This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
My one ask of you is to search your soul and ask yourself why NBC thought that when Brian Williams did precisely the same thing it detracted from his credibility to host nightly news. Do you understand why they made that decision, and why there was a better choice for that job?
This is creepy. How big of a loser do you have to be to have a "file" on another internet poster?
Dude, if I see someone posting under an alias I usually call them out and I wasn't going to make an exception for you here, particularly since you come keep coming into this thread to trash Hillary (there are plenty of other threads where you can do that and be welcome and I will indeed leave you alone as you request if can restrict your Hillary bashing to those threads).
I respect this post a lot. It sees Hillary for what she is, while essentially acknowledging that you think she'll be effective if not despite it, but because of it.
No need for soul searching. While I think it's fair criticism, if the Bosnia embellishment is her worst personal failing after 40 years of public service advocating for the have nots, I don't find it professionally disqualifying. Especially when embellishing your record is essentially part of the job when running for office.
Williams was replaced because once you've shown the tendency for self mythology over truth, it calls into question other things you've said and other things you will say. It is also pretty wel accepted that like mice you see, there are many times that behind the walls. It's a character thing, not a faux paux.
No, I think he was replaced because he was on NBC and they caved to the criticism against Williams. If he was on Fox nothing would have happened - Bill O'Reilly has told plenty of whoppers about his past journalistic exploits that were proven false (including one about his camera crew being attacked in a war zone which no one remembers except O'Reilly). But Fox just ignored it and let him keep doing his show without even acknowledging it.
Okay, so you make a choice what you're about. Fox decides that truth doesn't matter, I agree. NBC and other organizations thing trust and integrity and important, dare say crucial. When it comes to the highest office in the land, I index to the latter. Maybe it's just me.
There are psychological studies that have shown that ordinary people who experience a traumatic event or are in a traumatic situation (like a war zone) can misremember, conflate or mix up what really happened with no intent to deceive. And from my recollection, the Williams situation was overblown, I believe that one of the pilots initially backed a close variation of his version, so what he claimed may not have been that far from actually happened. I don't think it was necessarily an intentional embellishment since it would no sense to make a claim where are numerous witnesses that could easily disprove it. For that reason I give Hillary a bye on her comments.Okay, so you make a choice what you're about. Fox decides that truth doesn't matter, I agree. NBC and other organizations thing trust and integrity and important, dare say crucial. When it comes to the highest office in the land, I index to the latter. Maybe it's just me.
In the very first clip she says "I have been very consistent over the course of my entire life, I have always fought for the same values and principles." Then the next couple minutes show how that's untrue.
Maybe he evolved. I remember when WetDream burst on the scene he was really into fanny packs but now I never see him post about them.
Sure it is possible. Hillary and Obama both evolved on the issue of gay marriage.
Says the guy who believes EVERYTHING Hillary says hook, line and sinker. You can't even admit she lied on the sniper story. You called it an "embellishment" when it was clearly a flat-out lie.
My understanding is that additional work protections were added to the Colombian trade deal, per the politico piece you posted in the other post. Specifically:Mr. Ham said:
Tommy skip the Politico piece and read the emails from Hillary they link to. You believe Hillary, right?
I'm watching that too, it's on msnbc and CNN. The maniac is also making limiting the 1st Amendment as part of his platform, not exactly an advocate for transparency.
The other link from Ham? The emails where Hillary was suggesting other democrats support the agreement in 2011 after the worker protections were added?
Actual transcript:
The two people she is writing are Michael Froman and Robert Hormats.
Are you suggesting Hillary was traumatized in the Bosnia incident? This is a particularly interesting hypothesis to me, as I'm a clinical neuropsychologist and have a fair share of trauma and PTSD training. As an aside, my wife is a fairly well-known researcher in the field as well, so I kind of live with this stuff daily. Anyway, I cannot speak to her state of mind at the time, but knowing what we know about that situation, the video clips of her comportment and disposition, and quite frankly the more parsimonious explanation that she conflated for street cred points, I find this theory of her having a stress-induced memory lapse to be flawed on multiple levels.squistion said:
squistion said:
Wait, you do realize that Hillary was referring to union workers in Wisconsin, Ohio, and Michigan having their collective bargaining rights stripped from them by the republicans in those state legislatures, right?
Well, to be fair, Obama campaigned on transparency and not only was his administration NOT transparent, it was one of the worst ever at it.
You realize that she was showing how cleverly she could spin the issue on a dime, don't you?
I'm fairly certain Hillary doesn't need to show anyone how cleverly she can spin issues on a dime.
Here she's essentially winking saying she can manipulate the #### our of people.
Sanders is not part of the Establishment. Minorities are very comfortable with their relationship with the current Establishment and don't want to change it. Why else would 90%+ continue to vote for the very Establishment they always gripe about? Because the Establishment is good to them that's why. Americas young angry socialists are going to become very upset with minorities when they find out that minorities favored the status quo Establishment and were the ones who torpedoed Bernies campaign
Just save time and make any and all intelligence information open and free access...what the hell? Right?
