HRC on the record

[MaggieD]

I see quite a bit of erroneous info posted here about HRC. Sadly, some comes from right wing talking points and sites. But some just looks made up out of whole cloth.

Well, we have a solution. Here is an excellent web site that lays out her voting record, policy position, and statements. Yes, facts. Facts are a wonderful thing. They always help foster intelligent discussion.

http://correctrecord.org/the-record/

Enjoy. And please feel free to use the facts "liberally."

[NYC_SKP]

1. Let me be the first to call bullshit. That is Hillary's Super PAC website, hardly a reliable source

the desperation is palpable.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/campaign-ads/188979-super-pac-with-hillary-ties-announces-correct-the-record-effort

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/05/20/buffy-wicks-poised-to-jump-from-pro-hillary-clinton-super-pac-to-campaign-side/

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clinton-plans-to-coordinate-directly-with-super-pac/

[MaggieD]

2. So does it follow that everything Bernie says

.... Is bullshit too?

[Florencenj2point0]

25. Bernie took money from Hillpac

during his last election. That makes him suspicious and kind of a hypocrite. He didn't seem to mind her corporate bucks then, huh?

[Sancho]

37. Just for fun...can you provide a reliable (in your view) pro-Hillary website?

I didn't think so....in other words, the BS is your bashing.

There are a couple of folks on DU who are helping Hillary a lot, and you are one of them so I hope you keep it up. Those who already know about Hillary (and Bernie and Webb, etc.) aren't swayed the the constant attacks. Those who see the crazy BS bashes sometimes ask or take the time to investigate. Most quickly think more positively when they examine the records, listen to her, or look at primary material. If not, that's fine as long as they are checking it out.

Do you really think that DUers aren't capable of looking at a PAC website and interpreting the links! Telling them it's bullshit makes you look condescending at best (like they can't figure something out), and simply wrong (if people look at the info and conclude it's mostly accurate). They will "ignore" you, or else figure you are so anti-Hillary that maybe you are bad for the Democratic party, or maybe conclude all the Hillary bashers are zealots. Regardless, even though I hope you keep it up, it would be good for Hillary fans if you and the others keep up the bashing. The more posts per day the better. Win or lose, it's getting people to learn more about Hillary.

Please prove me wrong and suggest a better pro-Hillary link. Thanks in advance.

[NYC_SKP]

38. "Pro-anybody" is, by definition, not going to be objective.

For anyone on the fence, or susceptible to campaign spin, they should know going into that source who paid for it.

The OP didn't make that clear, so I did.

That's what I do, I educate, I give.

I'm a giver. It's a blessing and a curse, but I'm just posting information.

[Sancho]

49. Ok...post a link that is "neutral" about Hillary that reaches a positive conclusion if you see one.

My point is that people can get information and follow up on "pro", "con", and even "satirical" websites. They will "shoot the messenger" as some point if they only see one side presented.

In my case, I don't have any problem checking who pays for the site. Heck, I have browsed FR, Drudge, etc. to see what they are saying.

If people are taking time to check out information on a candidate, they will likely conclude what they like (or don't). Its a long time to the election. OTOH, DU gets a little out of control sometimes.

I'll vote for the Democratic candidate. Any of them will be better than Jeb, Rand, etc.

[Sheepshank]

43. And just who the fuck is going to state voting facts etc

except the person trying to protect their own reputation against the many lies being promoted and passed around? huh? MSM, RW media, Fox, Bernie supporters?

[NYC_SKP]

45. Lies aren't needed for Hillary to be deemed disqualified. She's done it all to herself.

Cherry picked voting record shit? It's all crap.

[Sheepshank]

47. pisses you off to no end that she's trying to clarify the lies the Bernie supporters are spreading

if what she has posted are incorrect, you are free to clarify. Otherwise your personal concern that she only posted the corrections other than every piss and dress change she makes, is duly noted

[pnwmom]

67. Why wouldn't Hillary's website be an accurate source for her running positions?

Would you prefer Faux news?

[darkangel218]

5. +1!!

[MineralMan]

4. Thanks for posting this link.

Even though it is a pro-Hillary site, it contains lots of good information we should all know. I predict, though, that it will be heavily criticized by some here.

ETA: I see it has already started. Oh, well. That's to be expected, I suppose.

[darkangel218]

6. Lmao!!!@ even though..

Always comical!

[MineralMan]

7. Do you suppose that every candidate will not have a similar site?

I recognize what it is. I also know that there are facts there to examine. Laugh all you like. That's what campaigns are: campaigns.

Take a point from that site and refute it. Take several, if you can.

I still haven't read through all of it, but I will. I'll do the same on Bernie Sander's campaign sites.

[darkangel218]

8. You never hid your support for Hillary

I was simply laughing at your "even though", as it wasn't your choice lmao!

[MaggieD]

11. Do people have to "hide" their support for a candidate here?

When was that requirement put in place?

[darkangel218]

14. Not at all.

Why say : "even though".. Then?

[Sheepshank]

53. it's simply an acknowledgement the info comes from a site HRC has some control over

There are clearly some people that are only satisfied when HRC info comes from anti HRC sites...... you really are trying to make a mountain out of a molehill.

[MineralMan]

64. As I have said multiple times, I will be caucusing for

Senator Sanders in Minnesota. My concern is for the very likely possibility that he will not be the nominee. You are incorrect.

[sabrina 1]

30. Point #1 - Human Rights Advocate.

One of the main reasons I supported Obama over Hillary was her support for the inhumane Iraq War which killed over on million human beings, many of them children. I saw the photos, I'm sure she did too.

When asked about her opinion on torture in that campaign, she waffled, stating she 'wouldn't take it off the table'.

Then there is Libya. She has touted that horrendous human rights disaster as a victory. For whom?

Boats filled with victims of that 'victory' are leaving Libya each day, risking death, and many have died, to get out of that hell hole created by NATO.

Of course many of us Dems opposed that, what did they call it again? 'Humanitarian' invasion but were told how wonderful it is to have your country bombed to smithereens by the Western Powers, just like Iraq.

No one who advocates for Human Rights could possibly have voted for any of these war crimes in action.

And not once have I heard her talk about all the dead babies, the human rights violations that are ongoing in both those tragically destroyed nations.

And on one who advocates for Human Rights would ever endorse torture under any conditions.

[MineralMan]

66. Whatever you say...

[MaggieD]

9. So does it follow that everything Bernie says is BS too?

Just trying to figure out the "rules" we are operating under here.

[NYC_SKP]

15. Consistent.

Fersure!

[MaggieD]

16. So if it comes from HRC it's BS, and if it comes from Bernie....

It's also BS too, right? I mean, speaking of "consistent."

[darkangel218]

17. Yes. Because Bernie is honest.

Sorry you have a problem with that.

[MaggieD]

18. Really?

Is he being honest with you when he says if you elect him college will be free for everyone?

That's honest?

[cali]

10. ooh, straight from one of Hillary's Super PACs. I love Propaganda

When you need a Super PAC to defend yourself, it just could be that your record and rhetoric are so problematic that you need hundreds of millions to churn out some revisionist history.

She doesn't even have a platform with positions on issues on her website.

But hey, at least you're no longer pretending you don't support Hillary and that you like Bernie. While you were engaging in that charade, you were a marvelous illustration of the adage "With friends like that, who needs enemies".

You, like so many HRC supporters, consider every criticism- yes, every single one- to be right wing talking points.

John Cassidy or Amy Davidson in The New Yorker? spewers of right wing talking points

Zephyr Teachout and Doyle McManus? Ditto

Vox, Vanity Fair, Slate, Salon, The Atlantic: Well known right wing rags and purveyors of..... right wing talking points.

[MaggieD]

12. So then we should also assume everything Bernie says is BS as well?

Is that how it works?

[cali]

20. I wouldn't rely on his website to verify his record. He's hardly disinterested

and he doesn't even have the same problems with truthiness that Hillary does.

But at least you're no longer trying to run a scam on DUers by pretending to like Bernie, while at the same time attacking him repeatedly. Got to be thankful for small blessings!

[MaggieD]

23. Everything you know about him came out of his mouth

So your excuse fails.

I am NOT a Bernie supporter any longer - that is true. And his supporters and his pandering are the reason.

[morningfog]

35. "Any longer" lol!! So long!

[MaggieD]

50. Yep - any longer

Did I ever think he could win? Nope, not for one second. But I did think he would drive the debate to the left, and I welcome that. However, his supporters give me a bad taste. That and this free college pandering business. I don't want smoke blown up my ass. I want a serious candidate with serious proposals. So sue me.

[Florencenj2point0]

19. surely you can tell a fact

from an opinion regardless of the source? Facts are sourced.

[cali]

21. Surely you know that facts can be selective.

Omitting some facts and stressing others can put forth an inaccurate picture.

[Florencenj2point0]

27. have you even read the site?

it is way too extensive for you to make that claim. Got facts?

[MaggieD]

24. So these bill numbers are not fact?

Somebody just made them up?

http://correctrecord.org/hillary-clinton-on-college-affordability/

ETA - this should have been a response to Cali.

[Sancho]

44. Just for fun...can you provide a non-propaganda (in your view) pro-Hillary website?

I didn't think so....in other words, the BS is your bashing.

There are a couple of folks on DU who are helping Hillary a lot, and you are one of them so I hope you keep it up. Those who already know about Hillary (and Bernie and Webb, etc.) aren't swayed the the constant attacks. Those who see the illogical bashes sometimes ask or take the time to investigate. Most quickly think more positively when they examine the records, listen to her, or look at primary material. If not, that's fine as long as they are checking it out.

Do you really think that DUers aren't capable of looking at a PAC website and interpreting the links! Telling them it's propaganda makes you look condescending at best (like they can't figure something out), and simply wrong (if people look at the info and conclude it's mostly accurate). They will "ignore" you, or else figure you are so anti-Hillary that maybe you are bad for the Democratic party, or maybe conclude all the Hillary bashers are zealots. Regardless, even though I hope you keep it up, it would be good for Hillary fans if you and the others keep up the bashing. The more posts per day the better. Win or lose, it's getting people to learn more about Hillary.

I know I've learned a lot about Bernie from some recent posts, and after looking into the facts about his positions (gun liability, Robin Hood tax) I actually like him less than I used to, so if I have to vote in a primary I'd like to make a good choice.

Thanks in advance.

I'll vote for the Democratic candidate, regardless. I'd like a Democrat to win.

[KMOD]

13. Great link

K&R

[hrmjustin]

22. Thank you for posting!

[MaggieD]

26. You are welcome

When BS is posted it should be responded to with facts. I was amazed this morning to find that Bernie supporters just assume HRC has not been a champion on college affordability. They just aren't informed. And perhaps do not want to be informed. But at least this reduces the excuses.

[hrmjustin]

28. I follow the site on twitter and it is just great.

Remember that some are willing to believe the worst about her.

[think]

29. This would be better if the site's owner was not anonymous

The about page and contact info is very vague which is not cool in this day and age. Many people want to know who is putting the information in front of them.

http://correctrecord.org/about/

Hopefully this comes across as advice to whomever is responsible for the content. It's obvious someone spent a great deal of time and money to develop it. They should do themselves a favor and proudly own it rather use anonymous about information.

Would you buy something from website if you didn't know who was selling the product?

[cali]

31. It's a super pac created by the HRC campaign

they can accept unlimited funds. cool, huh?

[MaggieD]

33. First Fact check on the Bernie Supporter BS

It's owned by the same people that run Media Matters. It was not CREATED by HRC or her campaign.

Cali, why don't you fact check yourself once in a while? It's not a sin to check your assumption prior to posting.

[cali]

52. oh please, these are all spin offs from the campaign- and really a part of it

Correctthe Record, a rapid-response group that's been promoting Hillary Clinton, will spin off into a stand-alone super-PAC to better coordinate with her presidential campaign.

The group says the new Correct the Record will not make independent expenditures, allowing it to coordinate its strategy directly with campaigns.

<snip>

Brad Woodhouse, president of American Bridge, will take the reigns of the new super-PAC. The group's current head, former Clinton aide Burns Strider, will stay on with Correct the Record as a senior adviser.

<snip>

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/241805-pro-hillary-group-spins-off


got that? Direct coordination.

and Media Matters? It's been closely connected to HRC from day one.

[m-lekktor]

55. Hillary was an advisor for Media Matters when it was first created

according to it's wiki page which i am too lazy to bother to link to. David Brock, out of guilt, is making up for doing wrong to Hillary and Bill as THE right wing shill who got the whole Whitewater mess rolling in the 90's by being one of Hillary's main media shills NOW.

[MaggieD]

59. Well damn her for doing that, huh?

Or maybe you don't remember when we had nothing to counter the right wing think tanks.

I know you didn't mean to, but all you have done is point out just how much HRC has done for Democrats over the years.

[MaggieD]

57. You need to fact check yourself again

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Matters_for_America

MMfA started with the help of $2 million in donations. According to Byron York, additional funding came from MoveOn.org and the New Democrat Network.[15][16][17]

It's an offshoot of the Center for American progress, which also publishes Think Progress. All evil right wing Democrats, eh?

So what you really mean to say is she acted as an advisor to them early on. OMG - how dare she!

Also, Burns Strider worked for Nancy Pelosi. Another evil Democrat, right?

[MaggieD]

32. It's a PAC that supports Democrats

Just like it says.

[think]

39. It's a Pac. That much is a given. Some of the other Pacs actually give a background

And more information so people know more about the organization they are dealing with.

Actblue gives a physical address and phone number in addition to the names of the individuals working for the Pac.

https://secure.actblue.com/about

https://secure.actblue.com/contact


Credo lists their physical address, names their company as the starter of the Pac, and names their executive director, president, & their campaign manager.

http://credosuperpac.com/about/

http://credosuperpac.com/contact/


This may seem inconsequential to you but I appreciate knowing who is putting information in front of me.

[MaggieD]

41. Google it - it's not a secret

Run by the same people that run Media Matters.

[think]

46. I did and found nothing until you mentioned it above. That's why websites have an about section

To address this on the site itself for clarity.

Not the end of the world but why should people have to try to figure out who's behind a site when most others would put it in the about section and be done with it so as to not cause any confusion?

Just an observation. Sorry....

[MaggieD]

48. No different than any PAC

Here is the about us page for the one that supported Obama and other democrats. Same.

http://www.prioritiesusaaction.org/about-us/

When you Google Correct the Record, here is the third link (after the first two that go to Correct the Record itself):

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/09/david-brock-hillary-clinton-correct-the-record

There is nothing secret here. Nothing shadowy. Nobody is hiding anything or trying to fool anyone.

[think]

51. Thank you Motherjones for letting me know who runs the Correctrcord.org PAC

Since it doesn't appear in CorrectReocrd.org's About page. Much appreciated.

[MaggieD]

58. Did you vote for Obama?

[think]

60. Yes. He was much better than the alternative. I still appreciate many of things he does but he's

sure turned out to be a mixed bag rather than the Obama I saw as a candidate.

JMO...

[MaggieD]

61. Well here is the about page on the PAC that supported him

Notice that is almost identical? http://www.prioritiesusaaction.org/about-us/

The problem is that once elected Presidents have to govern. And they need to represent all of us, not just some of us. At least Democratic presidents do.

The fact that Obama went from being seen as a demigod here to evil incarnate by some was quite predictable. In fact I DID predict it, as did many others.

There are no perfect politicians when it comes to president. That is just the nature of the job.

[Marr]

34. Did you know that BP has an umatched commitment to environmental safety?

It says so right on their site!

http://www.bp.com/en_us/bp-us/who-we-are/commitment-to-safety.html

[MaggieD]

36. Has Media Matters lied to you before?

The same people are behind Correct the Record.

Now, can you find something factually incorrect there? Can you point to lies Media Matters has foisted on the public? Are you saying everything Bernie says should also be assumed a lie? Anything his supporters say should be considered a lie? Are you saying the record of the bills she sponsored or voted for that are listed on this site are made up?

[Doctor_J]

65. According to Ted Cruz's site, Cruz defended voting integrity...

...so it must be true

Ah. Here it is. He did that by supporting legislation that lets states enact photo ID laws.

Amazing thing, propaganda. Much less amazing are people who believe it.

[MaggieD]

70. So the folks at Media Matters are prone to lying in your opinion?

It's a huge web site that calls out lots of right wing bullshit. Can you point to something they have posted that is wrong?

How about Think Progress? Same group of Democrats. Are they a bunch of liars too?

Or do they only become liars if they are pro-HRC?

[NYC_SKP]

40. One hour and I've identified 23 Flat Out Lies on that page.

Damn, they are busy over there.

It kind of sucks, having to fact check propaganda created with money "earned" through her abuse of influence while SOS.

I mean really, Smart Energy Policy? She helped Chevron get a foothold in Eastern Europe over the protestations of citizens.

Pretty sick stuff.

[MaggieD]

42. According to who?

You? Who in your post makes the claim that she is paying for the PAC? LOL!

[Doctor_J]

68. So you're allowed to call them facts, but NYC_SKP cannot call them lies?

[MaggieD]

69. Well since he got a very essential point wrong....

... in the post claiming the site was not factual, yeah, I think I can come to the conclusion that his idea of what is fact or not fact is not too reliable.

[Doctor_J]

54. maybe I'll post a link to a page of "facts" about JEB Bush. If the link

goes to Fox news, it's still guaranteed to be 100% factual...right?

[MaggieD]

56. Do you think Media Matters lies?

It's the same people. Maybe Bernie supporters should fact check themselves once in a while before posting.

[Doctor_J]

62. No. The link in the OP doesn't go to MM. It goes to a campaign site

A one-sided propaganda site. Maybe Hillarians should learn to distinguish between campaign sites and news sites

[MaggieD]

63. As I said, it is RUN by the SAME people