2007-11-10 05:49:20 · 32 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,310316,00.html
2007-11-10 05:49:59 · update #1
After the debacle with Russert, they can't take any chances that she might actually be asked a pertinent question! She must only be thrown soft balls. Like the kind Chris Matthews throws!
2007-11-10 05:52:28 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 10⤊ 3⤋
there's a skinny line between asking an truthful question and throwing a delicate "substitute-up" on your candidate to "hit out of the park". it rather is like a right this moment guy in a comedy habitual, performing like it rather is a severe question, yet understanding that's is in basic terms a set up for the humorous significant other to grant out the "Punch line". Hillary is in contrast to Tanya Harding. that may not a truthful remark! That develop into not real. Tanya's strikes have been criminal!!! yet I admit i don't undergo in techniques Hillary even having an opinion on the subject of the important political affairs, not to show exhibit any management skills as 1st lady. Then sooner or later she all of sudden desperate to run for president, on the coat tails of her accepted yet untrue "significant other" invoice, who left semen on the gown of "that lady", and tried to lie approximately it, to the court docket, and the rustic, at the same time as Hillary rooted for a shown liar. in case you hear heavily, applicants incredibly do not answer interviewers' questions frequently any way. they are going to easily use the question, to launch right into a "speech" that they have got the want to make, approximately what they deliberate to talk approximately besides! If a shill (that's what they're suggested as in teach corporation) would not ask a set "up question", she'd forget approximately on the subject of the genuine question, and supply out the set answer any way. So not lots incredibly replaced.
2016-09-28 23:25:25 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is a thin line between asking an honest question and throwing a soft "change-up" for your candidate to "hit out of the park".
It can be like a straight man in a comedy routine, acting like it is a serious question, but knowing that is is just a set up for the funny partner to give out the "Punch line".
Hillary is NOT like Tanya Harding. That's not a fair comment! That was not true. Tanya's actions were criminal!!!
But I admit I don't remember Hillary even having an opinion about the important affairs of state, let alone demonstrate any leadership skills as 1st lady.
Then one day she suddenly decided to run for president, on the coat tails of her popular but unfaithful "partner" Bill, who left semen on the dress of "that woman", and tried to lie about it, to the court, and the nation, while Hillary rooted for a proven liar.
If you listen carefully, candidates really don't answer interviewers' questions usually any way.
They'll just use the question, to launch into a "speech" that they want to make, about what they planned to talk about anyway!
If a shill (that's what they are called in show business) doesn't ask a set "up question", she'd ignore the real question, and give out the set answer any way. So not much really changed.
2007-11-10 06:00:17 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
It's a political ploy she learned from the white house. Remember Jeff Gannon? If not, follow the link. VERY interesting stuff, probably never got air time on FOX.
2007-11-10 06:38:45 · answer #4 · answered by Michael S 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It has been critically and widely acclaimed the candidate has issues with answering questions. Like a magic show, plants work for them and those who wish to deceive. Personally, I prefer an honest candidate who does not skirt the issues in a pants suit. Thank you.
edit: Kudos on the Tanya Harding analogy. Never would have thought of that ! Excellent !!
2007-11-10 06:00:13 · answer #5 · answered by Mele Kai 6 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Because she is a NWO, Bilderberg, IMF scum elitist and is poised to be the next fiat dictator
the entire thing is staged,
the elections are a sham..
Boosh had the same plants like his fav gay prostitute Jeffy Gannon who gets in the white house whenever he wants but isn't even a real reporter.....
well, you know what they say about Boosh,
you need a man in the white house who gets on his knees!
This country has such a corrupt government..
Hillary WILL be next President.
Get ready to live in a martial law Fascist police state that BOOOSH set out for her.
DOWN WITH THE BOOSH/CLINTOON DYNASTY!
VOTE RON PAUL,
THE ONLY HOPE FOR THIS COUNTRY!
2007-11-10 05:57:29 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
Because Hillary is like the Tanya Harding of politics. She realizes she doesn't have the world-class talent it takes to win honestly, so she's trying to cheat every little way she can.
2007-11-10 05:55:34 · answer #7 · answered by pachl@sbcglobal.net 7 · 6⤊ 4⤋
Most politicians (including republicans) do this because it makes better a media presentation.
There's no second place in elections...
just winners and losers
2007-11-10 05:56:08 · answer #8 · answered by red riter 5 · 5⤊ 4⤋
Because they all do it. When Bush makes a speech the audience is always hand picked from a group of his supporters.
2007-11-10 05:54:02 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 5⤋
They all do it up to and including FEMA and the POTUS who were both caught doing it just recently. No new news here.
2007-11-10 06:09:28 · answer #10 · answered by Enigma 6 · 3⤊ 3⤋