What is Hillary doing???? Making a video about politics of pile-on????

[Greenwood]

Are you kidding me?

Let's be honest here. Do these political freakin' handlers think that folks are that stupid? That dumb? That, somehow, by putting out a video saying basically that, "poor me, folks are piling on, that's not nice, etc., etc." that folks will somehow come to the realization that that is the case?

Look, it is what is it. You are the front runner. Everyone else wants to BE the front runner. It comes with the territory.

I am sick and tired of people telling me what I should think. I think what I think and don't need a video to tell me. That is insulting. It is also a BIG MISTAKE by the Clinton campaign. This will only keep the story going and make folks talk about it. Unreal.

I will vote for Hillary. But, I find it pretty sad that politcs has come to this.

[gateley]

1. What are you referring to? Thanks. nt

[babylonsister]

4. This, I'm thinking...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3669095

[gateley]

8. You're omnipresent, babylonsister - you know what's going on in every little

nook and cranny on DU. Thanks!

[babylonsister]

11. Not really; I just happened to see that a minute before I saw this thread.

:D

[calimary]

64. You didn't know she was Madam Mad-Eye Moody?

Married to Harry Potter's Defence Against the Dark Arts teacher - the one who always warned his students: "CONSTANT VIGILANCE!!!"

[Alamom]

2. ???????

What?

[Clintonista2]

23. Check the political videos forum

I posted it there.

[laststeamtrain]

3. Whining. n/t

[Greenwood]

9. Maybe I am in the minority on this but I am FED UP.....

of what I perceive as being treated like an idiot who can't decide what I saw.

Just totally disgusted.

[Bethany Rockafella]

5. Can you give us more info please. n/t

[cuke]

15. There's a video on HillaryHub.com

that shows all of her opponents obssessing over her

[Big Blue Marble]

6. That is what you call the politics of entitlement.

With this video she is not so subtly signaling her supporters that since she has already been anointed,
her opponents have no right or justification to challenge her.

[zulchzulu]

7. If there's anything I can do to help out...

:hi:

[Greenwood]

10. Try this link....

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8SKEAKG1&show_article=1

[MethuenProgressive]

12. It was sad to see Edwards and Obama act like Rove trained Republicans.

At least they didn't use the word "intern" over and over, like Mitt Romney is doing.

[jenmito]

17. Sad? What would you like them to do-just all chip in and buy her a crown?

This is a contest to get the Dem. nomination. She's not off-limits to perfectly valid criticism.

[MethuenProgressive]

19. It's sad they have nothing positive to say about themselves.

But the Karl Rove tactic of attack worked against Kerry, so it's not suprising ObamaEdwards have adopted the Republican campaign of slime and smear.

[superkia]

29. Why is it an attack when someone points out what she IS doing?

This baffles me, she tried to dance around a tough question like she normally does and she got caught up. Its a debate and all of the candidates should be held accountable for what they are saying and doing in their campaigns, why should we ignore what they are doing? We are deciding our children's future here and if you feel we should ignore the facts, you should have your right to vote taken from you because that is dangerous and how we got Bush. Kucinich had to answer a UFO question ad he did it directly and honestly, what is wrong with being direct and honest?

[MethuenProgressive]

30. What bribe did she take? What lie did she speak?

Edwards and Obama want to *hint* she's some kind of criminal, but lack the balls (yes, I said balls,)to actually come out and say it. That's Karl Rove 101.

[superkia]

39. I am very happy that I am not behind a candidate no matter what.

It allows me to see things even about my candidate that are true and obvious, for some reason there are allot of people that are unable to look at truth and fact and want to stay behind a candidate no matter what. I see it it way too much here on DU where people never address the things that are negative about their candidate, they only want to turn questions around, spin or just return with a personal attack about a fellow citizen because they point something out about their candidate. What has happened to this country when this is how people deal with truth? I don't feel like looking for some of the Clinton positions that have changed because it gets old having to do it every time something is said about Clinton. Her supporters want to see it, you find it and then they spin it to something that its not?

I think Kucincih is my best choice for who represents me and I accept that he saw something in the sky that he didn't know what it was, sometimes things happen to some people and never happen to others, I have had an experience with a ghost or something that was unexplained and most would say I'm crazy, luckily my brother witnessed it with me as well.

Good luck to America if Clinton is the nominee, she will either continue the wars or lose in the GE because America is sick of our government skipping around the truth. This is about our children's future, we need to stop looking at it as a favorite team, we are all on the American team and need the best leader, not someones favorite or popular one.

[cuke]

60. So you can't even identify one single solitary lie

There are supposedly so many, but you can't identify one

[superkia]

62. I never said "lie", you did. She doesnt speak straightforward...

enough for me. In 2002 leading up to a war that was supported by NO EVIDENCE, she took the low road and spread propaganda like Bush did instead of being honest about the situation like Kucinich did and said it was for oil.

After 9/11, we didn't need more Bush nonsense spoken by our political leaders. Clinton beating the war drums for a war with no evidence:

In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001.It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.

I have concluded, after careful and serious consideration, that a vote for the resolution best serves the security of our nation.

This is a very difficult vote. This is probably the hardest decision I have ever had to make -- any vote that may lead to war should be hard -- but I cast it with conviction.

And perhaps my decision is influenced by my eight years of experience on the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue in the White House watching my husband deal with serious challenges to our nation. I want this President, or any future President, to be in the strongest possible position to lead our country in the United Nations or in war.

THIS IS FROM HER IN IOWA IN JULY OF 2007, SHE ACTUALLY SOUNDED LIKE SHE REALIZED THE PRICE WE WERE PAYING AND WAS FOR ABSOLUTELY GETTING OUR TROOPS HOME BECAUSE LEAVING THEM THERE ONLY CAUSED MORE PROBLEMS.

As a result of these failures, the next President will inherit some of the greatest foreign policy challenges in our history. Rising terrorism and extremism. Frayed alliances. And the increasingly difficult task of restoring American leadership in a world that has come to view our nation with suspicion and mistrust.

We cannot effectively address any of these challenges if we continue our military engagement in Iraq. As long as we stay there, our military strength will continue to erode. Our standing in the world will continue to decline. Our enemies in the region will continue to exploit our failures. Our occupation will continue to serve as a recruitment tool for terrorists. Our support for Afghan democracy, our conflict with the Taliban, and our hunt for al Qaeda will continue to be compromised. And our brave men and women will continue to lose their lives and suffer grievous wounds.

HERE SHE IS IN SEPTEMBER OF 2007, 2 MONTHS LATER AND NOW SHE ISN'T SURE WHAT WILL NEED TO BE DONE. IN MY OPINION IT SHOWS HER CHANGING A ONCE FIRM POSITION SO SHE CAN STILL STAY IN IRAQ AND SAY WELL I DID SAY THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO SEE. SHE SAYS WHAT YOU WANT TO HEAR ( like she did in Iowa )AND CHANGES IT WHEN YOUR NOT LOOKING.

Asked by ABC's George Stephanopoulos whether she would withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq during a first term as president, Clinton (D-N.Y.) gave a simple answer: She did not know.

But she used more than 225 words to say so. "You know, I'm not going to get into hypotheticals and make pledges, because I don't know what I'm going to inherit, George. I don't know and neither do any of us know what will be the situation in the region. How much more aggressive will Iran have become?" Clinton said. "What will be happening in the Middle East? How much more of an influence will the chaos in Iraq have in terms of what's going on in the greater region? Will we have pushed al-Qaeda in Iraq out of their strongholds with our new partnership with some of the tribal sheiks or will they have regrouped and retrenched?"

Call this whatever you want but she isn't being straightforward with the American voting public when many see this war as one of the number one issues we face today. If she cant be upfront with this issue, how do we know what she will really do? Again, I am not going to waste my time pointing out facts about her that are out there, for some reason the Clinton supporters here on DU refuse to look at the facts, they only want to distort our spin them so I'm not wasting anymore of my time on someone that refuses to educate themselve on their own candidate. You are wasting my time by making me point out things that are out there for you, you just want to ignore them and hope that most people wont take the time to PROVE it to you. The political process of choosing who runs the country and decides our childrens future obviously is not important to you, it is to me.

Now go make excuses for why she has said the things she has, why she sounded like Bush in an important time in history, why she ignored the lack of evidence, why she continues to follow Bush's lead to Iran but slow not a rush and why she continued to fund this illegal war for this long. I am a Kucinich supporter at this time, so don't waste your time with the " but she wasn't the only one that voted for war" line, keep that one to yourself. I am finished wasting my time educating you on your own candidate, obviously you support her for some other reasons, maybe because she is a woman, maybe because you liked her husband, I don't know. I only know that I don't want anymore wars and she has not shown me anything that says she is for ending them.

[jenmito]

31. Huh? She avoided questions and changed positions and was called on it...

This had nothing to do with Rove or unfairly attacking. This has to do with not letting her get away with saying whatever she wants. She is not our nominee automatically. She has to EARN it.

[MethuenProgressive]

33. "not letting her get away with saying whatever she wants"? 1st Amendment?

She's right to ignore the sniping from the puppies. Why honor it with a response?
She has a message. why let the agendas of others get in the way of her presenting it?

[jenmito]

35. No...it's called a DEBATE...

Obama pointed out Hillary was for NAFTA and then against it, for torture and then against it, for the Iraq war and then against it. And then there's the "turn the page" line she stole from him and he pointed it out that it's a GOOD line (since it's HIS) but she's NOT turning the page by refusing to release records, not meeting unconditionally with our enemies, not telling the people what she really thinks (being straight with the people), etc. And then came the kicker when she danced around whether or not illegal immigrants should get drivers licenses.

Sniping from the puppies? She's NOT the Queen. She's a candidate. She has LOTS of merssages depending on who she's talking to and when. This wasn't a Clinton speech. It was a debate. Get used to it.

[MethuenProgressive]

36. Have you ever seen a real debate? That wasn't a debate.

That was a set-up of gotchas and leading questions.
In a real debate, Edwards would shit his pants and Obama would be lost for unscripted lines.

[jenmito]

37. Yes I have and yes it was.

Hillary's had a free ride up 'til last night. She finally got asked a couple things she didn't want to/couldn't answer and the others pointed them out. It's more than fair. "Gotchas and leading questions" are NOT what were asked. She was asked fair questions and couldn't respond.

[MethuenProgressive]

40. Sorry, I thought we were talking about the MSNBC thing last night.

You, obviously, were watching something else.

[jenmito]

44. Sorry, I thought you were living in reality.

You obviously are not. You didn't address any of my points about the questions she either avoided or changed her answer on.

ETA: I'll repost this and tell me where I'm wrong:

Obama pointed out Hillary was for NAFTA and then against it, for torture and then against it, for the Iraq war and then against it. And then there's the "turn the page" line she stole from him and he pointed it out that it's a GOOD line (since it's HIS) but she's NOT turning the page by refusing to release records, not meeting unconditionally with our enemies, not telling the people what she really thinks (being straight with the people), etc. And then came the kicker when she danced around whether or not illegal immigrants should get drivers licenses.

Sniping from the puppies? She's NOT the Queen. She's a candidate. She has LOTS of merssages depending on who she's talking to and when. This wasn't a Clinton speech. It was a debate. Get used to it.

[superkia]

41. I have realized that most DU clinton supporters cannot and...

will not recognize the facts. You can talk as long as you want about last night and they will never agree with you, they have to defend their girl at all costs. I think it was very obvious that in the DEBATE she had her biggest flaw pointed out, she has a propblem with being direct and honest, she wants to say what everyone likes so SHE can win, it has nothing to do with we the American people winning, its all about her and her agenda! Clinton was finally caught up in her word play games last night, she has been doing it for a while and America needs to know the truth at a very critical time.

Once again, give up on those people, just continue to speak as many facts about her to others and hopefully our country will have a chance at a change in direction.

[jenmito]

45. Well stated...

Her supporters are acting as if she's above being questioned or challenged! They are calling it "rape" and similar things! If yesterday's debate equalled rape, I don't see HOW she's going to survive a general election. Hopefully we won't have to find out.

[cuke]

58. But you can't identify anything dishonest that she said

all you can do is point out how you dont understand it

[jenmito]

61. From the debate...

Obama pointed out Hillary was for NAFTA and then against it, for torture and then against it, for the Iraq war and then against it. And then there's the "turn the page" line she stole from him and he pointed it out that it's a GOOD line (since it's HIS) but she's NOT turning the page by refusing to release records, not meeting unconditionally with our enemies, not telling the people what she really thinks (being straight with the people), etc. And then came the kicker when she danced around whether or not illegal immigrants should get drivers licenses, contradicting herself in a minute or two.

[tkmorris]

55. "Edwards would sh*t his pants?"

"Obama would be lost for unscripted lines"?

You disgust me. This kind of argument is just vile. There's no reason why DU has to turn into a sewer every election season.

[superkia]

63. And Kucinich would make the pro war candidates look like who...

they are. He would be able to point out that they ignored the fact that there was no evidence and instead spread war propaganda like Bush did, oh and then they continued to fund an illegal war that has killed so many and destroyed a whole country but hey, from the looks of some of the folks around here, the war and all the innocent lives mean absolutely nothing when choosing a candidate, the deaths are only talking points for some.

[Inspired]

38. HA! What a bunch of bullshit. n/t

[zulchzulu]

59. It was sad to see Clinton supporters act like Rove trained Republicans.

Any discussion of the issues is treated with crap like being called a "Hillary Hater" or whatever. Now apparently any discussion is "picking on her", "ganging up" or somehow not something men should do to poor, little gals...

:crazy:

[Bitwit1234]

13. The ones on this journal are that keep trashing her.

thinking it will build up Obama's support BUT from all I see it is eroding Obama's support.

[cuke]

14. "I seem to be the topic of great conversation and great consternation and that's for a reason,"

Love it!!

[jenmito]

16. I agree. She's the one who brags about how she's used to being attacked

by the RW. But she's crying about other Dems. pointing out her inability to answer questions directly or how she won't release records, etc.? I think it was a bad move to complain in an ad about candidates "piling on."

[superkia]

47. Clinton likes the non stop attention that has put her in the lead in...

the polls but when the attention makes her look bad, she and her supporters are angry that everyone is giving her this attention. LOL hilarious. How about the MSM completely takes her off the tv and replaces her with Biden or Kucinich, lets see where she is in the polls then, she would slowly disappear. If you try to win American idol and they don't show you on tv guess what, you are not winning! So just like that one Asian guy that was horrible but got a record deal just because of the attention he received , Clinton needs her attention or she goes nowhere. She cant rest on who she is, matter of fact she has to keep those items hidden until 2012. :rofl:

[BootinUp]

18. Why does it have to be "poor me"?

Why can't it say, I would have liked to have done less defending and more positive campaining at the last debate but this is reality.

[cuke]

27. It doesn't and it's not

It's "I took all their blows and came out fine and managed to attack bush* 25 times"

[neutron]

20. what happened was unprecedented

There has never been a debate in which the moderators AND candidates
went in for the jugular on one candidate.

The woman is not Adolf Hitler. She isn't Geroge Bush. She is a senator
and has been doing a good professional job which is why she is winning.

I don't think that being a winner has to mean being raped on network
television.

It never has up until Chris Matthews, Tim Russert and MSNBC.

I was an Edwards supporter until last night.

[BootinUp]

21. interesting comment n/t

[desi]

24. Could not have said it any better than that.

I had used another poster's description, "gang bang," to describe the debate. You have taken it a few steps further. Edwards was indeed a disappointment. Thank you and Welcome. Well said!

[Yael]

25. What exactly is she "winning"?

[cuke]

28. It's called an "election"

[Yael]

32. And exactly how many votes have been cast at this point?

[cuke]

34. And exactly what is your point?

That Hillary is losing with a majority of dems?

[Yael]

46. No winning, no losing. COMPETING

How is this so complicated?

[cuke]

56. At this point in time, she is winning

How is that so complicated?

You asked "What is she winning?"

"is" as in "What is" is the present tense. Right now, she is in the process of winning the election. No one has said "She DID win the election".

[jmp]

43. "I don't think that being a winner has to mean being RAPED on network television."

Wow! :eyes:

[themaguffin]

49. Oh please

[Debi]

50. Welcome to DU neutron

I wonder if you saw the debate in December of 2003 right after Al Gore endorsed Howard Dean. THAT was a pile-on.

As for last night...I don't think being questioned on positions, quotes and votes equals being raped. Not by a long shot.

But, it does divert the conversation. Instead of asking Senator Clinton about her record or her plans for America's future we're all bickering about who was meaner than whom and to whom. The politics of diversion.

:hi:

[superkia]

52. I think you view of things is a little off, I think she would have done...

better if she hasn't been giving people ammo. Give someone ammo and they will shoot you, she is supposed to be good at this stuff and she should have known better.

I disagree with this comment:

She is a senator
and has been doing a good professional job which is why she is winning.


She is winning because she has had non stop national advertising by the MSM and because of her husband. Take away her husband and the MSM coverage and she doesn't exist just like many of the other government officials that no one knows about.

[jenmito]

54. Exactly.

Well put!

[weeve]

22. Just pathetic ... call Hill a Waaaaaaaaaambulance someone !

One strong woman ? Because she wouldn't answer a question straight on, and flipped, then flopped. Strong ? Cagey and insincere more likely. It's refreshing to hear her finally being called out on her multitude of ever-changing positions. Better now than in the general, eh?

If, god forbid, Gore finally decides NOT to jump in ( next week I believe we'll finally know ) ... then I will campaign my ass off for John Edwards ... a straight-talker who doesn't try to pretend he's all things to all people. Actually a true Progressive who wouldn't think of enabling Bush/Cheney in their warlike ways in a million years. Unlike one person.

[Yael]

26. Thank you

:hi:

[jmp]

42. Camp Hillary doesn't portray her as a victim.

Or so her shills assure me. :eyes:

[jenmito]

48. Once again...

she wants it both ways.

[ClarkUSA]

51. The video was aimed at women in an effort "to stir sympathy"

"Her campaign sought to stir sympathy of Mrs. Clinton -– in a way that was reminiscent of what happened after she was
confronted by Rick Lazio, the Long Island Republican, in their Senate race in 2000 — by suggesting that she was the
victim of ganging-up by a stage of presidential opponents and one of the moderators, Tim Russert."

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/31/a-day-later-clinton-embraces-spitzers-license-effort/index.html

[Colobo]

53. Awwww!!! Poor Hillary! She's getting piled on!

She's so cute! Don't do that to her! :sarcasm:

[jenmito]

57. That's right. After all, t's a girl's prerogative to change her mind. And she's their girl.

Or so she says. She's really playing up the girl victim card.

[gorekerrydreamticket]

65. Yes, it seems designed to solicit sympathy....

just my opinion.