Video wars: Making candidates pay for own words

This is one of my biggest problems with Hillary: She will say anything to get elected. I don't trust a word she says. If she thinks telling voters that she will make it rain hippos will get her elected, then by God she will promise us a terrential downpoor of hippos.

Romney isn't any better.

Bill Clinton did the same thing. At least Bill had the charisma to make lies seem charming. With Hillary all we get are the lies.

niselib,
I suspect you don't like her because she's a woman. Be honest with yourself. SHE'S A POLITICIAN. Every gdamned one of them is the same. Even "maverick" John McCain holds private views which are vastly different from what he says in public.

John

I couldn't care less about her gender. She is one to the two biggest pander bears in this election.

I don't like being conned. She is doing the bait and switch on the American people just like bush did in 2000.

Where are all the videos of Bush saying "a vote for this resolution is not a vote for war" when talking about what the media calls the "Iraq War" vote??

Politicians are all they same except for gender. What's that line from the Woody Allen movie? "...you know the ethics those guys have. It's like a notch underneath child molester."

John says:

Politicians are all they same except for gender

Wow, John, you are really playing that gender card, aren't you? Don’t you know how pathetic that is? “Oh, don’t pick on her, she’s a girl.” Then she goes out and says people should vote for her because she can fight the GOP smear machine. B.S.!!! If she is crying like a little baby over this and having her apparatchiks play the gender card already just wait until the Republican character assassins start in on her. She’ll fold like a GAP T-shirt and we’ll be stuck with President Romney (God forbid).

My dislike for Hillary has far more to do with her being a two faced master-panderer than her being a woman. She, like her husband, can't give you an answer on what she thinks; she can only give answers on what her focus groups think.

There is a reason the Clintons have a reputation as disingenuous. The reason is - they ARE disingenuous.

Unbelievable
The media wants us to believe it is the snipped sound bites to blame? LOL
Does anyone believe Hillary doesn't want to give illegals driver's licenses? To make them legal, give them health insurance, and allow them to vote? Why doesn't she just say it? Does anyone think Hillary doesn't want to create socialized medicine run by her in the US? Why not just tell us? It is not the sound bites, it is Hillary trying to blur her agenda, with a wink to her far left supporters, and still allow moderates to deny to themselves what Hillary is really about.

"My dislike for Hillary has far more to do with her being a two faced master-panderer than her being a woman. She, like her husband, can't give you an answer on what she thinks; she can only give answers on what her focus groups think."

Posted by: nisleib | November 6, 2007 11:31 AM

How is this different than any other politician? They are all unprincipled scum who will do or say anything to retain office. They are all the same. It's fine if you disagree with her on taxes or healthcare but to claim she or Bill are any different is a lie. They are NO different.

John

It is a matter of magnitude. The Clintons are entirely scripted. Not all politicans are. If you think all politicans are exactly the same you are wrong.

I beleive that Obama, Thompson, Ron Paul, Edwards, McCain, Biden and Huckabee all have far more integrity than Clinton does. Every word they say is not parsed. They can, sometimes, give you a straight answer.

But you, John, you keep falling back on the Gender card to defend Hillary.

Pathetic.

"My dislike for Hillary has far more to do with her being a two faced master-panderer than her being a woman."

Hmm, it sounds like you are admitting that PART of your dislike for her is due to her being a woman, just more of your dislike is due to the pandering, rather than the icky girl part.

Wow, Jill, play the gender card.

Hillary must be really desperate.

I'm not falling back on the gender card. I just think its hilarious that rarely if ever is there a principled opinion of why Hillary should not be President. We hear her called "Queen B", "her Thighness", "she's nasty", "she's mean", etc. Ask any, ANY politician when we will leave Iraq?, will I have social security?, why shouldn't we lock up all Muslim's in America? and you will get a canned answer that has been focus grouped and practiced. Your problem is perception. You perceive the Clinton's to do it more because so much more focus and attention is always given to them. Your homework assignment is to watch and listen to every other elected official and after they give a long winded, meandering answer ask yourself, "Did he/she really answer that question?" "Does he/she really believe what he/she just said?", and "Has he/she always felt this way?"

PS I'm not defending Hillary because I support another candidate.

Not playing the gender card, just reading the words you yourself wrote.

You can clear the whole thing up with a clear unambigous statement to the effect that Hillary's gender has nothing to do with your extreme dislike of her. You had that chance, but instead you chose to clearly say that it WAS a part of your negative feelings.

Don't blame me for believing the words you say.

"Ask any, ANY politician when we will leave Iraq?"

We aren't leaving. The democrats came to power claiming a mandate from the people to pull our troops out. Well .. have they even tried? NO! It's all about demogoging an issue, and not about providing solutions. It is much easier and more effective to critisize. Look what legislation the dems ARE championing. Federal insurance for "children" up to the age of 25 making $80,000 a year. They know Bush would veto it. It just gave them an issue to critisize ... SEE the republicans are against health care for "children" ... and you dolts keep falling for it.

A friend of Hillary's wanted to privatize the W.H. Travel Office for her personal profit. The holders of those jobs had friends in the media so to avoid looking mean Hillary tried to railroad them instead. After being the target of a lengthly FBI probe and then trial a jury decided in minutes Billy Dale was not guilty. Hillary has experience allright, of slander, character assassination, and crushing any in her way to power.

K W Smith,
A state asked for an exemption so that the cap could be raised to $80K and that measure was killed. Update your talking points. So what is you plan to insure the mentally retarded who are 23 years old and don't have jobs with health insurance? We'd all like to know what your alternative plan is.

Jill

I realize you must have a very small brain. Look at the top of this thread, you will see, three posts down, my comment where I said the following:

John

I couldn't care less about her gender. She is one to the two biggest pander bears in this election.

I don't like being conned. She is doing the bait and switch on the American people just like bush did in 2000.

Now obviously, Jill, that is fairly straight forward. As to why you and John continue to play the gender card I would guess you are doing it to change the subject. You want to distract from the fact that your candidate, Hillary, is a phony.

Good luck with that.

John
Are you for real? The mentally challenged are insured and receive government checks from the first day they are born, now that they have the technology to determine their condition that early. Why a mentally challenged baby is any different than any other baby is beyond me, but they get entitlements for their entire life. Tslk about demogoging! Hillary claims there are 47 million uninsured children, and none of them are children of illegals. Total BS!

I don't think I would want to take Clinton out to dinner. It would take her too long to order in the event the lobbyists who represent big corporations are sitting at her table. That's what she means by getting along with them.

Her senior strategist is connected to a firm which represents Burston. That's why she parses as she does.

For the first time ever here, I must say that I agree with Nislieb.

Hillary doesn't SAY anything. She panders and never really takes a stance on anything. I'm a pretty solid Lefty. A year ago, I was for Hillary, but I've grown tired of her having it both ways throughout this campaign. I don't feel like I have any clue on what she'll actually DO as president. Will she be like her husband and "triangulate" the Democratic party into Nuevo Moderate Republicanism? Will she be an old-school Democrat? Will she continue the war? Will she end it? Will she raise taxes? Will she lower them? Will she pander to corporations or support labor (I sadly think I know the answer to that one)?

It's like she feels the election is her's to lose, not in need of winning, and so she's chosen to not SAY anything and that way, she can't LOSE the election.

Well I don't want a President who thinks that way. That's someone who wants to be President just to be President. Not to change things for the better or serve the country. If she wished to serve the country, she would say "here's me... .here's my policies.. here's what I'll DO. Now whatd'ya say? Can I have your vote?" Instead, she's letting the media carry her water because she's got the most history and is the most corporate-friendly Dem candidate. We need less of that, not more.

That's why I'm for Edwards or Obama right now (or Biden, or even Ron Paul, for chrissakes)... they seem more principled on WHY they're running for President. I have a grasp as to what I'm getting with them. As though they actually feel they could IMPROVE the country, not just because they're personally ambitious, and they're not afraid to tell us how.

The mentally challenged are insured and receive government checks from the first day they are born, now that they have the technology to determine their condition that early. Why a mentally challenged baby is any different than any other baby is beyond me, but they get entitlements for their entire life. Tslk about demogoging! Hillary claims there are 47 million uninsured children, and none of them are children of illegals. Total BS!

Posted by: K W Smith | November 6, 2007 4:07 PM

KW Smith...

1) Please tell me under what program mentally challenged kids are getting checks from the government from the day that they're born?

2) Illegal immigrants will undoubtably be killed if Al Qaeda sets off a Nuclear bomb in a major city, ergo, by your logic, we should disband our military and immediately cease the war on terrorism as it could possibly protect an illegal immigrant.

We should also immediately stop investing on our infrastructure because Illegals use roads to travel and bridges to cross rivers. We should disband all police forces because they could possibly protect an illegal immigrant from a crime. We should immediately allow corporations and individuals to pollute to their heart's content because immigrants breathe air and drink water.

Right? We basically shouldn't do anything that you don't personally politically like because you can think of some way that an illegal will benefit. That's how it works, right? That's the straw man, right?

Your argument that 47 million children should not be insured because Hillary can't promise you that not one illegal immigrant won't benefit should make you repulse at your own position. Think about what you're saying. How can you not be ashamed of yourself for what your political ideology has done to your morality?

I mean, if you have a better solution for these 47 million kids, then fine.. that's cool. But to say that we shouldn't insure 47 million kids out of spite for an illegal immigrant CHILD is disgusting. It's foul.