By nature Hillary is wound really, really tight. A total control freak. Like a drill sergeant in the French Foreign Legion. I imagine her whole life is carefully scripted, minute-by-minute, with her writing the script. She's not good at thinking on her feet. Everything she says sounds like she's carefully memorized it. She cracks the whip on her staff because everybody around her is tightly disciplined. Now, would this woman allow herself to be asked a question to which she might not have an answer? Nope. And just check out how she phrases a lot of her answers. "I'm glad you asked me that. As I travel around the state, I often have people come up and ask me...(yada...yada...yada...)" Her needle's been stuck in that groove for ten years. And by the way, Bush gets hammered by the press every day. Unscripted questions. No member off that same press would ever ask Hillary a question without first clearing it with her staff, unless they want to wind up in Fort Marcy Park, stretched out beside a cannon.
2007-11-13 13:45:24
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Well, understanding that this isn't a news conference, and that she answers hundreds of questions a day, I really don't think its important. Audiences tend to ask the same questions and there may be a reason, like pending legislation that she (or any of them) wants to get their thoughts out. So someone asks someone else to ask her a question, here I think it was on environment, and she gives an answer. Its not explaining a problem she is responsible for, its just to give a variety of questions on a variety of subjects.
Its only dishonest if she doesn't take questions that are valid, not if she wants to answer an extra one.
If it came out that all the other candidates do the same, would you think the same about them too, or is it really a Hillary thing, like shes supposed to be some sort of saint?
2007-11-13 14:07:13
·
answer #2
·
answered by justa 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Most politicians do this--it is routine.
And it makes sense, up to a point. Frequently, there is some point or issue a politician wnnts --or needs--to address. Asking one of the reporters to raise that issue by asking a certain question is a common strategy.
I'm not saying I approve--I think there should be a way for politicians to do this more openly in the press conference setting. And--in the past, there was. The whole process of politics nowadays--not just press interactions--has becoe so confrontational that it's impossible to manage these things without some degree of sbtrefuge.
So--do I think its "okay?" No. But it is a minor matter. Hardly a point against Hillary--unless you simply want to write 99% of the potential candidates for al offices off your list.
2007-11-13 13:40:46
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
come across this suitable. Her we've human beings conserving one liar against yet yet another liar. extremely that's no longer even humorous. that's extremely very pathetic. as without delay as we've elementary Lies from the two applicants, as (mis-speaks). And we characteristic neither one in charge. shows you the integrity of the electorate. yet then what do you assume from the Dr, Spock technologies. whilst momma has reported you all your life, that its o.k. to end very final. And that that's all suitable to augment or lie your butt off to get someplace.which you particularly do no longer would desire to be. Thats why we dont compliment winners anymore, we console losers. i'm no longer giving any pub a loose pass in this the two. as quickly as you examine, many of the recommendations in this board from Obama human beings and Hillary human beings. that's approximately making excuses for what they do. that's approximately conversing around a ingredient, as unfavorable to addressing the ingredient. as quickly as you have an electorate, that's crammed with naive, gullable budding socialist, who're attempting to pin a tail on the donkey so as to talk. so as that they are going to bolster there loose journey into person life. that's extremely pathetic. as without delay as I examine those positioned up by using potential of the toddlers, who in basic terms cry out for activity, it pass's to coach how lost this very final technologies has become. Do they ask how they'd replace some thing. NO. Do they ask why the will they had has by using no skill worked. NO The democrat on the instant, is unfavorable depressing excuse for what grew to grow to be years and years interior the previous. The dem occasion now no longer exsist. that's been replaced by using potential of thieves and opprotunitst and very lazy human beings. they'd particularly rob you of your attempt and achievement, than make there very own. So United, Hillary isn't the Queen gazing for coronation, she in spite of each thing is a Clinton and that particularly says all of it. Obama is a in the present day no longer some thing, and that asserts all of it. So whoever gets your crown of thorns to place on there head advantages it. For they are the leaders of the lost.
2016-10-02 07:43:30
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think it ranks right down there with the "fake FEMA" press conference. I also think she should be charged standard advertising rates from all print/air media outlets that carried it as "news" coverage.
BTW... my answer would be the same for any candidate of any party that did/does it, not just because it's Hillary.
2007-11-13 14:50:53
·
answer #5
·
answered by sagacious_ness 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'm sure most of them do it but it doesn't make it right. It sounds dishonest and not very sincere. If she is strong enough to help run this country then she should be able to answer questions on the fly.
2007-11-13 13:37:24
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
I am totally anti-Hilary but I don't think it is as big a deal as they are making it. Like, maybe she had a specific topic she wanted to discuss and she wanted to be sure that she got her chance. I think a lot of candidates do it, it's just the fact that it was covered up that makes it so deceitful and scandalous. It wouldn't be such an issue if she had just come out and told the truth instead of acting like she knew nothing about it.
2007-11-13 13:34:29
·
answer #7
·
answered by Heather 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
I don't assume that most candidates do it, it is totally dishonest! But, of course, she didn't know that her people had done this & she is really upset with them! HA! She is grasping at straws now & will pull any stunt to make herself look good, it's not working! Looks like she is her own worst enemy!
2007-11-13 13:38:07
·
answer #8
·
answered by geegee 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
All candidates have "Shills" in their audiences.
Bush has Secret Service men weeding out people who say anything but praise for Bush. Secret Service men recently kicked-out a couple who wore anti-Bush t-shirts.
It is commonly done in the industry; no need to be so shocked.
2007-11-13 13:40:48
·
answer #9
·
answered by MenifeeManiac 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
I wasn't inspired... old trick... I want to see a spark of creativity in a leader. All I've seen so far is just relabeled old tricks but amazingly enough they still work after all these centuries.
2007-11-13 13:37:49
·
answer #10
·
answered by Mit A 2
·
2⤊
0⤋