Re: Hillary doesn't lie alone
- From: "Irish Mike" <mjostar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:12:51 GMT
"da pickle" <jcpickels@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:soGdnVj6_9dBvXDanZ2dnUVZ_ryqnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Irish Mike"
I recently posted a few of the lies Hillary has been caught in:
I wonder about the use of the word "lie" ... I don't like it much. I may
be too soft.
Interesting article today about Hillary.
Excellent and insightful article. Here's the saddest thing to me. Hillary
had no reason to lie. She's trying to convince people that she has more
foreign relations experience than Obama, which isn't hard to do. All she
had to say is, "I flew in to Bosnia, which was a war zone". It's a true
statement and it makes her point - at least she's been to Bosnia. But, as
the lass points out in the article, lying and exaggeration are just part of
the Clinton make-up. In fact, I can't think of a single instance when
Hillary or Slick Willie were caught in a lie, that they just stepped
straight up and admitted it.
Irish Mike
ither understand the problem with her candidacy, or you
don't. You either understand who she is, or not. And if you don't, after
16 years of watching Clintonian dramas, you probably never will.
That's what the Bosnia story was about. Her fictions about dodging bullets
on the tarmac -- and we have to hope they were lies, because if they
weren't, if she thought what she was saying was true, we are in worse
trouble than we thought -- either confirmed what you already knew (she
lies as a matter of strategy, or, as William Safire said in 1996, by
nature) or revealed in an unforgettable way (videotape! Smiling girl in
pigtails offering flowers!) what you feared (that she lies more than is
humanly usual, even politically usual).
But either you get it now or you never will. That's the importance of the
Bosnia tape.
Many in the press get it, to their dismay, and it makes them
uncomfortable, for it sours life to have a person whose character you feel
you cannot admire play such a large daily role in your work. But I think
it's fair to say of the establishment media at this point that it is well
populated by people who feel such a lack of faith in Mrs. Clinton's words
and ways that it amounts to an aversion. They are offended by how she and
her staff operate. They try hard to be fair. They constantly have to
police themselves.
Not that her staff isn't policing them too. Mrs. Clinton's people are
heavy-handed in that area, letting producers and correspondents know
they're watching, weighing, may have to take this higher. There's too much
of this in politics, but Hillary's campaign takes it to a new level.
It's not only the press. It's what I get as I walk around New York, which
used to be thick with her people. I went to a Hillary fund-raiser at
Hunter College about a month ago, paying for a seat in the balcony and
being ushered up to fill the more expensive section on the floor, so
frantic were they to fill seats.
I sat next to a woman, a New York Democrat who'd been for Hillary from the
beginning and still was. She was here. But, she said, "It doesn't seem to
be working." She shrugged, not like a brokenhearted person but a practical
person who'd missed all the signs of something coming. She wasn't mad at
the voters. But she was no longer so taken by the woman who soon took the
stage and enacted joy.
The other day a bookseller told me he'd been reading the opinion pages of
the papers and noting the anti-Hillary feeling. Two weeks ago he realized
he wasn't for her anymore. It wasn't one incident, just an accumulation of
things. His experience tracks this week's Wall Street Journal/NBC poll
showing Mrs. Clinton's disapproval numbers have risen to the highest level
ever in the campaign, her highest in fact in seven years.
* * *
You'd think she'd pivot back to showing a likable side, chatting with
women, weeping, wearing the bright yellows and reds that are thought to
appeal to her core following, older women. Well, she's doing that. Yet at
the same time, her campaign reveals new levels of thuggishness, though
that's the wrong word, for thugs are often effective. This is mere
heavy-handedness.
On Wednesday a group of Mrs. Clinton's top donors sent a letter to the
speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, warning her in language that they no
doubt thought subtle but that reflected a kind of incompetent menace, that
her statements on the presidential campaign may result in less money for
Democratic candidates for the House. Ms. Pelosi had said that in her view
the superdelegates should support the presidential candidate who wins the
most pledged delegates in state contests. The letter urged her to
"clarify" her position, which is "clearly untenable" and "runs counter" to
the superdelegates' right to make "an informed, individual decision" about
"who would be the party's strongest nominee." The signers, noting their
past and huge financial support, suggested that Ms. Pelosi "reflect" on
her comments and amend them to reflect "a more open view."
Barack Obama's campaign called it inappropriate and said Mrs. Clinton
should "reject the insinuation." But why would she? All she has now is
bluster. Her supporters put their threat in a letter, not in a private
meeting. By threatening Ms. Pelosi publicly, they robbed her of room to
maneuver. She has to defy them or back down. She has always struck me as
rather grittier than her chic suits, high heels and unhidden enthusiasm
may suggest. We'll see.
What, really, is Mrs. Clinton doing? She is having the worst case of
cognitive dissonance in the history of modern politics. She cannot come up
with a credible, realistic path to the nomination. She can't trace the
line from "this moment's difficulties" to "my triumphant end." But she
cannot admit to herself that she can lose. Because Clintons don't lose.
She can't figure out how to win, and she can't accept the idea of not
winning. She cannot accept that this nobody from nowhere could have beaten
her, quietly and silently, every day. (She cannot accept that she still
doesn't know how he did it!)
She is concussed. But she is a scrapper, a fighter, and she's doing what
she knows how to do: scrap and fight. Only harder. So that she ups the
ante every day. She helped Ireland achieve peace. She tried to stop Nafta.
She's been a leader for 35 years. She landed in Bosnia under siege and
bravely dodged bullets. It was as if she'd watched the movie "Wag the
Dog," with its fake footage of a terrified refugee woman running
frantically from mortar fire, and found it not a cautionary tale about
manipulation and politics, but an inspiration.
* * *
What struck me as the best commentary on the Bosnia story came from a
poster called GI Joe who wrote in to a news blog: "Actually Mrs. Clinton
was too modest. I was there and saw it all. When Mrs. Clinton got off the
plane the tarmac came under mortar and machine gun fire. I was blown off
my tank and exposed to enemy fire. Mrs. Clinton without regard to her own
safety dragged me to safety, jumped on the tank and opened fire, killing
50 of the enemy." Soon a suicide bomber appeared, but Mrs. Clinton stopped
the guards from opening fire. "She talked to the man in his own language
and got him [to] surrender. She found that he had suffered terribly as a
result of policies of George Bush. She defused the bomb vest herself."
Then she turned to his wounds. "She stopped my bleeding and saved my life.
Chelsea donated the blood."
Made me laugh. It was like the voice of the people answering back. This
guy knows that what Mrs. Clinton said is sort of crazy. He seems to know
her reputation for untruths. He seemed to be saying, "I get it."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120663639483768965.html?mod=todays_columnists
.
- References:
- Hillary doesn't lie alone
- From: Irish Mike
- Re: Hillary doesn't lie alone
- From: da pickle
- Hillary doesn't lie alone
- Prev by Date: Re: OT = Aspartame
- Next by Date: Re: Hillary doesn't lie alone
- Previous by thread: Re: Hillary doesn't lie alone
- Next by thread: OT obama finally speaks sense
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
