Last week, Hillary Clinton gave a speech in which she highlighted as usual her contributions to the world as First Lady. During the speech she exaggerated some facts and said the following words:
"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."
When asked about the mishap, she simply said that she misspoke! In her book titled "Living History," she describes the same event (a trip to the Tuzla Air Base, Bosnia-Herzegovina) as followed:
"Due to reports of snipers in the hills around the airstrip, we were forced to cut short an event on the tarmac with local children, though we did have time to meet them and their teachers and to learn how hard they had worked during the war to continue classes in any safe spot they could find."
According to Clinton's own words, she has spoken millions of words a day which means that she had probably given thousands of speeches and has had thousands of opportunities to check her facts, practice and prepare her speeches.
Does a country need someone who is going to excuse his or her misrepresentation of facts that show character as a "minor blip?" Should accounts of international relations in the Middle East be in the "minor blip" category when everything proves a major need for understanding and clear communications and representation? How many times have we been duped into taking a position which we would have been completely opposed to if we had clear and complete facts?
Here's one of the many articles published on Clinton's "minor blip." Does reading it give you the sense it was just a minor error in recollecting the event or a very calculated attempt to mislead the public?
Click here for the article.
4 comments:
It is unfortunate that many of our politicians today are not content on telling us the truth. Are they afraid that we won't like the real them? What if Hillary Clinton had told us that she gained valuable experience while on a trip to Bosnia to visit our troops? She must have thought that we wouldn't find any value in a peaceful visit to Bosnia. This is definitely a calculated tactic on the part of Hillary Clinton. A not-so-subtle reminder of the smooth talking administration of her husband. The Clintons apparently claim license to say whatever they feel expedient and the american public is expected to take them at their word. One more example why the Clintons cannot be trusted.
I think that this is going to be the nail in the coffin for Hillary Clinton's campaign. I just read a good article from politico.com about Hillary's chances and they aren’t good. Basically even if she wins every remaining contest with 60% of the vote she would still be behind Obama in delegates. Journalists have made it seem that the contest is closer than it actually is because it gives them better coverage. For Obama to lose it would require some of his pledged delegates to switch their support. If anyone is interested, here is the link: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9149_Page3.html
PS Does Hillary Clinton remind anybody of Sherry Palmer from 24?
Can we just have caucus again with new people running or is just me? pjubber stated "One more example why the Clintons cannot be trusted." Can we trust any of our current runners ? Plus no doubt that McCain is going to die in office if elected! Hope then he runs with a good VP! Plus Sören all she has to do is say it was that time of month and all is forgiven, it seems the excuse of choice really. I CALL FOR A REDO!!!
it's interesting that politicians feel like they have to make their life interesting. Why do i care about your life? Oh wait, i don't. I just want an honest president and it looks like Hill isn't afraid to flat-out lie, even when she can easily get caught in the lie. I don't get it. She is the same as Bill - lying to look good has never been a problem.
Post a Comment