Clinton 'misspoke' about '96 Bosnia trip

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So are you saying she walked casually and upright, but thought she was ducking from imaginary sniper fire?

Did she think the 8-year girl who read her a poem was actually a military officer telling her to watch out for snipers? How about the greeting ceremony she claimed never happened, but actually did... what did she think that was? A briefing on the sniper threat?

I have no idea. Could be any number of reasons - not least that she simply got her trips mixed up.

If that was the case, she'd have said so by now. It's a believable explanation. The fact that she hasn't offered it speaks volumes.

Instead, she said.... "I say a lot of things" ...

She has said a lot of things, as have all career politicians. You can't expect someone to scour every statement a person has made in their career and make retractions, alterations and justifications. Perhaps that's what people expect - but it seems a little unreasonable to me - especially when these things are used as the basis to question their basic honesty.

I'm just not sure that things like this are really worth everybody's time.

Well, let's face it. She blew it on this Bosnia thing.

All this really shows is that HC is no more resistant to or adept at dealing with smear tactics than BO. This kind of thing, with a couple more unverified statement from across her career can be used as a platform for suggesting that she is a liar.

[metta 0]

So are you saying she walked casually and upright, but thought she was ducking from imaginary sniper fire?

Did she think the 8-year girl who read her a poem was actually a military officer telling her to watch out for snipers? How about the greeting ceremony she claimed never happened, but actually did... what did she think that was? A briefing on the sniper threat?

I have no idea. Could be any number of reasons - not least that she simply got her trips mixed up.

If that was the case, she'd have said so by now. It's a believable explanation. The fact that she hasn't offered it speaks volumes.

Instead, she said.... "I say a lot of things" ...

She has said a lot of things, as have all career politicians. You can't expect someone to scour every statement a person has made in their career and make retractions, alterations and justifications. Perhaps that's what people expect - but it seems a little unreasonable to me - especially when these things are used as the basis to question their basic honesty.

I'm just not sure that things like this are really worth everybody's time.

Well, let's face it. She blew it on this Bosnia thing.

All this really shows is that HC is no more resistant to or adept at dealing with smear tactics than BO. This kind of thing, with a couple more unverified statement from across her career can be used as a platform for suggesting that she is a liar.

The Clintons have taken so many hits over the years of which being called a liar is but the most inoccuous and yet managed to overcome adversaries. At least in my opinion it does not amount to a deal breaker as the "God damn America" albatross that Republicans have hung around him does.

Smear tactics have been used through out electoral history because they work. John McCain the war hero was painted as a psycho case for all those years he spent in the Hanoi Hilton. And Kerry was swift-boated.

That's why HC's unfavorables are high but then BO's are rising too (50%) by one report.

[simple_male 1]

So are you saying she walked casually and upright, but thought she was ducking from imaginary sniper fire?

Did she think the 8-year girl who read her a poem was actually a military officer telling her to watch out for snipers? How about the greeting ceremony she claimed never happened, but actually did... what did she think that was? A briefing on the sniper threat?

I have no idea. Could be any number of reasons - not least that she simply got her trips mixed up.

If that was the case, she'd have said so by now. It's a believable explanation. The fact that she hasn't offered it speaks volumes.

Instead, she said.... "I say a lot of things" ...

She has said a lot of things, as have all career politicians. You can't expect someone to scour every statement a person has made in their career and make retractions, alterations and justifications. Perhaps that's what people expect - but it seems a little unreasonable to me - especially when these things are used as the basis to question their basic honesty.

I'm just not sure that things like this are really worth everybody's time.

Well, let's face it. She blew it on this Bosnia thing.

All this really shows is that HC is no more resistant to or adept at dealing with smear tactics than BO. This kind of thing, with a couple more unverified statement from across her career can be used as a platform for suggesting that she is a liar.

The Clintons have taken so many hits over the years of which being called a liar is but the most inoccuous and yet managed to overcome adversaries. At least in my opinion it does not amount to a deal breaker as the "God damn America" albatross that Republicans have hung around him does.

Smear tactics have been used through out electoral history because they work. John McCain the war hero was painted as a psycho case for all those years he spent in the Hanoi Hilton. And Kerry was swift-boated.

That's why HC's unfavorables are high but then BO's are rising too (50%) by one report.

Metta, how many times did Hillary come under sniper's fire? If it is many times, then I can accept that she misspoke, as it happened many times. If it is NONE, then what is it? She got caught because of video came after her speech.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Anyone can trawl a person's public appearances and statements and cherry pick what they need to cobble together flip-flop or dishonesty accusations.

It only works if you buy into it.

Moreover, the idea that the Clintons have survived this kind of thing unscathed is rather debateable. And it might not be inaccurate to suggest that some of the success that Obama has enjoyed is because the mud thrown at them has stuck.

The idea that she is any more resistant to this kind of thing, or that it somehow makes her more electable is wishful thinking at best.

Edited March 25, 2008 by Number 6

[nana_356 0]

This woman is a liar and a cheater, she will do anything to win, and yes this is a big deal. How can she say "I say many things", If someone took fire at me I would remember that really well. Her character keeps showing through.

[metta 0]

So are you saying she walked casually and upright, but thought she was ducking from imaginary sniper fire?

Did she think the 8-year girl who read her a poem was actually a military officer telling her to watch out for snipers? How about the greeting ceremony she claimed never happened, but actually did... what did she think that was? A briefing on the sniper threat?

I have no idea. Could be any number of reasons - not least that she simply got her trips mixed up.

If that was the case, she'd have said so by now. It's a believable explanation. The fact that she hasn't offered it speaks volumes.

Instead, she said.... "I say a lot of things" ...

She has said a lot of things, as have all career politicians. You can't expect someone to scour every statement a person has made in their career and make retractions, alterations and justifications. Perhaps that's what people expect - but it seems a little unreasonable to me - especially when these things are used as the basis to question their basic honesty.

I'm just not sure that things like this are really worth everybody's time.

Well, let's face it. She blew it on this Bosnia thing.

All this really shows is that HC is no more resistant to or adept at dealing with smear tactics than BO. This kind of thing, with a couple more unverified statement from across her career can be used as a platform for suggesting that she is a liar.

The Clintons have taken so many hits over the years of which being called a liar is but the most inoccuous and yet managed to overcome adversaries. At least in my opinion it does not amount to a deal breaker as the "God damn America" albatross that Republicans have hung around him does.

Smear tactics have been used through out electoral history because they work. John McCain the war hero was painted as a psycho case for all those years he spent in the Hanoi Hilton. And Kerry was swift-boated.

That's why HC's unfavorables are high but then BO's are rising too (50%) by one report.

Metta, how many times did Hillary come under sniper's fire? If it is many times, then I can accept that she misspoke, as it happened many times. If it is NONE, then what is it? She got caught because of video came after her speech.

Looking at the video, it is obvious that there was no sniper fire. However, she did go into a war zone and it is conceivable that during briefing on security arragements for the trip, the question of sniper fire came up. But, yes, I concede that she blew it by embellishing the circumstances surrounding that particular trip.

But at the end of the day, all politicians stand vulnerable to charges of lying on one count or another.

Comes with the territory. After all, they have to win over all kinds of folks who have conflicting interests, ideologies, life experiences and different levels of understanding of what's really going on in the country.

What's important is, how is that candidate going to effect the daily life of millions of ordinary citizens once he or she is elected.

As for me, I would not forgo the good in search of the perfect.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Plus, how many times has she referred to her courage under sniper fire in Bosnia as practically a centerpiece of her presentation of her 'experience'?

The centerpiece is a fake!

What's left then?

[nana_356 0]

Go Obama!!!

[jom 4]

LIAR LIAR, thats her.