The girl can't help it.

[Totenkopf]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080408/ap_on_el_pr/clinton_hospital_fact_check

 

So.....if she can't keep her facts straight, can she be trusted to run the country? Handle the 3AM phone call? Does she want to lose or figure she can't no matter what?

[mimartin]

She repeated a second hand story. She should know better than putting her faith in a second hand story. You would think someone that graduated law school would know better.

 

I got excited I thought this thread was about an old Journey song from the 80s. Imagine my disappointment.

[Tommycat]

Well according to the article, there was some truth to this. The woman did have a prior incident where she had a $100 barrier to the treatment at one facility, but the other clinic would have treated her. The first clinic did charity cases. and would work out payment plans for those that could not afford treatment. The second(where she unfortunately died) would have worked with her as well, but she had insurance at the time.

 

Not to mention she retold the story as it was relayed to her. It's not really her fault that the story was not completely true.

[JCarter426]

Not to mention she retold the story as it was relayed to her. It's not really her fault that the story was not completely true.

 

She should still know better.

[Jae Onasi]

The woman had health insurance, and she was never denied treatment when she had the stillbirth and whatever medical condition that lead to her demise 2 weeks later (my educated guess is toxemia or conditions related to toxemia). The family of the dead mother has apparently asked the Clinton campaign not to repeat the story.

 

No ER can turn away a woman in labor or someone having a life-threatening emergency in any case. If they receive any federal funds (and I don't know any hospital that doesn't since all of them take Medicare), they are obliged to follow this federal requirement.

 

If Clinton was told the story was true and believed her staff fact-checked it, I'm not entirely sure how she can be held responsible for repeating it until she learned the truth.

[Achilles]

Considering how easily this story could have (and did) come back to bite her, I'm surprised that she risked telling it. Then again, she also went around telling people that she dodged sniper fire in Bosnia, even though she had to be aware that there were television cameras there at the time. Some people might take this (along with her changing Florida/Michigan narrative) as being indicative of a larger problem with truth-telling (which might also explain sagging poll numbers).

[Tommycat]

Believe me I can't stand Hil, but in this case, she stated that the story was relayed to her, not that she experienced it. I mean this is nowhere near as bad as the landing under sniper fire incident. She was honest in this case, She said, it was a story that was told to her by an officer. And the officer has stated that he told her the story.

 

Yes she should do better fact finding on stuff like that, but I'm sure you could find a real story like that somewhere. All I'm saying is give her a pass on this one. It's a non-issue.

[Corinthian]

She's a pathological liar. And it makes me giggle so. Obama makes a good way of looking like a racist warmonger, and then we've got Clinton, who lies enough to make O.J. Simpson look like Honest Abe.

[Jae Onasi]

Once she learned the true story she was obliged to stop re-telling it immediately--there's no way she can fact check everything on her own. That's what her staff is there for.

 

I've heard of, or experienced, a number of stories of people not getting care because they didn't have coverage or were worried about inadequate coverage. I did first aid for a gentleman at a very large camping event in PA--he'd broken his foot badly enough for the bones to break the skin. We tried desperately to get him to go to the ER but he refused because his CA HMO wouldn't cover out of network ER visits. Another friend of mine hurt his arm at an event and thought he broke it. He didn't want to go get it x-rayed because he was a college student with no insurance and no money. We passed the hat around at the event and raised a couple hundred dollars to help cover the costs, but if we hadn't done that, he wouldn't have gotten help. My best friend refused to go to the hospital for his severe headache until what turned out to be fungal meningitis made him fall unconscious. He nearly died that night.

 

I could probably tell you dozens of other stories in that same vein.

 

A lot of people don't get the care they need because they're uninsured or underinsured and just don't have the money to get help. It doesn't surprise me that Hilary believed the story, because with all the problems we have in the US dealing with insurance and paying for health care, something similar to this has very likely happened.

[Corinthian]

The fact remains that she should have checked up on the story instead of speaking of it like it were fact. She is, at best, irresponsible, and considering her little story about the Bosnian Snipers, she appears to be both a liar and an idiot.

[Tommycat]

As far as health care is concerned, I'm actually going to change my stance. While it appears that I have been very fortunate in getting the care I needed when I needed it, I also realize that there are cases where that is not readily available. I think we should work towards a solution that is fair and equitable, possibly a portion of your taxes going into a Health Savings Account would work for some, but I think we need to have several options other than my taxes going to pay for those that choose not to work(my same problem with welfare and how it's been abused).

[Ravnas]

She should have checked her facts anyway.To be convincing you have to know what you're talking about and as for healthcare, I'm an advocate of extending Medicare benefits to everyone. It's far more cheaper and easier to implement than universal health care.

[EnderWiggin]

She should still know better.

Bull****.

 

She heard the story from the sheriff. That's a pretty reputable source, and as Jae said, she has staff to do that work for her. This was certainly not her fault and it certainly doesn't indicate a 'larger problem.' Other things might, but not this.

 

And I'm not even a HRC-fan.

 

_EW_

[Tommycat]

Bull****.

 

She heard the story from the sheriff. That's a pretty reputable source, and as Jae said, she has staff to do that work for her. This was certainly not her fault and it certainly doesn't indicate a 'larger problem.' Other things might, but not this.

 

And I'm not even a HRC-fan.

 

_EW_

Thank you... I can't stand her, but even I have to say this is really pushing it. She has enough dirty laundry that this is very petty. There are enough reasons not to trust her. This just falls on the side of "Meh, so the story the cop told was an exageration. Big deal."

[JCarter426]

This was certainly not her fault and it certainly doesn't indicate a 'larger problem.' Other things might, but not this.

 

Didn't say it was. All I said was that she should know better than to tell stories that are probably nothing more than that, because petty people will hold it against her (while they ignore her other problems...).

[Achilles]

Thank you... I can't stand her, but even I have to say this is really pushing it. She has enough dirty laundry that this is very petty. There are enough reasons not to trust her. This just falls on the side of "Meh, so the story the cop told was an exageration. Big deal."

Considering your history of advocating personal responsibility, I find this comment a little surprising. I don't see how *her* telling of the story is the officer's fault (which seems to be the message here). Thanks for reading.

[JCarter426]

Well, I think the assumption here is that the officer was the one that stretched the truth. But we don't actually know that--not that it matters, because the more important to note is that for someone who places such importance on image, Mrs Clinton has surprisingly bad foresight (not a good quality in a president...or in anything else ).

[Achilles]

Well, I think the assumption here is that the officer was the one that stretched the truth. But we don't actually know that--not that it matters, because the more important to note is that for someone who places such importance on image, Mrs Clinton has surprisingly bad foresight (not a good quality in a president...or in anything else ).

Agreed. Anyone that has every played the telephone game in grade school knows that a story changes with each telling. Clinton was using this story in tandem with her health care pitch, just as she was using the Bosnia story in tandem with her CIC spiel, so it's not as though she was just sitting around the table sharing anecdotes: she was using this to manipulate people. Granted these two stories are different in many ways, but with regards to your observations about foresight, one can't help but think that she was assuming that no one would try to vet her story. Odd thing to assume for someone in her position.

[mimartin]

Well, I think the assumption here is that the officer was the one that stretched the truth.

Most of the time people telling a story stretch the truth to improve the story. Try taking an accident report from three different witnesses and you will see what I mean. People emphasize what is important to them or they emphasize what they feel is important to the listener. Most of the time there is no malice or illegal intent in their description of the so called facts, they are just emphasizing what they feel is important and felling in the gaps with what they believe happened. I have no problem with the police officers telling Mrs. Clinton the story. I have no problem with her retelling the story, but as a Senator and someone running for the office of President of the United States she knows everything she says is scrutinized and should have not retold the story without checking out the facts.

[JCarter426]

Granted these two stories are different in many ways, but with regards to your observations about foresight, one can't help but think that she was assuming that no one would try to vet her story. Odd thing to assume for someone in her position.

 

Exactly my point. Bending the truth and manipulating, that is forgivable (she might not even have bent the truth in this case). But believing that one can actually get away with it certainly is not.

[Jae Onasi]

The Bosnian sniper fire thing I don't cut her any slack on. That was pure BS.

 

This incident I''m going to give her the benefit of the doubt on. There are a couple reasons for that.

 

First, if (and it is a big if) a staffer told her they confirmd the story, then it's unrealistic to assume she'd distrust her own staffer. Second, with HIPPA regulations in place, it would be extremely difficult for her staff to get any medical or insurance details. The husband would have had to give the hospital permission to release information about her care and what happened, and that may not have happened right away. Third, I would be very surprised if there wasn't some kind of legal action pending with the death of the mother, and I suspect any lawyers involved would want to be extremely careful about what info got released and how things were worded.

[Achilles]

First, if (and it is a big if) a staffer told her they confirmd the story, then it's unrealistic to assume she'd distrust her own staffer. Second, with HIPPA regulations in place, it would be extremely difficult for her staff to get any medical or insurance details. The husband would have had to give the hospital permission to release information about her care and what happened, and that may not have happened right away. Third, I would be very surprised if there wasn't some kind of legal action pending with the death of the mother, and I suspect any lawyers involved would want to be extremely careful about what info got released and how things were worded.

How would the staffer confirm it if all these other points are true? The press seemed to be able to get to the bottom of things eventually, so while I have no doubt it was difficult, it was clearly not impossible. I agree with you that she should be able to trust her staffer, but the "she got it from a staffer" angle is not something I have heard before and sounds like conjecture.

 

Again, for me it comes down to "why tell the story in the first place?". It really does appear as though she was trying to pull on heart strings so that her health care system would seem as though it were fire from the gods. No other explanation would appear to make sense. Just one in a series of truthiness issues.

[Jae Onasi]

How would the staffer confirm it if all these other points are true? The press seemed to be able to get to the bottom of things eventually, so while I have no doubt it was difficult, it was clearly not impossible. I agree with you that she should be able to trust her staffer, but the "she got it from a staffer" angle is not something I have heard before and sounds like conjecture.

It's entirely conjecture--no one knows at this point who knew what and when. I'm just giving some possible explanations as reasons why I'm not ready to jump on the 'this is an outright lie' bandwagon at this point. Sure, she's lied in the past, and this story might be another example of it, but I prefer not to be unfair by leveling that accusation without proof of actual wrong.

 

Again, for me it comes down to "why tell the story in the first place?". It really does appear as though she was trying to pull on heart strings so that her health care system would seem as though it were fire from the gods. No other explanation would appear to make sense. Just one in a series of truthiness issues.

 

That's a different question from 'Is she lying about this woman's story or not.' I completely agree she's trying to pull on heartstrings and appeal to women voters in particular, and I suspect it was effective with a lot of people since she retold it for however many weeks. Have you seen her telling the story? I rolled my eyes at the melodrama.

 

Here's a different thought--would it be different for you all if McCain or Obama were telling that story?

[Achilles]

It's entirely conjecture--no one knows at this point who knew what and when. I'm just giving some possible explanations as reasons why I'm not ready to jump on the 'this is an outright lie' bandwagon at this point. Sure, she's lied in the past, and this story might be another example of it, but I prefer not to be unfair by leveling that accusation without proof of actual wrong.

Fair enough, but we do know that it's not entirely a fabrication. The real story got twisted into something it was not, but I'm not saying that Hillary was necessarily the one doing all/most/any of the twisting.

 

That's a different question from 'Is she lying about this woman's story or not.' I completely agree she's trying to pull on heartstrings and appeal to women voters in particular, and I suspect it was effective with a lot of people since she retold it for however many weeks. Have you seen her telling the story? I rolled my eyes at the melodrama.

Hillary's campaign is extremely dependent upon low-information voters. She knows this. We know this.

 

The point of my interjection was not to say that I thought she was lying, rather that being truthful (and/or accurate) doesn't matter to her.

 

Here's a different thought--would it be different for you all if McCain or Obama were telling that story?

All other things being equal? No it wouldn't be different at all. But all other things are not equal, so I think that if this story were to come from one of their camps, I might be inclined to be more or less critical.

 

For instance, McCain isn't running on a platform of universal health care and has shown repeatedly that he is willing to change his rhetoric to appear more favorable to whatever group he is appealing to at the time. Had this story been his, I probably wouldn't be as upset.

 

If it had come from Obama, I would have been a little more shocked. He doesn't share one-off ancedotes, so to do so would have seemed out of character to me. If he had a string of "Bosnia stories" in his closet as well, then I think that would be another thing too.

[Tommycat]

Considering your history of advocating personal responsibility, I find this comment a little surprising. I don't see how *her* telling of the story is the officer's fault (which seems to be the message here). Thanks for reading.

Not really that hard to believe my stance as she didn't claim it was her story. I see it as she was told a story by the officer(a generally reputable source) and she believed the story as told by the officer, hence she repeated it. If you want to fault her for it, it isn't so much a lie, as failure to follow up. At least she didn't claim she had personal experience in it.

 

Again I have enough REAL reasons to distrust her. This just comes down to her info was not accurate.

 

The woman in question did die.

Her child was stillborn.

The woman in question did have a $100 barrier to treatments(at one clinic)

The woman did have that barrier because of a lack of insurance(though she had insurance at the time of her death, and she was treated at the second hospital).

 

The officer stated that he did tell her the story AS SHE RETOLD IT(I wonder if I'm the only one that read that part of the article).

 

Again, I really dislike HRC. I would never advocate her being president(*shudders*). This is just over the top and reaching to find things to dislike her for.