Oh Lord. That whole thing with Hillary Clinton and being under fire in Bosnia is so embarrassing. And I hate her response to it, I hate the first part of her response and I hate the last part of her response. Even though, “I was mistaken” is normally something I like to hear someone say – it’s true, it’s to the point, and yes we are all mistaken about things, this was not a small thing. She was trying to portray herself as a hardened and seasoned international-relations person and even if she did blow the event up in her memory, it’s more than just being mistaken. She was speaking from prepared notes when she made those comments about Bosnia. I mean, come on!
She should have said, “I’m horribly embarrassed. I have lost confidence in my own memories!” Or, "I was trying to show how internationally seasoned I am diplomatically and how brave, but that was a terrible example of it." Simply saying she was mistaken is not enough.
THEN, the second part – “It proves I’m human, which, y’know, for some people, is a revelation.” That part of the response is even worse! What is that supposed to mean? That some people think she is super-human? That seems snotty and arrogant. But actually, I think she was trying to make the opposite point, that reporters are picking apart picayune references in her speech and they think she's... I guess... sub-human? Odd, it doesn't really make sense to me.
Normally I agree, the press pounces on the smallest inconsistency. This, though, is not small. God, how could she not have looked into that memory before parading it around like that - in a speech from notes? About something so easily checked into?
Obama is looking better and better compared with her and he’s not even doing anything, all he has to do is stand there and he looks great.
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
45 comments:
I'm from a place where she's not very popular. I've always liked her to some extent. A lot of people do think she's subhuman, that she's some sort of monster. I usually chalk it up to the discomfort some people feel when they see a woman do things that only fit their ideal mold under "man."
All that being said, she hasn't been able to shake that view and none of the things she's tried have been very inspiring, that's for sure.
There are also people who (I assume jokingly) claim she is a robot. The scary part is other people read that and *believe it*.
This is exactly how I feel. Great post!!
I think that Hillary has just been doing the usual ugly stuff that we are used to seeing politicians do--- on both sides. She just gets picked on more because she is a Clinton and a woman. The Republicans demonized the Clintons and people still buy into it.
Obama has risen above the usual politicizing, which in the current climate, is remarkable, and I hope starts to set a new standard of integrity.
glad to see you blogging regularly!
anyway, i agree with venus. my mother, a republican, will not listen to a word Hillary has to say because her husband is "that pig."
i also think kizz is right - that people are uncomfortable with women doing historically "male" things, and are trying to find fault - that she will not be able to do it right, because she is essentially wrong for the role (of president).
This speaks volumes. It's one thing to get the city, date or even country wrong. That would be an honest mistake. This was pure manipulation.
I know a lot of people do think she is a "robot" or something, but the fact that she brings it up in such strange ways demonstrates that she's got deeper emotional problems with it.
Remember the last debate? When she pointed out that she gotten the first question more often and implied it was because she was a woman...
She didn't mis-speak, she simply LIED. And that's the whole story. Of course she knew she wasn't telling the truth. . . .
She didn't mis-speak, she LIED! That's the story, plain and simple.
Obama will have his own struggles as the race unfolds and either Dem will come in limping. Joh McCain and Ann Coulter, and all the people we can't stand will be big winners and that's depressing. Also, the Ben Stein movie will be a big hit. Sucks to be rational!
Um... What she should've said was, "I lied." But she's a Clinton, so she didn't.
And it's not the first time she's been caught lying. Michelle Malkin did a brief run down of just a handful of them:
This is the woman who insisted for more than a decade that she was named after the late, great mountain-climber Sir Edmund Hilary—never mind that she was born six years before he scaled Mount Everest in 1953.
This is the woman who told Dateline NBC that daughter Chelsea was on a jog in New York City when the jihadists struck on 9/11—never mind that Chelsea later wrote a magazine essay revealing that she watched the attacks on television from a friend’s apartment.
This is the woman who claimed to have “helped start” the federal Children Health Insurance Program—never mind that the program’s original sponsors noted that Sen. Clinton fought the initial bill and had no role in writing the legislation.
This is the woman (echoed by her husband and daughter) who bragged that she was the “first” to call the disaster in Darfur “genocide”—never mind that several other senators had done so in 2004, while her first press statement referring to Darfur as “genocide” wasn’t until March 2006.
This is the woman who claimed to have organized “instrumental” meetings in Belfast and baldly asserted that she “helped to bring peace to Northern Ireland”—never mind that key negotiators dismissed her as “totally invisible,” “cheerleading,” and “a wee bit silly.”
I understand from NPR that she had given this account of sniper fire four times in the past year. Seems to me she is practiced in this version of the "facts" so how is it that she can claim to be misremembering?
Eh, human memory isn't videotape. Even the most intense memories are reconstructions, often unconsciously edited to fit an internal narrative about who we believe ourselves to be. Who hasn't re-told an anecdote and embellished it a little with each retelling until it bears little resemblance to the original incident?
I think this is what her remark about being human is about. Your uncle John can tell tall tales at parties, your mother can confuse details about your prom date, but god forbid that anyone running for office can be less than 100% verifiably accurate about every minute detail of their lives. God forbid that anyone running for office should give in to media pressure to talk up their participation in anything and everything to make it more significant than it really was, and really more significant than anything the other guy ever did.
I never even considered that they were prepared remarks. That makes the entire situation much worse, let alone the fact that she's said them multiple times. It's unfortunate that she wants to win so badly that she'll stoop to doing whatever it takes, including taking down the inevitable President, Barack Obama. I'll write in Obama if necessary. We'll all start a "Write-In the Vote" campaign.
Also, as it turns out, she wasn't lying:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHVEDq6RVXc
I'm ashamed to say that I haven't kept up with the presidential run much. I need to...but it just gets so frustrating and well, infuriating that there is no candidate that expresses our viewpoints (non-theistic/non-religious). It's so upsetting that this country...being founded on SEPARATION of church and state is now RAN by the church...or at least they are trying (and Bush has made more progress on that front than any--at least I think so--and I hate to even say that).
I recently changed my political affiliation to "none" and then to learn about the Green Party only last week. Now, I'm seriously considering changing it to Green. But, with all organized groups...there is always the risk that while you aren't looking they will do something awful (and you are affiliated with them) or change there stance slowly and you not catch it until one day, someone asks you, "What political party are you affiliated with?" and you answer...and they GASP and say, "REALLY!? With what they did to______or what they stand for...etc" and you honestly had no idea that they had changed...
I dunno...maybe it's worth taking the chance in order to try and get something accomplished as an organized group. I dunno...
...it can all get so confusing sometimes.
Julia-I loved "Letting Go Of God"...it certainly helped me get through my de-conversion and feel better about my decision. It's great knowing that someone like you exists and is doing something on the side of rationality! The scientists are great (as I am in school to be one), but we need more non-scientists like you to open the door just a bit wider to rational & free thinking!
I predict another win for the republicans. just because you have a woman running for office, and a black charismatic leader doesn't mean the majority is buying the hype, the media has a history of over playing things and just because "history is being made" doesn't excite many people whether you are a rep. or dem.
I predict that many dem.s will vote for McCain because of his many years experience holding office. His team will out debate either obama or billary. If McCain adds a conservative to the ticket then, hey i might vote for him. I still think he is going to win.
I am from the UK, and I find the antagonism towards Hilary not just bizarre, but a worrying symptom of anti-woman sentiment. There was a recent speech by Obama that was, to us Europeans, worrying. Why did he only now speak out against a preacher who he had followed for so many years?
Man, we could all do without another four years of Republicans in the White House -- and I don't even live in the US.
Not that Clinton would necessarily make a bad president... but the US is in such desperate need for a wholesale change, I think Obama's your best choice. And, as Jon Stewart put it after Obama's big speech, "He finally talked to Americans as if we were adults."
Hi Julia,
I never knew you had a blog. Anyway I added you too me feed aggregator and given the fact that I am subscribed to like 1,000 blogs I will probably read what you have written in 40-50 years. So if you want to now talk about the moon colony or nanobots then I will probably find it real relevant by the time I get to read it.
There certainly does seem to be an insurmounable bias against outspoken, ambitious women in our backward society.
And it's undoubtedly connected with religion.. our collective roots in Christian Puritanism and biblical literalism, from which apparently there is no escape.... or at least no escape after only 300 years of nationhood.
BUT, BUT.. on the other hand there is also the somewhat tiresome feminist position that seems to be that any woman is better than any man... and that is simply unreasonable.
Condoleeza Rice?
How about Phylis Schafley?
Or.. not entirely out of the question Anne Coulter, who is ... sure she's hateful to reasonably civilized citizens..... certainly charismatic to a lot of people.
So as a woman I don't know... Mostly I long for the days of my youth when I spent a lot of time in the college cafeteria drinking coffee and dreaming deep, deep thoughts of the withering away of the state, an imminent possibility.
When we wouldn't be called to cede power to any individual, male or female...
But since that hasn't happened, and the reality is that we are called upon to choose a titular head of the Republic from among a lot of not always happy alternatives... for what it's worth, I would have to go for Obama..
The Clinton's .... both of them...seem to have gone over the deep edge.
She because the prize is huge.. a historic first, and she simply wants it much to badly. There seems to be nothing she won't say to win..
And he because his place in history, and his vindication as an inarguable leader of men is at stake.
Obama does at least speak creditable Enlish and he does show some signs of being able to distinguish an idea from a political bromide...... and he does avoid the standard American Fourth of July political cliches...
But the system by which we choose candidates is against him.. it has gone on for so long, that he has started to repeat himself, and to descend too often to the same level as standard issue pols..
Bottom line..it doesn't matter: the war HAS to be brought to an end, and we have to extricate ourselves from the Bush/Cheney quagmire .. and our only chance of doing that -slim as it is - is by voting for the Democrats in November .
The mantra isn't " Hilary bad, Obama good," or vice versa, it's "Get the bastards out..."
NMB
Juulia- look up David Trimbles comments on her role in the Northern Ireland Peace Process. Trimble was one of the main players in the negotiations. Clinton claimed she was "instrumental in bringing ppeace to Northern Ireland". Trimble confirmed that she played absolutely no part in the negotiations.
The bizarre thing is the way the Clintons are cozying up with the people Hillary used to call the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" - Bill was on Limbaugh's show, and has lunched with Richard Mellon Scaife, and Hillary recently met with Scaife and the staff of his hard right newspaper in Pittsburgh (the #2 in the market, not even #1).
To put this in context, Scaife bankrolled the whole Arkansas project that generated most of the real and fake scandals about the Clintons through the 90s, everything from Hillary 'killing' Vince Foster to the 'crack pipes on the White House Xmas Tree' to the sex scandals.
Meeting with Scaife is tantamount to the Clintons asking Monica Lewinsky and Ken Starr to appear with Hillary on campaign stops.
But now it seems Scaife and Limbaugh are ready to join forces with the Clintons against Obama.
Seems to me, if Scaife and Limbaugh are against Obama, then that's a pretty good indication that I should vote for Obama.
(I also don't like the hawkish company Clinton keeps, think better of Obama's judgement, and think Clinton will really drive Republican turnout in November to beat her. I don't think the GOP will be quite as motivated against Obama. She'll be easier to beat, or will put the vote close enough for GOP tampering to work. That's why Limbaugh is telling his fans to cross party lines and vote for her.)
Finally, I really don't like Hillary's public speaking voice (for the same reason I hated Gore's). She speaks in a droning monotone, raising her volume where it would sound better to vary the pitch. I couldn't stand listening to clips of Al Gore accepting the nomination in 2000, because of the stentorian monotone way he said "I ACCEPT THE NOMINATION..."
I agree with the last poster who pointed out, and unhappily, that the Clintons are swimming with some really strange smelling fish...Limbaugh, Scaife... et al, as well as telling stories that would be ridiculous even if they didn't address events that have lots of witnesses, including.. photographers.
Lots of photographers.
It makes one think they are crazy or stupid, or both...
And it puts one in mind of a paraphrase of Scott Fitzgerald, " the powerful are very different from you and me.."
They think the common clay can be willed into ignoring their trespasses, no matter how blatant, and no matter how dangerous.
Elliot Spitzer for instance, also seemed to ignore, clearly willfully , the fact that in A.D. 2008, there are very few people, especially in the world he inhabits who aren't wandering around armed with cell phones that take pictures... and snapping away anything and everything in sight..
Did he imagine that he could will himself invisible to witnesses?
Do these people have some sense of exaggerated superiority that allows them to think that if they will it, no one will notice their dabbling in flagrant, unmistakable untruths?
Or is that they have a sense of entitlement that says they deserve their jackpots.. including the Presidency?
I don't know.. but what it brings to mind is the Catch 22, that when someone wants the Presidency that much no one cogent should vote for such a person..
Bu then on the other hand.. there would be no one TO vote for and we should have to revert to the Divine Right of Kings..
A conundrum...
But I still say the crew we have NOT working for us now, has to go.. no matter what.
NMB
I happened upon this blog, and I was taken with your clear leanings toward Democratic candidates BUT ability to see things for what they are. I am a Republican (who, by the way, cringes at McCain); however, your insight that Obama just stand there and he looks better than Hilary is definitely a Republican view. If Obama gets the nomination, he's going to stand there and look better than McCain as well.
I totally agree with you on the Hillary Clinton thing. I always liked the Clinton's alot, but that story that she exagerated or embellished was a major boo boo. Her response to her blunder was even worse.
I am very upset with Hilary Clinton. Why did she lie about her Bosnia trip, so many times, to so many different audiences?
Did she forget that she was video taped each time she left the White House on an official trip? Or doesn't she care that she's going to be caught eventually, and decides if she is caught, she will brazen her way out of it anyway she can, and will just lie for the hell of it to make herself look more Presidential.
I don't like the devil may care swagger, she assumed when she told this lie to her audiences; if it's too dangerous for the President to go; they said, send the first lady. I think I paraphrased her correctly.
What must Chelsea think of her frothing at the mouth, out of control dad, who should stop campaigning for Hilary as soon as possible and her sad sad lying mother.
How could they subject Chelsea to the rigors of the campaign trail, without teaching her how to effectively answer embarrassing personal questions about her dad's sex scandal.
Surely they had to know that someone would ask Chelsea about that horrid situation.
It's none of your business, is not going to cut it, and we see that because the question continually pops up.
I have a few:) Republican friends, who have always called both Bill and HIlary pathological liars when we would discuss them during the 90s. They laughed at me for years, while I continued to support Bill. Now they are smiling on the phone, while I eat crow, and take back all my former comments about her honesty and integrity, though most of my friends are kind; they don't say, I told you so.
What kills me is she did not have to lie about her her credentials. Her lie shook me up enough, that after the lies of the past 8 years, after our latest experience with Bush, WMDs and Iraq, if I had been for her, I would run like hell over to Obama's camp.
I like Hillary, she's great and working hard and give her the most changes she got. My attractive face look like Clinton that's why I supporting her. Sorry, no offence to those disagree with me.
Ha ha, i love the last part about Obama.
To nelc: who thinks this can be compared to your mom confusing details about your prom date, that is simply ridiculous. Not remembering if you wore a blue dress or a purple dress is one thing. Claiming to have flown into a country under sniper fire when in fact you were greeted by smiling children is completely different. Also, we can excuse Uncle John for telling tall tales, and moms for misremembering prom details because those are casual situations where we are not determining their credibility to run the country. If Hillary is unable to stand up to the media pressure before taking office how is she going to stand up to their pressure, and the pressure of other foreign heads of state, senators, congressmen, etc. after she gains the office?
I really have a point there. About Hillory Clinton. She is a very sincere person and I think for sure she wants what's best for all America. And that's a Canadians point of view. I really don't know who would be better. Either one is a winner know matter which way you look at it.
Hillary is not infallible just like you. Be gentle , after all deep inside is another female spirit living to free herself .
try http://alladvices.blogspot.com
Bye from Its Me
I am sorry to jump in late- Hillary says she "mis-spoke" because she was "tired". Okay- now wha' if she's the President and the Ruskies call up at 3 am and say "hey, we're gonna blow this or that up and..." Well, I hope she don't mis speak then...
A mis spoke is an honest mistake- like-"Oh, I had such a cool time with the Obama's on Tuesday, Oooo, sorry, I got my days all mixed up- I meant Thursday."
A flat out LIE is when you say, "...and we got shot at and ran and ducked and did not have any kind of meet and greet..." and then somebody shows you getting off a plane with puppies, flowers, YOUR daughter, all kissing and hugging the "village" folk. Oh yeah, that there is text book lie.
...and ps I guess, but Hilly- if it was so dangerous, why did you take yer little daughter there, and I suppose to go it one further- why did Chilly Billy send YOU there? Yup, you mis spoke- sounds so much better than just saying- "Hey y'all lying runs in da family!"
If you are thinking of supporting Obama ask yourself this what has he accomplished in the senate, what does he really stand for besides "change" and what changes does he want to accomplish beside getting rid of Bush.I personally will be seriously looking at McCain.
She done no matter how you slice it Obama is getting endorsement from super delegate every day now. I got a feeling after Pennsylvania thing would get even more clear! All Obama need is to close the gap so she does not get all that much more delegate than him. A win would be a death blow but that would be asking too much.
amen to that.
Hillary is "old-school" politics. When she speaks, there's nothing new. Nothing different. Obama can at least inspire (the illusion of) change. Does anything really change anyway? At this point in history, anyone is better than the current guy (who's name will not be mentioned :)
I don't care which Demo. wins, just as long as one does.
Thanks for the post....
now I'll have to learn more about your movie...
ciao~
d
What if she gets a call at 3:00 am and she says this is not the Whitehouse or I'll transfer you to Monica's room, where Bill is....duh she a total frape, she's done.
Your last point is so valid, and it's sad, because her actions are making the whole party look bad...
Hillary is a total twat!
She should be careful next time.
Reading all the comments prior to mine just make me wonder what anyone would be saying at this point in having to run for President for what will be 2 verrrry loooong years. I'm a bit younger than Hillary and I often preface my comments with "Maybe I'm just making this up, but do you remember?....." I don't care HOW intelligent you are, when you are having to talk non-stop, reacting to the latest soundbite or poll number, it's got to get old. I think they are both showing a lot of wear and tear.
Great post!=)
If you’re tired of waiting around for those super delegates to make a decision already, go to
http://www.lobbydelegates.com and push them support Clinton or Obama
It takes a moment, but what's a few minutes now worth to get Clinton in office?!
Sending a note to current Clinton supporters lets them know it's appreciated, sending a note to current
Obama supporters can hopefully sway them to change their vote to Clinton, and sending a note to the
uncommitted folks will hopefully sway them to vote for Clinton. It's that easy...
Contact super delegates – www.LobbyDelegates.com
You captured my exact feelings about this whole thing. I can't vote in the country but I can strong arm my husbands and at this point Obama is indeed looking better and better by doing nada!
urgh.
C'mon. Haven't you ever related a story and you want it to be "better" than it actually was, so you EMBELLISH. it's not really lying, it's wanting to be MORE interesting. we ALL do it. i wouldn't call it lying. it's exaggerating. no big deal. i admire the woman. she's smart. that's ALL that matters to me.
Thanks for the post. It was very interesting and meaningful.
Web Development Company| Web Design Company|
Post a Comment