Why the free pass for Hillary Clinton, who banded together with the "man-on-dog" guy?

[LoZoccolo]

WASHINGTON - Sen. Hillary Clinton, D- N.Y., appeared Wednesday at a Capitol Hill press conference with conservative Republican senators Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania and Sam Brownback of Kansas and conservative Democratic Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut to tout their request for $90 million in federal funds for research on how the Internet, i-Pods, and other electronic media affect children's emotional and behavioral development.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7142420

Is she excused?

(To be fair, the first two "no" responses in this thread were to a different question I put before the edit. Saracat and MookieWilson are not saying that she is not excused.)

ON EDIT: This is not a rehash of the primaries. There is no use in doing that. I don't care that Hillary shared a stage with Santorum per se. I am trying to arrive at a definition of the concept of "endorsing". If Obama is "endorsing" Warren, why is Hillary not "endorsing" Santorum here?

ON EDIT AGAIN: It is not enough to tell me it is "different".

[Captain Hilts]

1. No. nt

[saracat]

2. No.

[musette_sf]

3. actually i have been thinking now

that we might as well have just elected Hillary. i read "The Family" and know of HRC's complicity with these evil bastards. i thought Obama was different. so, so wrong.

[MyNameGoesHere]

4. So since was this 5 years ago

did this pass? Was it funded? Or is this a hit and run? Really try harder. People can and will be upset about some of President Obama's decisions. Doesn't make him bad or evil, just a politician. And besides, rolling over and being "yes" people for a president didn't work out so well did it?

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

5. Because she's not the president elect. Next inane question?

[LoZoccolo]

8. So Obama is "endorsing" Rick Warren's views as a president-elect.

Hillary is "endorsing" Rick Santorum's views as a senator.

Sure, there is a difference.

[Captain Hilts]

15. And she doesn't control who supports a bill she supports. nt

[onehandle]

6. Exactly what was the crime here?

Obama sponsored bills with Republicans too.

Lieberman was his mentor.

So?

(on edit, I may be confused as to what the OP is proposing here)

[leftofthedial]

7. Is it true that Rick Warren

opposes "man-on-dog" action?

[jonnyblitz]

9. holy crap, is the primary still going on in your feeble little brain?

some of us actually *do* care about human rights issues.

[Bluebear]

10. You said it.

[ronnykmarshall]

13. Duh?

[LoZoccolo]

16. Can you answer the question?

I don't care about Hillary running; she lost. But you didn't see this outrage. Isn't she just as guilty of "endorsing" Santorum's view?

[jobycom]

11. It is possible to condemn Warren and his inclusion without condemning Obama.

Which also means I can disagree with Clinton without condemning her as whatever.

Even so, your parallel is a poor one, if you are only complaining about the reaction to Warren. Clinton is a senator and works with other senators to accomplish legislation. She will necessarily have to side with senators we all disagree with--whom she disagrees with, as well--to accomplish anything. Bottom line--she didn't choose Santorum or Brownback for the Senate, and in the last election she didn't choose Lieberman in the general election, either. Obama did choose Warren.

I'm not condemning Obama. I'm condemning his choice of Warren. And I do condemn Clinton's choices when I disagree with her. So I'm not sure what you are asking if I excuse her from.

[bunnies]

12. man-on-dog?

I think I saw that on the intertubes. :hide:

[Jackeens]

14. LOL!!!

[emilyg]

17. You need your meds.

[LoZoccolo]

18. Still haven't heard why this isn't "endorsing" Santorum like Obama is "endorsing" Warren! n/t

[emilyg]

35. I never thought O is endorsing Warren.

[mtnsnake]

19. You're using a 3 1/2 year old article just to spread the seeds of hatred again???

I notice you cleverly left out the March. 10, 2005 date of your article, soon to be 4 years old. You are just as pathetic as you were.

[LoZoccolo]

20. For the record, I don't give a fuck about Hillary being onstage with Rick Santorum.

I just want people to lay off Obama, or explain why Obama is "endorsing" Warren but Hillary was not "endorsing" Santorum.

[mtnsnake]

24. Your full of it and you're just trying to deflect the animosity back toward Clinton

because you can't stomach anyone voicing concern about some of Obama's decisions.

For the record, I don't give a fuck about Hillary being onstage with Rick Santorum. I just want people to lay off Obama, or explain why Obama is "endorsing" Warren but Hillary was not "endorsing" Santorum

Using an article that's almost 4 years old to get people to start hating Clinton again is nothing short of pathetic, no matter what your lame excuse is.

[LoZoccolo]

28. Don't personally attack me.

You can make your point elsewise.

[mtnsnake]

31. Just calling it like it is. You are full of it. I edited the other subject line from shit to it

Feel better?

[LoZoccolo]

37. That is still a personal attack.

If you expect people to respond to you, then you should not do that.

[mtnsnake]

38. This isn't SundaySchoolUnderground.com.

When someone is as full of it as you are, you're bound to hear about it when you're posting on a political message board.

But I think you already knew that...

[wyldwolf]

21. this is not a valid comparison

[Malikshah]

22. Is she President Elect? Is she having Rick Warren at her inauguration?

No?!?

Then it's false equivalency and unhelpful to the discussion.

[LoZoccolo]

26. If Obama is "endorsing" Warren, how is Hillary not "endorsing" Santorum? n/t

[Malikshah]

30. Did you even read my response? Do you understand the public

nature of the inauguration? At all? For the world?

[LoZoccolo]

32. A press conference is not for the public to see? n/t

[Malikshah]

40. Willful ignorance of the difference between the once-every-four-years

inauguration of the US president (a world event) and a press conference is shameful and beneath most folks.

[cboy4]

23. Oh make it stop

:puke:

[Autumn]

25. Was the bill on

man on dog sex? No fucking comparison.

[LoZoccolo]

27. Is Warren's appearance going to be a lecture on homosexuality? n/t

[Autumn]

29. Warrens life is a lecture on

homosexuality. No comparison.

[racaulk]

36. And McClurkin's appearance wasn't a lecture on homosexuality either!

Oh wait...

[Marrah_G]

33. Very different things.

Primaries are over. since you can't understand that the primaries are over and wish to continue the fighting I will put you back on ignore.

[Sebastian Doyle]

34. Hillary endorsed all kinds of crazy shit during the primaries

Santorum. The West Virginia racists. Obliterating Iran. Fictional missions to Bosnia. Just to name a few.....

But what the Hell does any of that have to do with a homophobic dominionazi speaking at the inaguration?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

39. I think the point is that much of the criticism is two-faced.

Many of the critics of Warren's homophobia took no issue with Hillary's racism.

[ClarkUSA]

41. For the same reason why there's no DU OUTRAGE over Bill Clinton getting donations from Blackwater

Pure unadulterated hypocrisy.

[polichick]

42. Nobody is saying that Obama shouldn't work with Warren.