that his aid mentioned about withdrawing from Iraq, while also calling Clinton a monster.

I could go on and on. Because, you see, this man has been telling lies since he began his campaign last year. A few days ago, I saw a list of more than 50 of them in a comment someone made to a post. I should have kept them. But what is really striking to me is that his lies are all very pertinent to what he would do in office if elected and what he would do as president. They are very pertinent to a voter who is trying to choose the best candidate. What Hillary said is basically an exaggeration, or an error in confusing different trips (and who wouldn't when she made more than 80 during her time as First Lady, and this was 12+ years ago. I couldn't tell you what I was doing 12 years ago. Could you?)

by CognitiveDissonance 2008-03-25 11:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Love your signature - so appropriate.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-26 03:33AM | 0 recs
You should really do a diary about...

Sen. Clinton's speech on Monday, after all it was a key event of her campaign and talked about what is considered one of her stronger issues which is the economy.  Also you do write fairly well.

i tipped but didn't rec (due to the fact that this diary is on top of the rec list and a slight disingenousness in that there were 3 occaisions that this misspeaking happened and it got exaggerated
http://ruralvotes.com/thefield (yes I know Al is in the tank for Sen. Obama and even unfairly criticized you) has a summary of it.

by Student Guy 2008-03-25 11:06PM | 0 recs
Arrgh

I forgot to spell check that should be occasions and  dis-ingenuousness

by Student Guy 2008-03-25 11:10PM | 0 recs
This whopper of Hillary's was

not a misstatement.  It was a short story and total fiction.

The story starts with her claiming she was the first person to visit there after the peace agreements.  Not true, the president himself had been there and numerous congresspeople.

Then she said if the place was too small, too poor or too dangerous they sent her instead of the president.  Send the First Lady and their young daughter to places too dangerous for the president?  Well, at least they sent a comedian and a folksinger along to protect them.  That whole statment is a whopper but it's also totally ridiculous.

Then there was the whole running under sniper fire part when in fact she and Chelsea walked to where she was greeted and a small girl read her a poem.  A person doesn't mix up a poem read by a child with sniper fire no matter how tired they are (or does she claim that running under sniper fire was such a common occurance for her that it wasn't memorable?).  Another huge whopper.

And the above fictional account of Hillary's experience was right on the heals of her, also fictional, account of brokering peace in Northern Ireland.  

But Clinton supporter would like us to equate this with whether Obama taught a class (for years by the way) at Chicago University as a guest lecturer or as a visiting professor.  How stupid do you think we are?

by GFORD 2008-03-25 11:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Great diary, Alegre. You've made some excellent points Elizabeth Hasselbeck and her football-helmeted husband wouldn't even try to dispute. :-)

by RickWn 2008-03-26 12:03AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine -

I particularly like the part about Obama never going even remotely near a war zone because its so true. Most state senators don't head into war zones, the man is so utterly unqualified to be President its ridiculous to even compare him to Hillary. I guess Bush has lowered the bar SO low that if you can speak clearly you can be President

by rossinatl 2008-03-26 01:30AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements
My dear you are comparing apples and oranges.
Hillary LIED,plain and simple.She just made statements about Tulza on St Patty's day and before on Mar 5th,on CNN...and she's done it like 3 times already.No candidate is perfect~remember that.
 I feel your need to fight no matter what, but reason and logic need to prevail here.
Misstatement implies that you're facts were skewed~not that you were under Sniperfire.Give me a break.
What I cannot in  God's name understand is why Obama is such an awful candidate except that you have your mind made up about Hillary.No matter what she does you will find a way to justify her behavior.
 I'm not sure if you were around in the 90's but I was in my 20's~and let me tell you~they weren't all that.Hillary is the Establishment,the DLC and a lobbyist supporter.Obama is the man of "the people" and that is something that scares the shit out of "the establishment".Quit being scared and listen to the man already.
by Wild Starchild 2008-03-26 02:20AM | 0 recs
Obama misspoke, Hillary bald-face Lies

You can try to Parse this all you want but you know damned well that politics anit beanbag.

If you can't get your point across in 15 secs your point is moot.

In 15 secs of video you see Clinton outright lying on one side about Snipers and on the other side a group of 5th graders sing while an 8 year old gets her cheek kissed. DAMN.

This is way worse than you admit. Hillary is toast. She'll be lucky to keep a senate seat after this lie.

by rockemsockem 2008-03-26 02:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Alright.  Step-by-step rebuttal:

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/3/26/6484 7/6249

Now you can take out your claim that no one's rebutted your arguments.

Thanks.

by The Great Gatsby 2008-03-26 02:56AM | 0 recs
Well there isn't heavy enough traffic

at MyDD for your post to have any effect on the message that's emerging but it's a valiant effort.
Not only is the media going after HRC's repeated lies about Bosnia (1 time is a mistatement, 4 times - including a written statement - is a lie) but they're coming after her on NAFTA.

The Clinton Achilles heal is that idea that they'll say anything to get what they need. The media finally has their hook to hang that coat on.

by RLMcCauley 2008-03-26 03:01AM | 0 recs
Wow. Is the Clinton campaing so prevalent here

It's like the 5th time I've seen these campaign talking points of ridiculous minor Obama stuff that was released by the campaign reprinted verbatim here. Hmmmm. Curious.

Here's a better video of the Clinton lie, not misstatement, lie. A misstatement is when you accidentally said something incorrectly. A lie is when you planned to in your prepared text and have told the same lie quite a few times.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ie5X4fWtH iQ

by Travis Stark 2008-03-26 03:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Thanks alegre.
Already knew most of these embellishments and some total fabrications and outright lies out of Obama's mouth during the recent two scandals. The difference is that Clinton was in Bosnia, was in a combat zone, was around sniper fire that became an issue shortly after her arrival, but misquoted or didn't remember the exact details while out on the campaign trail. Has admitted she was mistaken and 'misspoke' and has been branded a liar by the Obama campaign, not the commenters, the posters, the biased media, but Obama's campaign.

I'm not sure if his campaign understands the backlash of his belittling Clinton as a 'first lady tea hostess' but it makes people ask the question "what were YOU doing' and the contrast between the portrayal of Michelle as the fashion statement of Jaqueline Kennedy as first lady.

It doesn't mean Hillary had experience as president while first lady, but had plenty of exposure to dignitaries and their spouses and traveled all over the world bridging gaps and spreading good will and diplomacy and both Bill and Hillary extremely well liked around the world. This is something Obama says he can do at a time when we need to mend our relations in the world. Hillary already has, so of course, Obama needs to belittle and demean her experience over his inexperience.

I enjoy your diaries...keep it up. I heard about you on Huffpo when you went on strike at DKos. At Huffpo if you are not a Hillary hating republican troll or a Hillary bashing Obama supporter you're lucky if you can one post in 100 through the filtering and censorship even if you aren't saying anything negative about Obama. You just can't say anything remotely positive about Hillary.

by Justwords 2008-03-26 03:27AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Hillary didn't misspeak, she outright lied.

by Socks The Cat 2008-03-26 03:52AM | 0 recs
Excellent and truthful diary

Thank you for this excellent and truthful diary.  It has made the Obama followers spew their concocted baloney but the truth remains.  Hillary made one misstatement and so it was easy to focus on.  Obama is a serial misstater so he gets away with it for a long time because nobody expects him to be truthful.  He is only expected to paint beautiful pictures with words and the fact that they are all lies doesn't matter a whit.

Anybody recall his having said that it was a coincidence that Ms. Rezko bought the adjoining lot to his/Michelle's house on the same day?  Anybody recall his haveing said that while religiously attending church for twenty years, he never heard Rev. Wright say those hateful things?  Anybody recall his having said Rezko only gave $60 thousand to Obama's campaigns when it is now up to $250 thousand?  I didn't think so because since he lies whenever his mouth opens then NOBODY fact checks his stuff.  They don't have to.  Nobody expects it to be true in the first place.

by macmcd 2008-03-26 04:07AM | 0 recs
concocted baloney?

All I have to say to that is :

Liar Liar Sniper Fire!

by rockemsockem 2008-03-26 04:24AM | 0 recs
Re: concocted baloney?

Snore.......zzzzzzz

by macmcd 2008-03-26 04:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

this is a wonderful diary!  thank you for doing the work that the corporate media outlets apparently are unable or unwilling to do on their own.  excellent investigative journalism!!!  thank you!

by txyellowdawg 2008-03-26 04:11AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Hillary supporters are not fooling themselves or anyone else by calling her lies about Tuzla "misstatements".

by Mojo Risen 2008-03-26 04:26AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Hillary was on a diplomatic mission to a foreign nation, flying into a combat zone, back when Obama was just trying to gain power in Illinois.

Nice contrast - if this is mis-speaking, carry on, Hillary.  Now everyone knows what we've always known about her - she was most trusted advisor to the president of the United States for 8 years.

by Larissa 2008-03-26 04:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Clinton Told the Truth, She didn't Misspeak

She should have never apologized.

Barack Obama is a proven liar, many times over. He lied about Rezko--he only did "5 hours of work" for "that individual?" Give me a break.

Alegre, this is another tour de force diary. Thank you.

by Tennessean 2008-03-26 04:50AM | 0 recs
Hillary caught in another lie

The Bad P.R. serves that liar, Hillary right.

by Lefty Coaster 2008-03-26 04:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Thanks for the diary. Misstatement based on wrong memory 12 years later. Obama supporters should actually be afraid of what they wish for. Those videos are quite powerful and if the media plays them over and over again, people will get impressed that she went there in the first place -- that she had the intellectual curiosity to learn about the combat situation and the dedication to thank the soldiers on behalf of all of us. She could have sat in her WH residence sipping tea with the ambassador's wife, you know.

by pm317 2008-03-26 04:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

So you think this is good research?

I don't know how it would be seen in a high school class (or for that matter, one in junior high), but in a college class in political science, journalism, or history -- this earns an F and a warning.  You cannot use biased sources without acknowledging their bias and without examining arguments made by others who disagree. You can't rely on sources created by people who have an interest in what is being argued. You need multiple sources and you need objective sources.

As for doing this sort of work in a business situation, you'd be in big trouble. Imagine your boss asks you to investigate whether a manufacturer hyped claims about their product. So you hand your boss a report that uses information you got from the manufacturer under question and a good part of the report is a section of claims from the  manufacturer under investigation saying that a competitor also made misrepresentations.  Do you think this would be considered good work on which your boss would make a decision about whether to continue working with that manufacturer? Only in Dilbert.  In the real world, your job would be at risk.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-26 05:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Classic.  Ignore the issue, attack the messenger.

You've learned well from Bush and Cheney.

by Dave B 2008-03-26 06:02AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

That's ironic, considering that trusting even the most dubious of sources is what led Democrats to vote for the AUMF, Clinton included.

by rfahey22 2008-03-26 06:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

No, I didn't attack "the messenger," I attacked the quality of the work.  Every teacher knows there is a difference.  I think every boss does, too. And certainly every parent does.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-26 06:53AM | 0 recs
Those living in glass houses.......
When was Barbara Bush or Laura Bush in a combat zone as First Lady? Never! While watching the old CBS video, I noticed all of the U.S. soldiers surrounding her in every shot. They carried guns and were wearing combat gear. That should be another little clue to the Obama naysayers that Hillary Clinton was in a combat zone.

I wish Clinton had not made the statement that she was dodging sniper fire. But, I'm sure some Army sniper, off-camera and in the surrounding hills, was doing that exact thing on her behalf.

The Obama camp might want to back off on this one. When it comes to misspeaking, embellishing, or outright lying, Obama is not innocent. Those living in glass houses, shouldn't throw stones.

by zenful6219 2008-03-26 05:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Those living in glass houses.......

Why it matters for Clinton - from ABC news -
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Vote2008/story ?id=4519064&page=1

"Questions surrounding whether or not Clinton embellished a 1996 trip to Bosnia are particularly embarrassing for her because she has campaigned so hard on her "experience," arguing that she is ready to answer the 3 a.m. crisis call at the White House.

Video footage from the trip reveals no visible threat and a brief greeting ceremony on the tarmac. A little Bosnian schoolgirl read them a poem. The first lady paused for pictures. She and daughter Chelsea even climbed up on a guard tower.

John Pomfret, a Washington Post reporter who was there to capture the moment, said, "The whole Tuzla sector was under the control of the Americans. We were driving around in soft-skin cars. No reporters I know of were wearing flak jackets at the time. So it was pretty much a peaceful area."

by politicsmatters 2008-03-26 05:43AM | 0 recs
Re: Those living in glass houses.......
I must have missed the portion of Obama's resume that showed he visited a combat zone.
by zenful6219 2008-03-26 06:38AM | 0 recs
Re: Those living in glass houses.......

He didn't.  But he didn't make claims about visiting places like that which are not true, did he?

by politicsmatters 2008-03-26 06:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Those living in glass houses.......
You're right Obama has not visited a combat zone. Hillary Clinton has. Now, I suppose you'll say it really wasn't a combat zone.
by zenful6219 2008-03-26 07:50AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

"Misspoke." I love that. She willfully distorted the facts of her trip to Bosnia multiple times and all you can say is she simply misspoke? And if there was any real danger in going in to aa "combat zone", do you really think that President Clinton or the Secret Service would have allowed her and Chelsea to fly in there? For a photo op? This, it seems to me, is scraping the bottom of the barrel in support of Hillary. She has made this Bosnia trip one of the cornerstones in contrasting her foreign policy experience against Obama and it fell far short of muster. Call a spade a spade and move on. Trying to change the subject is disinengenuous.

And if you are not a person who has gone through a combat experience it seems that you would have a very difficult time actually forgetting maybe the only time in your life that you were ducking from sniper fire. I mean, no matter how little sleep you are getting or how much stress you are under, how could you really ever forget or misremember something like that?

by AHunch 2008-03-26 05:29AM | 0 recs
Is this what you really want?
Do you really want to turn this into a contest of who has embellished more than the other? I don't believe Obama would come above the fray.
by zenful6219 2008-03-26 05:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Is this what you really want?

I would gladly turn this in to a contest of who has embellished more. But that is beside the point I am trying to make, how can it be that your only repsonse to this Bosnia flap is to say, well Obama does it too? I would also question the veracity of saying that this Bosnia flap is an embellishment that is on par with Obama saying that he was a law professor as opposed to being a senior lecturer.

If Hillary wants to make her foreign policy bona fides as the starkest contrast between herself and Obama she had better come up with instances that are not easily refuted. That's all I am saying.

by AHunch 2008-03-26 06:26AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

If only the media was as attentive to details !

Thanks alegre for your committment to honesty that gets mucked up on the "infotainment" shows.

by catchawave 2008-03-26 05:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

I appreciate the work that Alegre does, but the sad fact is that the information does no good.  Because people like Matthews and Olberman are hell bent on destroying the Clintons.  Matthews has hated the Clintons since the 90's and will never be fair in his reporting.

I sense that the MSM is doing all their research at the great orange satan.

by Dave B 2008-03-26 06:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

"I sense that the MSM is doing all their research at the great orange satan."

Are you kidding? The MSM has researchers galore and many, many hours of video footage, with video archivists to help them locate what they want.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-26 06:59AM | 0 recs
&quot;Everybody in politics lies, but they do it

with such ease, it's troubling."

Disgusting is more like it, but that was David Geffen, the Clintons' friend.  How well he knows them.

by ReillyDiefenbach 2008-03-26 06:03AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

I know all politicians "mis-speak" from time to time.  The problem with Hillary doing so is that there are way too many people waiting to jump all over her for one error.

She'd better not give them any more ammunition to use.  There's just no leeway for her.

Double standard?  Yes.  But that's how it is.

by creeper1014 2008-03-26 06:25AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

You cannot misspeak about the same thing several times over.  At that point it becomes a blatant lie.  No spinning for the Clintonistas will change that.

by Socks The Cat 2008-03-26 06:28AM | 0 recs
The Biggest Lie Of All

Alegre, you missed the biggest one...the one where Barack Obama promised the voters of Illinois that he wouldn't bail on his term as Senator to run for the presidency.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10909406/

Hillary made that same promise to the voters of New York.  The difference between Clinton and Obasma is that she kept hers.

by creeper1014 2008-03-26 06:35AM | 0 recs
Re: The Biggest Lie Of All

It doesn't seem to bother the people of Illinois, does it? He got a significantly higher vote in the IL primary than Clinton did in the NY primary.

And I wish Clinton had run in 2004. She could have beat Bush.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-26 06:57AM | 0 recs
Re: The Biggest Lie Of All

The question is not whether it bothers the voters of Illinois.

The question is whether Barack Obama is a man of his word.

by creeper1014 2008-03-26 09:57AM | 0 recs
Clinton did not lie

What she said was Bullshit. At least a liar is aware that such a thing as truth exists. Bullshit has no relation to truth whatever; even a negative one.

by LibDem 2008-03-26 06:36AM | 0 recs
This was NOT a combat zone. I was there a week..

later doing a USO show.

The area was safe.  Bill Clinton had been scheduled to come himself 3 weeks earlier, but bowed out due to the flu.

If it was a combat area:

A. The military would not have allowed her to come
B. She would NOT have brought her daughter
C. They would BOTH have been wearing flak jackets and helmets
D. They would NOT have been standing unprotected ON TOP of a watchtower

Come on.  She lied.  Is that so hard to say?

by AmericanUnity 2008-03-26 07:07AM | 0 recs
The Dayton Peace Accord had been signed 5 weeks...

earlier.

This area was as safe as they get.  I was there myself

by AmericanUnity 2008-03-26 07:08AM | 0 recs
Hillary's historic trip

Hillary supporters make it seem that Hillary's Bosnia trip was something that other first ladies haven't done.

Not true. Laura Bush visited Afghanistan in 2005. http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/ma r2005/a033105wm2.html

Unlike Hillary, you don't hear Laura Bush exaggerating the security threat on her trip. Afghanistan was a far more dangerous place to visit than post-peace Bosnia. How many combat casualities did we have in Bosnia? Zero

Just because there were fortified outposts and soldiers with guns doesn't mean that it was a combat zone or that there was a sniper threat or any serious threat. Showing strength is one way insure the peace.  I saw it myself when I was in Bosnia a few months after Hillary.

Hillary also claims that she was the first first lady to visit a war zone since Eleanor Roosevelt.
I wouldn't consider post-peace Bosnia a war zone, but her claim isn't true anyway. Pat Nixon went to South Vietnam in 1969.

by moffcz 2008-03-26 07:31AM | 0 recs
Your examples are pathetic

Your examples are partisan exaggerations themselves.

Hillary has lied and mislead so many times it points to a character flaw that she and her husband share.

by Moonwood 2008-03-26 07:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Your examples are pathetic
Obama has also lied and embellished. What makes his lies and embellishments more tolerable than Clinton's?
by zenful6219 2008-03-26 07:52AM | 0 recs
because they are not lies

You are practicing the Rove technique of inoculation
You accuse your opponent of exactly what you are doing and in the confusion everyone looks bad.  

Its a despicable tactic and is basic to Hillary's campaign.  

She is losing but will damage the party with her irresponsible behavior.

by Moonwood 2008-03-26 09:43AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Has Sen. Obama even visited Bosnia? What about Iraq and Afghanistan? I know that he has been to Iraq 2times for brief stops, however, Sen. Clinton has been numerous times as has john McCain. I think that this is a wash and actually begs the question, where has Obaman travelled for his foreign policy creds!

by shark 2008-03-26 07:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

He didn't make claims about his foreign travel that are not true.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-26 07:56AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Clinton has a long-standing reputation for this sort of thing. That's why it's especially problematic for her to do it again.

An example from one of her biographers:

http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/26/hi llary-clinton-truth-or-consequences/#mor e-470
The latest episode -- the sniper fire she so vividly remembered and described in chilling detail to buttress her claims of  foreign policy "experience" -- like the peace she didn't bring to Northern Ireland, recalls another famous instance of faulty recollection during a crucial period in her odyssey.

On January 15, 1995, she had just published her book, It Takes a Village, intended to herald a redemptive "come back" after the ravages of health care; Whitewater; the Travel Office firings she had ordered (but denied ordering); the disastrous staffing of the White House by the First Lady, not the President -- all among   the egregious errors  that had led  to the election of the Newt Gingrich Congress in 1994.

On her book tour, she was asked on National Public Radio about the re-emergence of dormant Whitewater questions that week, when the so-called "missing billing records" had been found. Hillary stated with unequivocal certainty that she had consistently made public all the relevant documents related to Whitewater, including "every document we had," to the editors of the New York Times before the newspaper's original Whitewater story ran during Bill Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign.    

Even her closest aides -- as in the case of the Bosnian episode18 years later -- could not imagine what possessed her to say such a thing.  It was simply not true, as her lawyers and the editors of the Times (like CBS in the latest instance) recognized, leading to huge stories about her latest twisting of the facts. "Oh my God, we didn't," said Susan Thomasas, Hillary's great friend, who was left to explain to the White House lawyers exactly how Hillary's aides had carefully cherry-picked documents accessed for the Times in the presidential campaign.  The White House was forced -- once again -- to acknowledge the first lady had been `mistaken;" her book tour was overwhelmed by the matter, and Times' columnist  Bill Safire that month coined the memorable characterization of Hillary Clinton as "a congenital liar."

by politicsmatters 2008-03-26 07:57AM | 0 recs
It is quite simple really

The reason that we are so upset with Hillary and not with Obama is...

He Won, she lost, he will be the nominee, she will not.

So we have our Nominee, and we have this other candidate out there trying to tear him down.

If the situation were reversed most of us would be attacking Obama, but the situation is not reversed.

There is a person out there attacking the Democratic Candidate for President of the United States, and we are defending him, just as we would be defending her against dilusional partisans like yourself who aren't supporting our nominee.

Got it?

by Silence Do Good 2008-03-26 07:58AM | 0 recs
Clinton Press release

What a joke.  Is critical thought now banned? I mean when you lead with:

In academia, there's a significant difference: professors have tenure while lecturers do not

False.  This may be true in some universities but it is not universal at all.   A professor is not defined by tenure.  Lynn Sweet doesn't know what she's talking about.  

On Selma his quote was

Yet something happened back here in Selma, Alabama. Something happened in Birmingham that sent out what Bobby Kennedy called, "Ripples of hope all around the world." Something happened when a bunch of women decided they were going to walk instead of ride the bus after a long day of doing somebody else's laundry, looking after somebody else's children. When men who had PhD's decided that's enough and we're going to stand up for our dignity. That sent a shout across oceans so that my grandfather began to imagine something different for his son. His son, who grew up herding goats in a small village in Africa could suddenly set his sights a little higher and believe that maybe a black man in this world had a chance.
...
This young man named Barack Obama got one of those tickets and came over to this country. He met this woman whose great great-great-great-grandfather had owned slaves; but she had a good idea there was some craziness going on because they looked at each other and they decided that we know that the world as it has been it might not be possible for us to get together and have a child. There was something stirring across the country because of what happened in Selma, Alabama, because some folks are willing to march across a bridge. So they got together and Barack Obama Jr. was born. So don't tell me I don't have a claim on Selma, Alabama. Don't tell me I'm not coming home to Selma, Alabama.

I'm here because somebody marched. I'm here because you all sacrificed for me.


He's clearly referring to the civil rights movement in general as represented by Selma.  

The funny one is

FactCheck.org: 'Selective, embellished and out-of-context quotes from newspapers pump up Obama's health plan.'

Thats all this is "selective, embellished and out-of-context" claims that try to frame disagreements over who deserves credit, whether the law that passed was his or had been altered too much, or claiming that his misstatement (adding 'thousand' to ten on the number of people who had been killed in a local tornado) as "lies".

Its pathetic.

by PantsB 2008-03-26 08:13AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Hillary is a liar, official have told her over and over, she have first lady experience,not president.

Hillary insult WOMEN, she think we do not know politic nor difference Ithink it's because the way husband treated and disrespected her, but it's not fair to the American People for her to lie to us and say it's a mistake, she needs to be held accountable, or someone will have to clean her mess, instead of Bush mess, as she indicated.

Answering that phone at 3 in the morning,she is not credibility, no ethical and moral values.

Hillary makes to many mistakes, lies, point finger, Hillary have to many jokes up her sleeve,
unfairness, white water, Monica, McDougal went to prison.

DENOUNCE      HILLARY       AT        POLL

by glue 2008-03-26 08:54AM | 0 recs
If Hillary is Liar, Obama is Hyper Liar

because in his short career, he has told more and bigger than Hillary, by far.

by blah blah 2008-03-26 08:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

A vote for Hillary Clinton will not make history

The Clinton's sex scandal from Arkansas is first history

The Clinton's sex scandal in the white house is second history

The Hillary Clinton will have to settle for third history, if, if, if

I changed my mind I am VOTING FOR OBAMA

by glue 2008-03-26 09:10AM | 0 recs
Perceived honestly polling, Gallup

http://www.gallup.com/poll/105097/Percei ved-Honesty-Gap-Clinton-Versus-Obama-McC ain.aspx

Obama decent polling, McCain decent polling, Hillary not so much.

by mady 2008-03-26 09:44AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

She made a "boneheaded" mistake.  I guess Obama has been allowed to claim that, right?  

by JustJennifer 2008-03-26 09:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Wow, the Obamabot trolls are out in full force. They're clearly in denial that Obama indeed isn't alway truthful himself. The Obama campaign and Clinton bashing media have opened this box. Obama's exagerations far suprass that of Senator Clinton's. Perhapse the reason Obama inflates his record and accomplishmenets so much is that he doesn't have much of a record to begin with.

by Christopher Lib 2008-03-26 09:55AM | 0 recs
That wasn't the only time she told that Tuzla Tale

by jaywillie 2008-03-26 10:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements
Obamabot trolls?
To my knowledge..MyDD is a Dem site.
Those supporting Obama are just as much a member of our Party as those who support Clinton.
So Chris Lib..if Dems with opposing views bother you..go to Taylor Marsh..
by nogo war 2008-03-26 10:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

And even Taylor Marsh has said that Clinton messed up!

by politicsmatters 2008-03-26 11:10AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

The pilot says that basically nothing Hillary said was true.

There were no evasive maneuvers.
No one said to sit on bullet-proof vests.
There were no snipers.
Other high level officials came in before Hillary.
No one worried about their safety on the tarmac.
There was a normal arrival ceremony.

Watch it for yourself http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4uph2_ col2_news

by politicsmatters 2008-03-26 10:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

My Dad is a pilot and always laughs at my terror in   swooping down into a tricky landing.  Pilots' ideas of safe are a tad different than mere mortals.

by Feral Cat 2008-03-26 11:23AM | 0 recs
by Tennessean 2008-03-26 11:06AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

The devastating thing about this particular episode is that it fits in perfectly with the negative narrative about Hillary which is that she is not honest, trustworthy, and that she'll say anything to win, and that her political persona is not authentic, it's just a creation tailored for her attempt to win the Presidency, and it calls into question her positive narrative, which is that she's tested, she's experienced, ready on day one, has crossed the threshold to be commander in chief. If a job applicant comes in and it's found that there's a lie on his resume, it calls into question everything else on his resume and it says to the employer that this person is not honest and trustworthy.

by dmc2 2008-03-26 11:41AM | 0 recs
lame

cut and paste job from a Clinton campaign memo.  He said he was a Professor when he was actually...A LECTURER!!??!!

CRUCIFY HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!

by Bargeron 2008-03-26 12:08PM | 0 recs
Re: lame

Actually he doesn't say he was a Professor but a professor and, believe it or not, that's an important distinction in academia.

A professor is someone who teaches at a college or a university.

A Professor is a particular academic rank.

There is ZERO problem with Obama saying he was a professor.

by politicsmatters 2008-03-26 12:24PM | 0 recs
A Tuzla Veteran asks HRC to stop the SPIN

POSTED at : http://pennsylvaniaprogressive.typepad.c om/my_weblog/2008/03/bosnian-vet-acc.htm l

Dear Sir,

I feel compelled to write to you in regards to Senator Clinton's remarks regarding her visit to Bosnia.

I was present at the base in question when the First Lady visited and am intimately familiar with the situation on the ground at the time. It strikes me as beyond misstatement or clarity of memory for Senator Clinton to suggest that this visit in any way compares with the reality of those of us serving in theater experienced or presented a threat to her or her daughter.

As a service person in the US Army, I was deployed to Bosnia immediately after the Peace Accord was signed and served there for eleven months in 1996. I was there at Tuzla Air base when the First Lady visited, and there was no sniper fire or anyone running under cover.  I saw both the First Lady and her daughter in our headquarters building (we called it the 'White House'). When I saw them in the lobby of our Headquarters neither her or her daughter had on the "Flak" vests which even we were required to wear at all times when not inside a building.

It was my fortune to be working in the Headquarter building as a Communications Specialist, and while I did go out to the ZOS (Zone of Separation) once and lived under "Full battle rattle" rules, I would never in any way compare my experience with those who daily risked their lives. That was the M.P.'s who went on daily missions trying to round up weapons and militant individuals who opposed the Peace Accord and the contract workers who aided the Multi-National forces in trying to rebuild the infrastructure (bridges, communication, water) that had been blown up. If, as I believe, it is improper for me to compare my involvement with those who took the bulk of the real risks it is even more improper for any visiting dignitary to compare their own for any reason, let alone for personal gain.

I am quite angry that what I and my fellow soldiers worked to achieve should be used as a playing card to build up a political nominee and tear down another.  This is not what those of us who actually risked our lives were working for, we were trying to maintain a Peace Keeping mission in a country that had  been ravaged by ethnic cleansing.  To trivialize the atrocities suffered by the real people I met in that country for political gain is beyond my ability to comprehend.  I met mothers who had lost their children and children who had lost their parents. The sheer leap of credibility that the First Lady would have brought her daughter into an active war zone is an insult to the people there who suffered more than real risk, they suffered real loss.

I did have contact with some of the general population on a daily basis. Many came to work for the Military in custodial capacities. Many carried all that they possessed in plastic bags every day. They brought their own food and cooked daily on little burner plates. I was constantly amazed at how upbeat and optimistic some of the people were in spite of things. It still is hard for me to think of Srebenica and all of the women who lost husbands, sons, and fathers because of religion and nationalistic fervor.

My father still works as a Civil Servant at WOMAK on Ft. Bragg, NC and a couple of years ago he met a Bosnian woman and her daughter, who had lived through the worst of it. They got to talking and found out that I had been over there and told him to tell me 'thank you' for what we had done. It still humbles me and chokes me up a little to know that even after all of these years there is appreciation for our past efforts.

I was simply a soldier doing my job in Bosnia and I believe in what we accomplished there.  I do not either want to make of my service more than it was nor to denigrate those who served with me and those who lived through more than any of us.  It seems to me that if I simply stand by while others "spin" their involvement for their own personal or political ambitions that I would be contributing to the slander of my fellows in arms and the people we were working to help in Bosnia, so I offer you my personal experience of the reality of the situation.

To verify my story I have included a copy of an commendation I received for service in the Bosnian theater during that period. It would be my honor to provide you more of my perspective if it would serve to deliver the truth to the American people.

Best Regards,

Tammi K  Hetherington (nee Jann)

(formerly)

SPC

141 Signal Battalion, 22nd Signal Brigade, 1st Armored Division, US Army

Task Force Eagle

by Veteran75 2008-03-26 12:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

I am guessing that your intelligent thinking woman, but the manner in which you construct an argument is not.  You quote Hillary supporters and Fact Hub, as if they are arbitrers of the truth.  You conveniently leave out facts to make your case and this is something you consistantly do.  The propaganda on here is hard to swallow.  That people do not understand that to lecture is to teach and that to teach at a University one is called a professor is mind boggling.  Fabricating a trip into a danger ridden trip to engage in substantive issues is relevant to the contest at hand.  Stating you negotiated open borders when you arrived after they were open is relevant to the contest at hand.  Stating that she had anything to do w/the passage of FMLA is relevant. That Obama overestimated the deaths due to a Kansas tornado is what?  Sad that you felt the need to mention it.

by daninpa 2008-03-26 01:15PM | 0 recs
Obama response

TO: Interested Parties
FR: Obama Campaign
RE: Clinton's Exaggerations: The Domestic Record

DA: March 26, 2008

Senator Clinton's claims about her visit to Tuzla, Bosnia--and the footage disproving her account--have created quite a stir. And with good reason. As the Associated Press wrote <http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap_campaignplus/20080325/ap_ca/on_deadline_bosnia&gt; yesterday: "What makes Clinton's situation unique--and the Bosnia embellishments so damaging--is the fact that the New York senator has built her candidacy on the illusion of experience. Any attack on her credentials is a potential Achilles heel."

Unfortunately, Clinton's fantastic invention of a sniper-raked landing is only one in a growing list of instances in which she has exaggerated her role as First Lady, particularly with respect to domestic policy.

Clinton has credited herself with "creating" the State Children's Health Insurance Program and "helping to pass" the Family and Medical Leave Act.

Like the Tuzla story, both of these claims turn out to false--raising serious questions not just about the rationale for Senator Clinton's campaign, but about her willingness to adhere to the truth.

"Creating" the State Children's Health Insurance Program?

Ø Question: Did Hillary Clinton "create" SCHIP as First Lady? That's what her web site says. But it's not what the program's congressional sponsors say.

On her website, Senator Clinton goes so far as to laud <http://hillaryclinton.com/issues/healthcare&gt; what she calls "her successful effort to create the SCHIP Children's Health Insurance program."

"Create" SCHIP? Once again, Senator Clinton's claim simply doesn't hold up.

The Boston Globe recently conducted an investigation <http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/03/14/clinton_role_in_health_program_disputed?mode=PF&gt; into Clinton's purported role in the legislation, concluding that: "Hillary Clinton, who has frequently described herself on the campaign trail as playing a pivotal role in forging a children's health insurance plan, had little to do with crafting the landmark legislation or ushering it through Congress, according to several lawmakers, staffers, and healthcare advocates involved in the issue."

Not only is Senator Clinton's claim of authorship false, but the White House actually opposed SCHIP during it's creation: "But the Clinton White House, while supportive of the idea of expanding children's health, fought the first SCHIP effort, spearheaded by Senators Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, and Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah..."

Representative Henry Waxman, a leader on the bill who remains unaffiliated in the race, said he has no memory of any involvement by Clinton: "It was a bipartisan bill. I don't remember the role of the White House," said Representative Henry Waxman, a California Democrat who has not endorsed a candidate in the presidential race and who was the chief Democrat on the Energy and Commerce Committee, which deals with health matters. "It did not originate at the White House."

And Senator Kennedy, the Senate's undisputed leader on universal health care and one of the actual creators of SCHIP, does not agree with Clinton's assessment: "Asked whether Clinton was exaggerating her role in creating SCHIP, Kennedy, stopped in the hallway as he was entering the chamber to vote, half-shrugged. `Facts are stubborn things,' he said, declining to criticize Clinton directly. `I think we ought to stay with the facts.'"

Leadership on the Family and Medical Leave Act?

Ø Question: Did Senator Clinton "help to pass" FMLA? Her White House schedules and the timeline of the bill's passage call that claim into question.

Clinton claims on the trail and on her website <Helping%20to%20pass%20the%20Family%20and%20Medical%20Leave%20Act> that she played a significant role in "helping to pass the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to enable new parents to take time off without losing their jobs..." But there is no evidence that this is the case.

For starters, the bill was signed into law only 16 days after Bill Clinton took office--not much time for the new First Lady to play much of a role. On top of that, the Associated Press reported that an existing version of the bill that had already been passed "by majorities in the last Congress" was altered only slightly and "recycled for enactment" [AP, 2/9/93].

In addition, Senator Clinton's recently released White House schedules show that she didn't have a single meeting on the bill she now touts. And in her own autobiography she discusses FMLA without making any mention of having a role in its passage.

Now that she's running for President, however, the facts seem to have changed. Or at least her allegiance to them has.

Experience: Foundation of the Clinton Candidacy

The refrain that Senator Clinton "has the experience to lead on Day One" has been repeated endlessly since she entered the race. On closer inspection, the claims Senator Clinton makes turn out to be little more than stories.

With the next primary less than a month away, it's time for Senator Clinton to finally face the "vetting" she's so fond of discussing. Badly trailing in delegates, votes, and states won, she's going to need more than a new script to win the nomination. But if she wants to regain the trust of the American people, it would be a good place to start.

by highgrade 2008-03-26 01:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

And what does the word "is" mean again?

by Drummond 2008-03-26 01:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Here is what never made sense to me and why I questioned her account before the verification confirmed my instincts.

I'm unmarried and don't have kids. (that I know of)  If I was President and knew of a dangerous situation, I would put MYSELF in harm's way long before my wife and child.  

This just doesn't make sense.

by bigdavefromqueens 2008-03-26 02:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

excellent diary alegre, people need to remain focused on the real problem- Obama's electoral impossibility,  not big mean Hillary.  

by atomic garden 2008-03-26 04:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

I once had a gun pulled on me I will never forget that.

I cant speak for Hill. But If it was me. I would remember running for my life. With my 16 year old daughter next to me.

Sleep deprived? Really? Really Really?
She is not an action hero so im guessing running from snipers is not a everyday thing. Again something you would remember

She is screwed with this one

Some people think she would say anything to get elected. I think that point in proven now.

Shhhhhhhhhh be on the look out for snipers.

by goalie40 2008-03-26 04:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements
 Amazing how only misstatements by hillary are comdemned. Obama could lie about the time of his conceivement, about his long-time friendship with a corrupt man and his racist pastor, about being a professor and embelishing his community organizing resume, and it all seems ok.
 Maybe she wanted people to know that she was visiting war zones years ago, while her opponent has never worked full time in his life prior to the US Senate. The disgusting, biased media won't highlight anything she has ever done, so maybe that was a way to call attention to herself. It was a war zone, and therefore risky to go there and that is undisputable.
by RC01 2008-03-26 08:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

Excellent post.  

I think you missed an important one.  In one of the debates, didn't Obama claim credit for the Wounded Warrior Act?  But he really did very little, and in fact didn't HRC do the real work on that one?

But hey, who cares about facts?  Not Obama's true believers.  The media don't seem to care much either.

by PlainWords 2008-03-26 10:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

The following three paragraphs were quoted from Lynn Sweet: The Scoop from Washington (Mar 18):

Obama admitted in his speech that he personally heard some of Wright's fiery rhetoric. "Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in the church? Yes."

On Friday, in an interview with the Chicago Sun-Times, Obama said something different. "I'll be honest with you. I wasn't in church when any of those sermons were issued."

Obama probably made that admission in his speech knowing that reporters were trying to determine if he was in church for one of Wright's divisive missives.

The remarks quoted above are 180 degrees from what he said the week before when he said that he was never present to hear any of those controversial remarks or wasn't aware that his reverend was making the remarks.  That's a huge misstatement!!!  

by yheitman 2008-03-26 11:12PM | 0 recs
Alegre--come back to DK

So many misinformation about Hillary--and when you correct it --they troll rate you.

I tell you these Obamamaniacs spreading Hillary misinformation in the internet --- are part of negative campaigning.  They dont want to have a debate--they just want to hide your corrections and facts because  they want it out there.

Peter and you should write everyday at DailyKos and dispute the misinformation.  Or else it becomes a fact to the readers.

by jasmine 2008-03-27 06:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Alegre--come back to DK

You know, i thought this "writing strike" at dailykos  was because those who were striking  were going to a more civil place like mydd.  Doesn't sound so civil to me. While i disagree with HRC and especially of her tactics lately, i have never called her or her supporters names such as "Obamamanics".  I consider that a highly offensive term.  People who believe in the Obama presidency believe that he has the power to change this country into something good, into something that results in less loss of life for our American soldiers, that results in people having access to health care, and of chnagning the accelerating destruction of our environment.  I am assuming that you feel that HRC will effectively solve those problems as well.  There is no need for divisive  namecalling of other American citizens, especially with those who have the same goals.  Debate Obama supporters on the merits of the issues.  Yes i am certain that there are zealots on both sides that would be tempting to lump all of us together.  I think if we all make an effort to treat each other as human beings we might able to get along a little better.  what do you think?

by petercjack 2008-03-27 11:50AM | 0 recs
MISSTATEMENT? AFTER THE 5TH TIME

it's a plain old LIE.

"Come on" yourself poster.  If your kid told you a whopper like that - and many more about many other "Commander in Chief" credentials you'd either spank him or never believe a word he said.

I'm an adult.  Even I can see she can't tell the truth.

I'm also a Democrat in my 4th decade of voting.

Sorry, I just don't believe her on anything anymore.

by AmericanUnity 2008-03-27 11:18AM | 0 recs
Re: Ok Fine - Let's Talk About Misstatements

By your outrage update, i am certain you will be writing a diary about HRC and her spiritual advisor, Doug Coe, and the mysterious "The Family".

You certainly wouldn't want a double standard now would you. The truth is it is all unfair.  I could care less about Wright or Coe.  I could care less about Hillary and sniper fire or Obama and whether he said he was a law professor.

It is time to end the politics of destruction.  The debate should be on Iraq, health care, the economy and global warming.  Let the campaigns continue through June 3rd so that all of the states can be heard.  Then the DNC and other prominent Democrats will get us out of this mess.  So lets stop hurting Democratic candidates  on race, gender, misstatements etc. and lets deal with the real issues.  For no matter who HRC or Obama supporters say they will vote for in November, htere is a world of difference between them and McCain.

by petercjack 2008-03-27 11:41AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads