Don't you think the answer to real issues are going to need to be addressed, sooner than later?
Or will evading the issue, become an issue?
2007-11-12 03:59:55 · 14 answers · asked by Moody Red 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
sjk7863: Oops! Sorry, I thought everyone watched the news on Hillary.
She evades answering questions either with a laugh, or "that's news's to me!"
2007-11-12 04:12:40 · update #1
Candidates are going to tiptoe around the issues until the American public stops getting its "information" from MTV-inspired sound bites on the evening news.
I remember the sickeningly bland Bush Sr. vs. Clinton debates. Sorry for the obscure analogy, but it seemed to me like two chess players in and endgame, where they are down to nothing but pawns, and need the other player to make that one fatal miscalculation to prevent a stalemate.
Every answer by Bush Sr. and Clinton were so wishy-washy and vapid that I couldn't stand watching it. Here you had two powerful men, and they were reduced to answering pointed questions with drivel. It was obvious that they were both coached to simply give safe, vague answers. Actually making a stand on an issue, or being controversial was the kiss of death.
And do you know why? The slimy, unprincipled press! They wait like vultures, hour after hour, day after day, waiting for that one unfortunate little sound bite they can use to lead off the evening news and get more viewers.
We all need to be a more savvy, sophisticated electorate, and stop judging candidates on one embarrassing gaffe.
2007-11-12 10:59:01 · answer #1 · answered by pachl@sbcglobal.net 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The woman lies as easily as she draws a breath.
I remember when Hillary was caught off guard back when the Lewinsky scandal was still unfolding, before the "blue dress" was known about. I forget which reporter it was doing the interview, but she was asked
"What would happen if it were found that President Clinton had lied."
She responded something to the effect that "It would not happen, because he hadn't"
The interviewer pressed her and changed it to a hypothetical
"But, What IF, it were true?"
Hillary was obviously flustered and I could tell then that she knew the truth, that he had lied, and now she was going to have to be on record as to what the fallout should be.
Her response "It would be a very serious matter."
2007-11-12 12:31:28 · answer #2 · answered by SteveA8 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Any Presidential candidate that has to answer "That's news to me" must be too poorly informed to be a President.
There is always SOMETHING unknown, but on major issues, if a candidate answers that way too often they are either a liar or too ignorant to hold the position.
With Hillary it is probably BOTH!
2007-11-12 19:47:06 · answer #3 · answered by Philip H 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Candidates will evade issues as long as those questioning them permit them to do so. Don't allow it! Ask the tough questions, and keep asking until they answer you!
2007-11-12 12:04:55 · answer #4 · answered by ItsJustMe 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
The side- stepping and deflection of questions is a preferred tactic of those that pander; Hillary, being a perfect example, has repeatedly spasmed to and fro on the Iraq issue-- and most recently about her accordance with Spitzer's illegal alien initiative.
2007-11-12 12:08:18 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
There are a boatload of folks on this forum who are more up to speed on current events than many of the candidates. I know they are busy with the campaign, but sheesh, how 'bout have some aide read the friggin' paper and brief you??
2007-11-12 12:10:43 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
A Clinton for ever.
Now her hubby is out taking the heat for her,
The breck girl and Obama big ears bin laden has their wives fighting for them.
The left is the party of do not blame me it is them.
Narcissist.
2007-11-12 18:33:19 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Haven't you ever heard "Ignorance is Bliss"?
She doesn't have to answer or defend herself if she shows that she wasn't aware that it was going on.
The Left Liberal Media will never make Hillary answer anything of any substance. Because it will show to the American people her true colors.
2007-11-12 12:38:37 · answer #8 · answered by "MAIKOO".... 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Well, it's worked for the last 17 years. She'll probably keep doing it till we send her back to Dogpatch next year.
2007-11-12 14:01:12 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Political candidates rarely if ever answer questions about real problems. It's much easier just to vilify the opposition. This is why we need a third political party.
2007-11-12 12:04:13 · answer #10 · answered by Zardoz 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋