The girl can't help it.

[Achilles]

If you want to fault her for it, it isn't so much a lie, as failure to follow up.

Right, she repeated something that wasn't accurate and didn't take any steps to ensure the accuracy/truthfulness of the story before repeating it. You still seem to be maintaining the argument that this is somehow the officer's fault and making light of her responsibility to know what she was talking about before opening her mouth.

[Tommycat]

Right, she repeated something that wasn't accurate and didn't take any steps to ensure the accuracy/truthfulness of the story before repeating it. You still seem to be maintaining the argument that this is somehow the officer's fault and making light of her responsibility to know what she was talking about before opening her mouth.

Same reason I wouldn't hold you accountable for something you quote from another source(so long as you not that it is from another source). I don't hold people accountable for quoting other people and believing it, I hold the source accountable for not being factual.

 

I'm not faulting the officer. HE is. He has accepted responsibility for the exagerations. Why can't you let him take the responsibility he is willing to take?

[Achilles]

Same reason I wouldn't hold you accountable for something you quote from another source(so long as you not that it is from another source). I don't hold people accountable for quoting other people and believing it, I hold the source accountable for not being factual.

So I could just...quote whatever I want and never have to bear any responsibility for the accuracy of what I repeat? Again, this would seem to fly in the face of everything I've ever heard you say about personal responsibility, but then again it may just be that you and I define "personal responsibility" in different ways.

 

I'm not faulting the officer. HE is. He has accepted responsibility for the exagerations. Why can't you let him take the responsibility he is willing to take?

Because it's a completely separate, unrelated issue. His telling Hillary the story is one action. Her decision to repeat it in a public forum, without making any kind of effort to vet the story first, is another. Whatever circumstances preceded her choice are completely irrelevant to the argument. No one held a gun to her head and forced her to tell the story. *She* made a choice to repeat what she heard. So his "accepting responsibility" is really a non-issue.

[Da_man]

This is why I'd vote for Obama over Clinton, if I could vote. She totally blew the story waaaaaaaaaay out of proportion. Can we really trust someone as president when they can't get the facts straight, and lets not start on Bill. Granted, it did come from a police officer, be she should have had the common snse to look it up to some degree.

[Tommycat]

Look, I still don't trust her. I'm not absolving her of all responsibility. This is just being blown WAY THE HECK OUT OF PROPORTION. I'm not going to defend her as a person. I dislike being on this side of it. Why is it that someone like myself that hasn't been able to stand her nor her husband is sitting here defending her? Heck I'm not even a democrat. I'm a Republican, and I'm defending her in this instance.

 

This is no big deal. Sure the story is an exageration. Sure she should have checked it better. I just don't see this as that bad compared to some of the whoppers she's already told.

[Achilles]

I just don't see this as that bad compared to some of the whoppers she's already told.

I would tend to agree with you. My intention was never to compare "this to that". I do think that this is part of a pattern of behavior though, which has been my argument all along.

[Tommycat]

I would tend to agree with you. My intention was never to compare "this to that". I do think that this is part of a pattern of behavior though, which has been my argument all along.

Then I guess we're more or less in agreement. Yeah she has a habbit of not verifying her stories, and it would be very scary to have her in power, this just isn't that big of a deal, and is closer to the truth than most of her other silly comments.

[Totenkopf]

I think the whole flap just generally speaks to her seemingly indiscriminate sloppiness. It doesn't compare to the many lies she's told over the course of her "political career", but reflects poorly upon her, especially in a situation where others WILL check the veracity and/or accuracy of her public statemements.

[Corinthian]

Hey, no sense getting mad over this - even if she did lie, at least she lied about something plausible. Focus on her little story about the Bosnian Snipers instead.

[Totenkopf]

No need to tell me twice. I've no intention of voting for her regardless. Don't much care for marxist/socialist control freaks.

[Corinthian]

Amen. Even if I could vote, I'd rather vote for Nader than Hilary.

[Tommycat]

Amen. Even if I could vote, I'd rather vote for Nader than Hilary.

If those were my only two choices, I'd write in Mickey Mouse

[Totenkopf]

Foghorn Leghorn would be more entertaining at least.

[Q]

Hillary will never be president.

 

Why? Because she isn't Bill. She can't just say "I didn't inhale" and make people laugh at the ridiculousness (is that a word?) of such a statement and then forget about it. She just lacks the charisma.

 

I agree that this is rather mild compared to the whole "snipers in Bosnia" thing, which was a lie. The reason that this is being over-hyped is because she's already been caught telling whoppers like that.

[Corinthian]

All the more reason to pray Operation Chaos has it's desired outcome and Hilary miraculously gets the Democrat Nomination.

[Jae Onasi]

Oh, Lordy, Operation Chaos is such a farce. Like Rush is actually going to have enough power to make zillions of people vote for her in the primaries so she can win the nomination. That gives Rush way too much credit. It is highly likely Hillary will lose. She'll have to do something spectacular, and Obama will have to have some incredibly ugly skeletons come out of his closet, in order for her to win the nomination.

[SilentScope001]

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

 

Still supporting Clinton though for the Democratic Nomination. It's just a lame story. I'm willing to allow for a candinate to make this sort of mistake if I trust her to be compentent. But you have to be realistic and admit she only got a 17% chance of winning the nomination (that's due to the presidental stock market).

 

However, there are many posts that indicate that Clinton has a chance of winning the popular vote. So I'm going to make a prediction: Clinton will stay in the race, winning Penn., lose a couple of other states, and then come in from below to win the Popular Vote by winning the 51st state of Pureto Rico.

 

Then, she will still lose the nomination because everyone will be laughing at Pureto Rico.

[Corinthian]

Given how unpopular Hilary is, her getting the popular vote by winning Puerto Rico is about as likely as Osama Bin Laden converting to Judaism and turning himself in.

[Da_man]

What's funny is that while i'M reading this, there is an ad asking to vote for a popularity poll about Hillary.

[Web Rider]

you know what's sad? This topic is the embodiment of how easily people get distracted from important matters and focus on the bogus media-overblown nothings.

[Corinthian]

Rush's only real objective is to prolong the Democratic Primaries as long as he possibly can so they'll sling plenty of mud at each other, not to mention make a series of dumb statements or have more psychotic Reverends show up.

[True_Avery]

I always find it amusing when people are surprised at politicians. Republican, Democrat, Liberal, Conservative. Everybody who runs for office blows things out of proportion. They all will take advantage over each others mistakes to get ahead. They will all try and find back doors, or find a juicy story to back their own message.

 

People an going to knock on Hilary for these two stories, and it is going to hurt her.

 

Obama's reverend is going to hang over his head like a bad raincloud for a very long time.

 

If I knocked on every politicians for blowing a story out of the water, then I would have zero people in our fine government to rely on even a tiny, tiny bit. If I hated a politicians every time they took a story to back their own message, then I would hate every single last one of them utterly and completely. Don't put yourself into denial by saying there is an honest person running for president.

 

I also find it terribly amusing that people are knocking on Obama for his reverend. I have racist family members. I have family members from all sides of the political spectrum. I have some friends and acquaintances who say some awkward things. Do I just dump them on the side of the road after all these years? I wouldn't. They are still my friends and family, even though I don't see eye to eye with them on a lot of things.

 

Want to bash Obama for being understanding about his Reverend? Then name every friend, family member, acquaintance that has said something awkward or just plain mean and maybe I'll bag on you for awhile. Beating on someone because someone they know is a little crazy is silly, in my opinion.

 

In my opinion, Hilary can't win the nomination. Obama will get the nomination, but doesn't have the vote to beat McCain because he doesn't have the older vote. No real biases against any of them, but that is just how I see it happening. I still think its pretty amazing a woman and an African-American have gotten this far. They may not win, but they got pretty close.

 

You know what's sad? This topic is the embodiment of how easily people get distracted from important matters and focus on the bogus media-overblown nothings.

Gotta love the media and all the people who follow like, well..., followers.