use misinformation and old stories that have been long ago debunked (Clinton Hit List, Black Panther story, White House china/furniture) to rag on her? Don't any of them ever check their facts? They tell these lies and then act morally superior about the Clintons while they're telling the lies. I can respect people who talk about the issues and why they disagree with her but the fact is that there is little of that in these forums.
How do you justify telling these lies and then feel morally superior about it? I'd really like to know.
2007-06-12
08:03:03
·
21 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
Clinton furniture/china/silverware story:
http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellne...
Black Panther/Hillary story debunking:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/...
Clinton Hit List debunking:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/...
2007-06-12
08:42:09 ·
update #1
Tony:
You're exacty the type I'm talking about. Pull quotes from non-vetted books and swear by them because it suits your agenda. At least Bernstein's book is vetted and isn't a hatchet job - you ought to try that one for a fresh perspective.
2007-06-12
08:54:12 ·
update #2
Peace Warrior:
Millions shop at WalMart Einstein, it's how they stay solvent.
She's a Republican? If so, she's the old style Repub I used to vote for on a regular basis, no problem there.
Who isn't in bed with the media moguls?
Yeah, you're a real warrior lol.
2007-06-12
08:58:01 ·
update #3
Chi Guy:
If you find her phony, then good for you. I don't. She was criticizing Bush's bad war management long before she decided to run for President. She's been complaining about it for years. And sorry, but this IS Bush's War - The Decider declared that it be so, and so it is. You're trying to blame those who were lied to for HIS actions and that just doesn't cut it in my book.
2007-06-12
09:00:51 ·
update #4
ArgleBargle:
Yeah, it's the truth isn't it? Nothing like having them prove my whole point for me right here in front of everyone.
2007-06-12
09:02:02 ·
update #5
Leonard:
As usual, you are right on target. I always admire your answers.
2007-06-12
10:32:39 ·
update #6
Newt Gingrich and Pat Robinson along with Rupert Murdoch's FOX news network and Talk Radio with Rush, spew the lies, and it's their job to spread the propaganda. They have to wait for a topic each day and then spread the disease. The right wingers justify the lies with the excuse of it being about Liberals, so in their own minds lying about Liberals is "OK" and moral. Hillary is a threat to them and that is all; because she will be the next and first woman President. Bush caused this to happen and history is in the making come 08 elections.
2007-06-12 08:26:55
·
answer #1
·
answered by leonard bruce 6
·
5⤊
3⤋
They have no real basis for their fear or hatred of her, so they rely on exaggerations, false assumptions and baseless accusations to justify their irrational "Hillaphopia". They are pulling out the same tired drivel they have used for years because she is an exemplary Senator and there is no real ammunition for their campaign to stop her (what I feel will be) successful run for the Presidency in '08. The American People have seen through these tactics long ago, the Republicans just don't know it yet.
2007-06-12 12:50:19
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
for my section, I extremely have a sneaking suspicion- that there are a honest # of Conservative "dinosaurs" available- who're nerve-racking on the potential of our electing a woman for President. i'm somewhat hoping that i'm incorrect approximately this... -that it somewhat is in basic terms the "Clinton" call this is inflicting all the angst approximately Hilary working. yet seeing as how all the Republicans working- are "whitebread" & male, and rather lots "gung-ho" appropriate to the conflict (& an argument favord extra by adult males -than women people), I extremely have a tragic feeling that Clinton may be battling a gender "bias" in this Election. it somewhat is too undesirable- too; using fact she's smarter & extra valuable qualified than maximum of those on the two area of the political fence.
2016-10-17 01:21:02
·
answer #3
·
answered by zaragosa 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I had no opinion of Sen Clinton until recently. I had no reason to have an opinion until she announced her candidacy for president.
In listening to her most recent speeches, she uses a number of keywords and phrases that are clearly socialistic. I have determined that I cannot share her vision of America. If she gets the Democratic nod, I will support the Republican candidate even if it were President Bush running again. That said, my opinion is that President Bush is one of the worst persidents this country ever had.
Among the Democrats, I truly wish Richardson wins the ticket.
2007-06-12 08:47:02
·
answer #4
·
answered by Perplexed Bob 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
They are not lies just there is a lack of support for them. But she is dislike for other reasons as well. As First Lady she try ed to enact laws that she had NO LEGAL RIGHT TO DO. Wanted legal gun owners to pay for the miss-use of guns by criminals by placing a 1000% tax on guns, ammo that the legal public and police would be paying not the criminals that USE THESE TOOLS ILLEGALLY. Also many people feel that Bill Clinton should have been Inpeached for his actions and we are sick of the name Clinton and her anti-american ideas.
2007-06-12 08:25:41
·
answer #5
·
answered by zipper 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
Hillary is the most adaptable person in politics...She can be for something in NJ and against it in Califonia and her phony accents go with the geography.....She is a Power Hungry Lying sack of Politacal lies.
Anyone who would support her is a mere lemming with no common sense and would also support Stalin, since she is a commie in Dem clothing
2007-06-12 08:21:43
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
Senator Clinton is a phony. Plain and simple. People can sniff insincerity a mile off.
2007-06-12 08:46:42
·
answer #7
·
answered by fruitypebbles 4
·
0⤊
2⤋
This poster sees her for the phony, popularity seeking, wishy washy person she truly is.
She supported the Bush strategy in Iraq until she decided to run for president. She can't have it both ways, and won't have it from this poster.
She refuses to apologize for making GW Bush the first emperor of the United States along with several other US Senators.
She calls this "Bush's war" while not accepting responsibility for giving him the power to basically, declare war in the first place.
She will say or do whatever it takes to get what she wants at the time.
She will be the downfall of the Dem party in the general election.
2007-06-12 08:12:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by Chi Guy 5
·
8⤊
5⤋
She is evil and must be stopped! if allowed to rule hilbilly will visit pain hardship and suffering upon the people the likes have only been seen in the dark ages!
2007-06-12 08:18:32
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
3⤋
I don't like her simply because...I don't like her. She comes across as a person that doesn't really care about the American people as much as being the first female President. I do agree that people on here seem to make up stuff about candidates they don't like, from both sides. Maybe everyone who makes a statement that doesn't begin with " in my opinion " or doesn't have a website to back up their story should be reported or blocked.
2007-06-12 08:13:27
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
6⤋