Letters to the Editor
-
@billcap
billcap: "Well, guess I'll admit that so long as you admit to the irony of you complaining about somebody's exaggeration while you exaggerate what they exaggerated about."
This isn't about me, it's about Clinton, but I disagree that I exaggerated anything. The overall image of the event that Clinton presented was inaccurate. She made it sound like a harrowing, rushed situation. I would say that the impression projected by her account is false. I would also say there's plenty of indication the false account was intentional (it was in her notes) and it was repeated on multiple occasions. Considering that the false statements are made in the context of Clinton attempting to tout her international experience, it's not a stretch to conclude the "exaggerations" (if you prefer the euphemism) were intentional.
-
xrandadu Hutman"
"it was repeated on multiple occasions"
You all keep saying this. For a week I've been asking for evidence of this. Nobody has posted it yet. So unless you have the evidence, it remains exaggeration
"The overall image of the event that Clinton presented was inaccurate. She made it sound like a harrowing, rushed situation"
Well, it was on the plane at the end and the landing as she was moved to the front, given a flak jacket, and given a steep, rushed descent. Without a doubt, her overall image of what happened on the ground was false and exaggerated. What I find so funny though is that while I'm willing to admit the latter, none of the Obama supporters here are willing to admit the former. Because again, to admit that there may have been some worries expressed, to admit her whole story isn't made up out of whole cloth means they can't score as many points. Points, yes, but not as many. So you all have to just pretend that stuff doesn't exist. Making you exactly what you decry in Hillary, willing to say or do anything for your own ends. That's the part I find so funny and sad about all this.
And I love watching the Obama spokesperson on CNN saying this whole Bosnia thing is, and I quote, one of "the important issues". I assume you can at least agree that this is not anywhere near one of those "important" issues?
Also, nice job twice now on completely ignoring the questions as to whether if you call Clinton a liar on Bosnia you're equally willing to call Obama a liar on Wright? Care to go for the trifecta on ignoring the question? And on Sinbad's argument with himself.
-
@billcap
billcap: "You all keep saying this. For a week I've been asking for evidence of this. Nobody has posted it yet. So unless you have the evidence, it remains exaggeration"
Here is one article among many that mentions multiple instances of the "misspeaking":
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=ap5lq52KkZRk
"I did make a mistake in talking about it the last time, and recently," Clinton told reporters in Greensburg, Pennsylvania. "I made a mistake. I have a different memory. That happens. I'm human. For some people that's a revelation."
During a speech last week in Washington, she said, "I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."
In February, she made a similar claim during a speech in Waco, Texas.
Again, there are other articles that also detail multiple instances. I've seen multiple quotes on YouTube. The more recent WarRoom piece cites an Obama memo that lists multiple instances as well. The Clinton campaign is not contesting any of these citations.
Not to mention the fact that the exaggeration/lie is in the text of her speaking points. So it's not like she simply misremembered on one occasion. It was part of a concerted effort to either perpetuate a false recollection, or to paint an image of something more impressively dangerous than it actually was.
billcap: "Without a doubt, her overall image of what happened on the ground was false and exaggerated."
Glad you will admit to "exaggerated." From here we can argue whether the exaggeration qualifies as "lying," but it's just quibbling over definitions at that point.
billcap: "What I find so funny though is that while I'm willing to admit the latter, none of the Obama supporters here are willing to admit the former."
Nobody has denied that the other parts of the story were true. Nobody has contested those parts of the story, either. What purpose is served by "admitting" that the plane really made a fast descent, etc., if nobody was suggesting otherwise to begin with?
billcap: "Because again, to admit that there may have been some worries expressed, to admit her whole story isn't made up out of whole cloth means they can't score as many points."
There are already enough points to score. I'm not sure who has been saying that the entire story is made up out of "whole cloth," but I haven't witnessed people doing this. The parts that are obvious falsehoods are sufficient to demonstrate that Clinton was "exaggerating."
billcap: "Points, yes, but not as many. So you all have to just pretend that stuff doesn't exist. Making you exactly what you decry in Hillary, willing to say or do anything for your own ends."
Straw-man argument.
billcap: "And I love watching the Obama spokesperson on CNN saying this whole Bosnia thing is, and I quote, one of "the important issues". I assume you can at least agree that this is not anywhere near one of those "important" issues?"
The relative importance of the matter is another discussion. But it's difficult to have that discussion if we can't even agree whether she lied or not. I think, if she did lie (and to me it seems obvious she did), it does reflect somewhat on her candidacy. No, it's not as important as other things, like what her past leadership has been on important matters such as Iraq, or whatever.
billcap: "Also, nice job twice now on completely ignoring the questions as to whether if you call Clinton a liar on Bosnia you're equally willing to call Obama a liar on Wright? Care to go for the trifecta on ignoring the question? And on Sinbad's argument with himself."
I'm trying to stay on-topic. This article is about Hillary Clinton in Bosnia. I've posted at length, repeatedly, about the Wright issue. I consider your bringing it up to be a giant dodge of the Clinton issue, or a weak attempt at showing equivalence. Plus, I don't feel obligated to reply to every inane misdirection you pull out of your ass.