....is that someone might ask her about Vince Foster or those Mena and Waco documents that conveniently got blown up in the Oklahoma City bombing?
2007-11-24 08:27:49 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
That is always a strong possibility, and would be difficult for one of the architects to respond to.
2007-11-24 08:30:48 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The Press found ONE person who asked a planted question and that's your rationale for stating that she doesn't answer "real" questions? Gimme a break!! And your Foster, Mena and Waco comments come straight from the right wing crazies and the Limbaughs and Hannitys who laugh all the way to the bank at lemmings like yourself.
2007-11-24 16:37:56 · answer #2 · answered by golfer7 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, all politicians screen their questioners to prevent the large number of wacko's out there from wasting their time. The practice has been used as a source of criticism by both sides if they think it makes an opponent look afraid to face the issues.
I just find it amusing that the people who are frantically defending Hillary over this were the loudest critics of GW for doing it.
2007-11-24 16:36:45 · answer #3 · answered by Mark S 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
She takes real questions, and answers them as well. But keep pushing the party line that she doesn't. The rest of us who have been listening know differently. No one asks her about Vince Foster or that other crap because they have working brain cells that prevent them from believing conspiracy theory bullshyt or giving it any credence. That is left to idiots who think they can make facts out of poorly constructed theories.
2007-11-24 16:52:03 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, I think those cases are pretty much closed. They were investigated pretty thouroughly by Ken Starr in the 1990s, so I think its pretty likely that most of the information is out there.
But I think its because she's a weak politician, and it could hurt her later, why not practice your skills by taking real questions now, when you are under less media scrutiny, than get later in the election when everyone is paying attention and you suddenly have to answer real questions, and she won't be able to. She looks good when she's not under pressure, but it just takes a little bit of pressure to get her to lose her cool and you can really see her PR weaknesses. That could hurt her later on.
2007-11-24 16:32:46 · answer #5 · answered by Super Tuesday 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Hillary Clinton has not exhibited a desire to answer questions directly. She does a lot of beating around the bush( no pun intended). If you are referring to a conspiracy, I doubt you have a leg to stand on. If there is proof, wouldn't it become a political issue if it were exposed ? If true, don't you think the facts would have come out during her senatorial campaign?I'm not a Hillary fan but fair must be the name of the game. If mud is to be flung we will be right with them!!
2007-11-24 16:41:57 · answer #6 · answered by googie 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Yes, she must have learned it from the Bush administration over
the last few years.
2007-11-24 16:35:33 · answer #7 · answered by Peter R 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Among other things... yes
2007-11-24 16:29:54 · answer #8 · answered by Dean C 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
hillary is a fraud! she ain't gonna answer crap!
2007-11-24 16:29:50 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
they didn't have anything to do with her!
2007-11-24 16:30:34 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋