HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Why does Hillary's hypocr...

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 05:25 PM

Why does Hillary's hypocrisy on gun control get ignored?

Hillary criticizes Bernie for his having taken the position in the past, as a senator representing a rural state, that federal gun control laws need to accommodate the rights of rural citizens. That is exactly the same position Hillary herself has taken in the past!



Philadephia 2008
CLINTON: What I favor is what works in New York. You know, we have a set of rules in New York City, and we have a totally different set of rules in the rest of the state. What might work in New York City is certainly not going to work in Montana.

So for the federal government to be having any kind of, you know, blanket rules that they're going to try to impose I think doesn't make sense.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But, Senator, you were for that when you ran for Senate in New York.

CLINTON: I was for the New York rules; that's right. I was for the New York rules, because they have worked over time. And there isn't a lot uproar in New York about changing them, because I go to upstate New York, where we have a lot of hunters and people who are collectors and people who are sport shooters. They have every reason to believe that their rights are being respected.

You walk down the street with a police officer in Manhattan, he wants to be sure that there is some way of protecting him and protecting the people that are in his charge.


Valparaiso, Indiana 2008
“I disagree with Sen. Obama’s assertion that people in our country cling to guns and have certain attitudes about trade and immigration simply out of frustration,” she began, referring to the Obama comments on small-town Americans that set off a political tumult on Friday.

She then introduced a fond memory from her youth.

“You know, my dad took me out behind the cottage that my grandfather built on a little lake called Lake Winola outside of Scranton and taught me how to shoot when I was a little girl,” she said.

“You know, some people now continue to teach their children and their grandchildren. It’s part of culture. It’s part of a way of life. People enjoy hunting and shooting because it’s an important part of who they are. Not because they are bitter.”

Minutes later, in a slightly awkward moment, Clinton faced a question from a woman in the audience whose son had been paralyzed by a gunshot. The woman asked Clinton what she would do about gun control as president.

Clinton touted her husband's record on gun control during his administration, and said "there is not a contradiction between protecting Second Amendment rights" and the effort to reduce crime.

Noting that many hunters and gun collectors want to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals, Clinton referred to her positive childhood experiences with firearms.

"As I told you, my dad taught me how to shoot behind our cottage,” she said. “I have gone hunting. I am not a hunter. But I have gone hunting."
Clinton said she has hunted ducks.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/04/12/clinton-touts-her-experience-with-guns/

And she was more than willing to accept Senator Harry Reid's endorsement in the Nevada caucuses last month despite the fact that Harry Reid has been one of the NRA's best Democratic friends in Congress for most of his career.

December 2012
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is a gun man, always has been....

Guns, their role in everyday life and the extent to which that right is protected by the Second Amendment were matters Reid simply didn’t question, according to those who worked with him — not after Columbine; not when the assault weapons ban expired (he’d voted against it); and not after Virginia Tech, the country’s deadliest single-shooter assault, happened in the first year of his majority leadership in the Senate.

“I haven’t seen him spend a lot of time wrestling with this issue over the years,” said a former aide who was close with Reid. “In years past he’s largely ended up toeing the NRA line. But I’m not convinced that’s going to happen this time.” ...

Reid has maintained a “B” average NRA rating, pretty high for a Democrat, and although he has never received the NRA’s endorsement in a Senate race, he usually receives its money — even rarer for a Democrat.

Reid voted against the assault weapons ban; applauded the Supreme Court’s recent pro-gun decisions in District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago; and worked closely with the NRA to promote gun sports, such as securing federal funding for the Clark County Shooting Range.
http://lasvegassun.com/news/2012/dec/28/harry-reid-may-have-change-his-tone-gun-control/



Just a reminder: Harry Reid has had a B rating from the NRA; Bernie's had a D rating.

Hillary also doesn't seem to have any problem taking money from people who have made their money lobbying against gun control measures.
https://theintercept.com/2016/03/01/nra-lobbyist-will-co-host-clinton-fundraiser/

56 replies, 2003 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 56 replies Author Time Post
Reply Why does Hillary's hypocrisy on gun control get ignored? (Original post)
TheDormouse Mar 2016 OP
jeff47 Mar 2016 #1
ibegurpard Mar 2016 #2
Attorney in Texas Mar 2016 #3
nc4bo Mar 2016 #4
Marr Mar 2016 #6
Zira Mar 2016 #27
DanTex Mar 2016 #5
amborin Mar 2016 #11
DanTex Mar 2016 #12
amborin Mar 2016 #13
DanTex Mar 2016 #14
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #17
DanTex Mar 2016 #19
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #21
DanTex Mar 2016 #23
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #25
DanTex Mar 2016 #26
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #29
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #15
DanTex Mar 2016 #16
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #18
DanTex Mar 2016 #20
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #22
DanTex Mar 2016 #24
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #28
DanTex Mar 2016 #30
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #31
DanTex Mar 2016 #32
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #33
DanTex Mar 2016 #34
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #36
DanTex Mar 2016 #37
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #38
DanTex Mar 2016 #39
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #40
DanTex Mar 2016 #41
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #42
DanTex Mar 2016 #44
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #45
DanTex Mar 2016 #46
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #47
DanTex Mar 2016 #48
beam me up scottie Mar 2016 #49
cosmicone Mar 2016 #7
TheDormouse Mar 2016 #9
thereismore Mar 2016 #8
sadoldgirl Mar 2016 #10
Zira Mar 2016 #35
w4rma Mar 2016 #43
Doctor_J Mar 2016 #50
TheDormouse Mar 2016 #53
snagglepuss Mar 2016 #51
merrily Mar 2016 #52
TheDormouse Mar 2016 #54
blueintelligentsia Mar 2016 #55
senz Mar 2016 #56

Response to TheDormouse (Original post)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 05:31 PM

1. Because her supporters do not care, and

those who do not support her are well aware of her hypocrisy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 05:31 PM

2. this

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 05:32 PM

3. exactly

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 05:36 PM

4. +100. Lower than a snake is how she rolls.

I don't know if she has a single shred of integrity in her. Her campaign sure doesn't have much.

She's the ultimate opportunist in my eyes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 05:43 PM

6. That's it, yep. +1

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:54 PM

27. Nailed it. Sometime people support a candidate so much that they don't care about

 

the bad stuff, even when it's what they've been against all the time before that candidate ran.

Either that or there are a whole lot of Neo Cons in America.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheDormouse (Original post)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 05:38 PM

5. LOL. She's the better candidate on guns by a mile, and Bernie not only voted against Brady,

but also voted for the horrific gun industry immunity bill.

Pick your battles more wisely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #5)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:15 PM

11. Bernie doesn't fund raise with NRA lobbyists

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to amborin (Reply #11)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:27 PM

12. He does their bidding out of love...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #12)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:38 PM

13. you are distorting his record; and defending someone who takes $$$ from the NRA

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to amborin (Reply #13)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:39 PM

14. Hillary doesn't take money from the NRA. That's a lie.

But Bernie's record of pro-NRA votes is very clear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #14)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:46 PM

17. Yep, years of F grades and a D minus lifetime rating.

Unless you don't know how the grading system works it's clear as a bell he's always been firmly pro-gun control.

Stop being deliberately obtuse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #17)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:47 PM

19. So much faith in the NRA ratings from Bernie fans. I can tell how much you respect them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #19)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:49 PM

21. You really don't understand how grades work, do you?

Sounds like something a kid would say, just because you don't like your school doesn't mean that D minus is irrelevant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #21)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:50 PM

23. I do. And I also know how the NRA works.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #23)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:52 PM

25. Anyone who thinks they don't research candidates before rating them is clueless.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #25)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:53 PM

26. Anyone who thinks their ratings are indicative of being strong on guns is, well, a BoB.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #26)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:55 PM

29. Anyone who dismisses them is a liv. Or just pretends to care about the issue.

Or both.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #5)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:43 PM

15. FIFY: She PRETENDS to be better - this time. If she gets to the ge Annie Oakley will flip flop again

Her positions aren't much different than Bernie's and she's already toned down the rhetoric because she knows she'll need to pander to gun owners again like she did in 2008.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #15)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:45 PM

16. So she "pretended" to vote against the gun industry immunity? LOL.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #16)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:47 PM

18. She pretends to be anti-gun, only her most gullible supporters actually believe it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #18)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:48 PM

20. So her vote against immunity was "pretend". You're doing great! LOL.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #20)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:50 PM

22. You can't even properly construct a strawman and you expect people to take you seriously?


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #22)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:51 PM

24. I don't expect Bernie or Busters to take me seriously. Or any other Trump fans, for that matter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #24)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:55 PM

28. Well that's probably a good thing because you make it impossible. Although you are amusing.

Watching you flail around when you get caught is hilarious.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #28)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:56 PM

30. I welcome the hatred of the pro-Trump contingent here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #30)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:57 PM

31. Don't flatter yourself, you're not important enough to hate. Relax, we're laughing not hating.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #31)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:57 PM

32. I dunno, you seem pretty worked up...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #32)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:59 PM

33. It only seems that way to you because I destroyed your arguments.

Nothing personal, I just enjoy bringing facts to the table.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #33)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:00 PM

34. Dunno about that! I sense animosity... Personal attacks... lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #34)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:02 PM

36. Tsk. There goes that imagination again. It's okay the bad ole bmus won't hurt you.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #36)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:03 PM

37. Just sayin'... you got the smilies going and everything. I gotta a feeling...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #37)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:06 PM

38. Well your "feeling" led you to accuse me of being part of the "pro Trump contingent".

And then let you accuse me of personally attacking you with absolutely no sense of irony or self awareness.

So that "feeling" of yours?

It's called projection.

mwah!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #38)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:07 PM

39. That's actually a description, not an accusation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #39)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:10 PM

40. Sure and if I describe people who personally attack others while whining of being flaming hypocrites

(among other things) that would be a description too.

But I'm not the one "describing" others here. That would be wrong.

You have a nice say, now, Dan!


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #40)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:11 PM

41. Hey, if I were pro-Trump, I'd own it. YMMV.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #41)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:15 PM

42. How do we know that, because you say so? Colour me skeptical.

Your posting history and attacks on other liberals could certainly give people pause.

But if you say you're not a Trump humper Dan I'll believe you.

Really.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #42)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:17 PM

44. It's my style. I don't pretend.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #44)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:18 PM

45. Like you pretended you didn't accuse me of being a "Trump fan"? Sure Dan, whatever you say.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #45)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:20 PM

46. That wasn't pretending.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #46)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:22 PM

47. Sure, I totally believe you. Seriously. I mean why wouldn't I?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #47)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:23 PM

48. I'm furious! I'm like a Bernie Bro! Should I start using all-caps?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #48)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:27 PM

49. Sure, why not? I mean it's not like it would damage your credibility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheDormouse (Original post)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 05:47 PM

7. Meh ... another hit piece fail n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cosmicone (Reply #7)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 05:59 PM

9. Is anything in the OP untruthful? if so, please point it out

and I will edit it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheDormouse (Original post)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 05:50 PM

8. Hillary Clinton: Champion of hunters. Right. This was her Annie Oakley phase.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheDormouse (Original post)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 06:04 PM

10. No matter, what she says now,

i want to compare it to what she will say when
she campaigns in Montana, for instance, should
she become the nominee.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheDormouse (Original post)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:01 PM

35. She hunted ducks?

 

I couldn't do that when I was a child. I would have had nightmares and guilt for the rest of my life.

My dad also couldn't have done that. Thank goodness he had kids who couldn't.

I don't think father and daughter sharing killing moments is a good idea. And, I look forward to that man who grew meat in a petri dish to ending the whole kill animals for food industry, hopefully sooner in our future than later. That is his intent and he found over a million in backing. I'm glad they are working on it. I've been a vegetarian since my early 20's.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheDormouse (Original post)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:16 PM

43. Because, who the hell knows what she supports on non-economic issues, from day-to-day?

 

Her only policy consistency is her support for anything that her big donors want.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheDormouse (Original post)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:27 PM

50. Because it's the ONLY issue on which Clinton is as progressive as Sanders, and of course she'll

 

probably run back to the right as soon as the primary is over. It keeps them from having to talk about this

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #50)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:57 PM

53. great image--sums their differences up very well; How can anyone read that

and not be able to decide who to support?

(And btw she is already running back to the right, now that she thinks she has the party nomination locked up.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheDormouse (Original post)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:36 PM

51. knr

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheDormouse (Original post)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 07:44 PM

52. Why can't you supporters of Bernie let

Hillary [strike]devolve[/strike] [strike]revolve[/strike] evolve in peace whenever she determines evolving to be necessary and appropriate to becoming the first woman President?

That is the kind of deference and authority she granted Dummya to invade freakin' Iraq, but you supporters of Sanders can't grant it to a member of your own Party so she can become the first woman President? Shame!

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) Authorization.--The President is authorized to use the Armed
Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and
appropriate i
n order to--
(1) defend the national security of the United States
against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council
resolutions regarding Iraq.

(b) Presidential Determination.--In connection with the exercise of
the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President
shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible,
but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make
available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the
President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that--
(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or
other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately
protect the national security of the United States against the
continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to
enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council
resolutions regarding Iraq; and
(2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent
with the United States and other countries continuing to take
the necessary actions against international terrorist and
terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations,
or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the
terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

(c) War Powers Resolution Requirements.--
(1) Specific statutory authorization.--Consistent with
section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress
declares that this section is intended to constitute specific
statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of
the War Powers Resolution.
(2) Applicability of other requirements.--Nothing in this
joint resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers
Resolution.

SEC. 4. REPORTS TO CONGRESS.

(a) <<NOTE: President.>> Reports.--The President shall, at least
once every 60 days, submit to the Congress a report on matters relevant
to this joint resolution, including actions taken pursuant to the
exercise of authority granted in section 3 and the status of planning
for efforts that are expected to be required after such actions are
completed, including those actions described in section 7 of the Iraq
Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338).


I'm sure someone will explain to me, when he or she has time, which part of the above authorization Bush violated. Meanwhile, I have trouble voting for moving goal posts. Hell, I even have issues when DUers move them, let alone someone running for POTUS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #52)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 08:58 PM

54. lolol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheDormouse (Original post)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:00 PM

55. shhhhhhhh......n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheDormouse (Original post)

Wed Mar 30, 2016, 09:19 PM

56. Remember what Obama said...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread