Hillary: Bosnia Sniper Flap Not What Voters Want To Be Talking About
Hillary Clinton said in a Fox News interview shown last night that the flap over her trip to Bosnia, and previous statements that she had come under sniper fire, are not what voters want to be talking about.
"I'm a human being. I made a mistake and owned up to it," Hillary told Greta Van Susteren. "But that's not what people talk to me about. When I'm out campaigning ... people want to talk about the economy and health care, and they want to know what are you going to do to get fix our country and get it back on track, and help my family and me.
"And that what I'm really engaged in. Because, you know, when you've been on a campaign for 14 months there's all kinds of other distractions, but at the end of the day this is a hiring decision."















Owning up is when you lie, then say: "I lied. I'm sorry." Telling another lie to excuse the first one is not owning up, its covering up.
March 27, 2008 9:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
She didn't lie. She misspoke. That proves she's human. In fact, in proves she's really, really, REALLY human. Incredibly human. Disgustingly human. On at least four separate occasions, she was sleep deprived.
Either that, or she truly believes the hogwash she's been spewing. In that case, she's completely off her rocker.
March 27, 2008 1:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was talking to my friends the other day, relaying the painful, yet beautiful birth experience I had with Max. Epidural, contractions, the whole nine yards.
Oh? Max is my cat, to whom I obviously couldn't have given birth? I misspoke. It must have been Jeremiah Wright's fault.
March 27, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm really getting really, really tired of her formula that begins:
"People come up to me and ask ..."
It's how she introduces anything she wants introduced. She also uses it to evade subjects she does NOT want to talk about, as in the current case, with
"People tell me they don't want to hear about ..."
March 27, 2008 9:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's the straw person argument. BTW, the person who took the straw person argument to new heights isssss the king! She is following in his footsteps. Tooooo funny. Our only hope for avoiding a third term of the king is obama.
Mccain and clinton will give us 4 more years of same old, same old. The only difference would be that clinton would be lying about everything as she screwed us, while mccain would at least be honest about screwing us.
March 27, 2008 9:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's like a set-up for bad stand-up comics.
I also enjoy it when she says "a mother grabbed my arm and said..." She used that twice in either the Texas or Ohio debate.
March 27, 2008 9:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHVEDq6RVXc
March 27, 2008 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know that's her excuse now for staying in the race, right? "People are telling me they want me to stay in..."
Yeah, well people are also telling you to GTFO. It's very Bush-like to keep fighting a lost cause.
March 27, 2008 4:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
She went on to say that people really want to talk about Reverend Wright, that's why her campaign keeps bringing it up.
March 27, 2008 9:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
And we have decided to go with the other candidate. We will call you if we have any other openings.
March 27, 2008 9:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
She goes on Fox to do damage control? Odd.
March 27, 2008 9:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
It isn't odd, she is getting more and more comfortable with Fox News, after all, they share hyped up smear stories to use against Obama, of course they are BFF. I bet after the interview her campaign encouraged Fox to revive the Wright story again.
March 27, 2008 9:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Revive it?
When did Fox ever stop swinging that bag of cats?*
*no cats were actually harmed in this bad-metaphor
March 27, 2008 10:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
It is not odd at all. When MSNBC "newsmen" like Matthews admit they have a homoerotic crush on Obama as they get a tingling up the pantslegs while listening to Obama speak and Olbermann has special reports bashing Hillary and goes off on hour long shows insinuating Hillary had something to do about Obama's passport being breached, to change the subject right after the Rev Wright tapes were revealed, and then issues no correction when it turns out it was Obama's own campaign staffer responsible and Hillary's was braeched too. It is hard to imagine Fox could be less fair.
March 27, 2008 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
These pundits you mentioned on MSNBC represent the left wing of the Democratic party. Their setiments are widely shared by liberal Democrats who they cater too. They're not interested in pretending to be neutral, that's why we love them.
Now, we weren't totally against Hillary since day one, but the views you describe by these Liberal talking heads lately just goes to show how badly Hillary has alienated the left-side of the party. Now she's launching attacks from the Fair and Balanced, only if you're a Rush Limbaugh type, Faux News? That's borderline treason!
This isn't about being fair anymore, we're beyond tolerating these phony right-leading infiltrators in our party. We learned our leason from Lieberman.
March 27, 2008 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fits her strange pattern this week. I mean, she slammed Wright in an interview with a newspaper owned by Scaife, of all people.
March 27, 2008 9:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Scafie was all booked up yesterday.
March 27, 2008 9:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nah, I still want to talk about the sniper flap. Makes great youtube.
March 27, 2008 9:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
I totally agree.
Listen Hillary, you are wrong on this one. If there is one thing the American people never get tired of it is talking about Clinton lies.
Clinton lies are like a car wreck mingled with a soap opera. You don't want to look but you can't help it. The pattern of self inflicted destruction is so intricate, yet so simple; it draws attention like fire draws moths.
We, as a country, find ourselves glued to the TV, watching blathering fat heads, just waiting to get to that clip of Hillary or Bill talking. We wait for it, and then when it comes we point at the screen & shout triumphantly, "Ah ha, did you see? They lied again!"
This is the clownish nature of the Clintons. America waiting to be lied to, again, by people we have absolutely no reason to trust.
March 27, 2008 10:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Would you give me the links to the vid or whatever where she says she landed "under fire?" That sounds like bullets were flying around or something.
March 27, 2008 10:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Her march 17 remarks. Look it up, I am sure that you can find it.
March 27, 2008 10:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have. You don't have a link to the vid or anything?
March 27, 2008 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
http://weblogs.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/blog/2008/03/clintons_landing_under_sniper.html
"I remember landing under sniper fire," Clinton had said during a speech a week ago Monday. "There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."
March 27, 2008 11:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks. I found the vid of the speech. That's definitely what I'd call a war story. Her eye movements are even compatible with remembering as opposed to inventing. So I'd say she remembers the trip that way now. She is going to have to deal with this again in November if she gets the nomination. I'm sure McCain will use it to great advantage. Be interesting to see if it impacts the PA, WVA, KY and OR votes. I'm sure it will come up in the debates. Big gift to Obama.
March 27, 2008 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary, we luv ya. We really do. In our own weird way, we do. But you did lie repeatedly. And the lie did keep getting worse. And that's just not, uh, cool.
Plus, you weren't the first First Lady since Eleanor Roosevelt to enter a war zone. That would have been Pat Nixon in Vietnam. Oh, and Barbara Bush in Saudi Arabia.
And you weren't the first prominent American in Bosnia after the Dayton Peace Accords. That would have been the Secretary of Defense, followed a week later by your husband. Then you came along two months after them.
See Hillary, the problem is not that you "misspoke." It's that there is a really clear pattern of you just making stuff up. We don't know if you believe it or not, and that's not the point. The point is, now that you've been caught saying this stuff over and over again, the press isn't going to let it die. They're going to find out what else you've been, uh, exaggerating.
The cat, my dear Hillary, has escaped from its bag.
March 27, 2008 9:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Oh, by the way, what's the deal with that pastor? Craaaa-zy!"
March 27, 2008 9:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
She owns up to a gross exaggeration that is demonstrative of her willingness to build false images of herself but on important issues like her war vote she still hedges. I do not applaud this show of "honesty". It is merely her way of moving past a damaging revelation.
March 27, 2008 9:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Okay Hillary, let's talk instead about the whopper you told about Chelsea and the World Trade Center:
http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/2008/03/26/hillarys-other-fabrication/
March 27, 2008 9:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
...Wow. That is bile-inducing.
March 27, 2008 9:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
If there is corroborating evidence, that story would really resonate with America. Seeing as that one comes from Dick Morris, however, isn't going to go too far since he's a renowned Hill-hater.
If true, however, using 9/11 to help her own political fortunes makes her... a republican.
March 27, 2008 10:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
How about claiming that her mother named her after Sir Edmund - even though Sir Edmund conquered Everest a few years after Hillary was born.
That said, (in Bosnia or anywhere else) any mother running and ducking live fire with her daughter in tow would have a very vivid memory of the incident. In fact any mother who would even subject her young daughter to possible death by gun-fire is...
March 27, 2008 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
See
http://mediamatters.org/items/200803250010
for the debunking of Dick Morris' 9/11 story.
March 27, 2008 11:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually Hillary when you go around for 3 months touting your foreign experience, this IS what they want to talk about.
Ready on day one? 3 A.M. phone call while you are sleep deprived? What kind of judgment did you show when you chose to lie?
This is exactly what people want to tlak about, sorry.
March 27, 2008 9:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, that's funny, because I figured voters wanted to hear about Iraq and the economy when the Wright fiasco was being drug all over the media, the same fiasco you tried to revive yesterday to get the heat off your lies. Funny how you want to talk about the issues when you are being "vetted".
And since who has the "experience" to be Commander-in-Chief "on Day One" is apparently so important to you, I think the fact that you have fabricated large parts of your experience IS actually very important to the campaign.
Lastly, you didn't own up to it, you were called on it, then you disparaged Sinbad and those who were giving conflicting statements about the events, and then you lied some more. You didn't admit to "misspeaking" (what we are calling repeated lies now) until AFTER video evidence came out and you were proven to be lying. Claiming that was just a misstatement is just adding lies on top of lies.
Drop out you lying hypocrite.
March 27, 2008 9:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hey everyone -- look over there! Isn't that Rev Wright?
March 27, 2008 9:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
"...but at the end of the day this is a hiring decision."
Exactly. And I'd prefer to hire someone honest who hasn't padded their resume.
March 27, 2008 9:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
you beat me to it, mysticeti. :)
March 27, 2008 9:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
"...at the end of the day this is a hiring decision."
Yes, and that's why repeated liars are disqualified in my book.
I don't trust you, Hillary. Sorry.
March 27, 2008 9:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary Clinton is on Fox News?
With Richard Mellon-Scaife?
Bill Clinton is on Rush Limbaugh?
Yet she keeps insisting that Obama should be known by the company he keeps with Rev. Wright?
Okay, I'll go along with that. You're associating with right-wing sleazeballs and Obama is associating with a Pastor who has a tendency to go over the top when fighting racism.
I think most Democrats would say you lose this "Guilt By Association" battle. Unless of course you really think the Limbaugh/Fox News/Wingnut is your natural base.
Maybe there's something to that.
March 27, 2008 9:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Whenever she says "you, know", you know that another lie is on the way. Sheesh.
March 27, 2008 9:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Hillary: Bosnia Sniper Flap Not What Voters Want To Be Talking About"
Not what hillary wants to be talking about!
I love when candidates pretend to speak for the American people.
March 27, 2008 9:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Typical Clinton MO - I see the surrogates when called out on a lie or flap, they'll say with a phony smile on their face 'but listen, that's not what people are concerned with...they want solutions...bla bla bla..day one...bla bla...'
Let's not forget who held a fund raiser for her:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12762092/
March 27, 2008 9:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
March 27, 2008
Op-Ed Columnist
Imagined Snipers, Real Challenges
By ROGER COHEN
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/27/opinion/27Cohen.html?ref=opinion&pagewanted=print
March 27, 2008 10:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
If voters aren't interested in what happened in Bosnia, then why did Hillary keep bragging and lying about it?!
March 27, 2008 10:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
If Hillary doesn't think voters care about what actually happened in Bosnia, then why did she keep mentioning it in major speeches and policy addresses?
March 27, 2008 10:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Heh, heh. She bases her whole campaign on her supposed 'experience,' claiming to be the first person rushed to any dangerous location, Bill Clinton's expert fixer,... and now she dismisses the issue and says that's not what people want to talk about? How funny is that? Maybe we should talk about NAFTA instead? Oops! I guess that's going to be off-limits, too.
Tell me, why isn't her campaign crashing and burning? Yes, her negatives are still climbing (and THAT surprises me, since I didn't think they could get much higher), but her die-hard supporters are still hanging in there. Well, not the super-delegates, I suppose. They're just wishing they hadn't been so quick to jump on her 'inevitable' bandwagon last summer - and wondering how soon they can bail without getting on the Clintons' blacklist.
I'm getting increasingly fed up with both Bill and Hillary Clinton. We need some real leadership in the Democratic Party, and I like what I'm seeing from Barack Obama, Howard Dean, and Nancy Pelosi, among others.
March 27, 2008 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Is this GREAT NEWS for Hillary?
March 27, 2008 10:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Fox News is the the new home of the DLC-Clinton wing of the Democratic party... actually it has been for a while already... However I did notice that H Ford stepped away from his position @ Fox recently.
March 27, 2008 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, Hillary and Bill are voters, so technically she's right.
March 27, 2008 10:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
No. She lied and did not own up to it.
At the end of the day I won't hire someone who lied their ass off during their interview.
March 27, 2008 10:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Watch the beginning of the clip where Hillary said "but instead we just ran" Look at her facial expression and catch the entirely out of place giggle as she is describing what was supposed to be a life threating and harrowing moment.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHVEDq6RVXc
I bet that giggle is a tell that can be detected when ever is she is in the midst of knowingly telling a big lie. Who would honestly giggle about such a serious incident if they were telling the truth!
March 27, 2008 10:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
"And that what I'm really engaged in. Because, you know, when you've been on a campaign for 14 months there's all kinds of other distractions, but at the end of the day this is a hiring decision."
I used to work in Human Resources. We ROUTINELY called references and checked credentials and sometimes even did criminal background checks.
Anytime that ANY job candidate lied on a resume, regardless of any other qualifications they might have, that applicant's resume was tossed.
Hillary Clinton, if you're asking me to hire you for President, you're getting that form letter that says:
We appreciate your interest in the job of President of the United States, however, we've decided to go with an applicant that better met the unique qualifications for the position. We wish you the best of success in your future endeavors.
March 27, 2008 10:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Excuse me? It was Clinton who was carrying on about dodging sniper fire in Bosnia. It is a relevant issue because she has been trying to build up her credentials to answer the phone at 3 AM, be Commander in Chief from Day One, etc. Now that she has been caught with her pantsuit on fire, she wants to bury the issue. Nice try, Hillary but no cigar.
March 27, 2008 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, she is right about this voter. I have no interest in talking about her Bosnia trip. Come to that, I have no interest in talking about any of the other nonsense which she insists leaves her better qualified to be commander in chief. I am unconvinced that any of the the experiences she lists (even the real ones) makes one either more or less prepared to send American military personel into harms way, and to be frank, her (and her husband's) track record on this subject leaves me extremely disinclined to esteem her the more trustworthy person to make these decisions. Both of them (her with her Iraq war vote, him with his Sudanese bombing raids) have left me convinced that they are perfectly comfortable risking innocent lives in order to boost their own poll ratings and gin up favorable news coverage.
Yes, I would be happy to leave off talking of this subject. I wish that she would too, so that she would not force me to remember how frequently she and her husband have disappointed me. There are many good things to be said about Sen Clinton, but none of them involve her "commander in chief" qualifications.
March 27, 2008 10:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, it's as if you reached inside of my head, and articulated it on the internet for all to read.
Uhhh...thank you?
March 27, 2008 11:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
So when she argues that she should be elected president because her on-the-job CIC training includes - among other wonders of statesmanship - dodged bullets in the service of peace, we're supposed to say: Gee, that's impressive. Now let's talk about health care!
Greg, one of the chief bullet points in her CIC CV is this fabrication. It is her bullet point, not something we invented. As such, it reflects on her character. Why ignore it, when character - i.e, who will be the best leader - is about all that really divides these two candidates?
March 27, 2008 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, Blue Skies, the beauty part of American democracy is that I cast my vote for my reasons and you cast your vote for your reasons. If you want to talk about Clinton's Bosnia fantasy, I grant that you are perfectly free to do so, and to the extent that others are like you then Clinton is mistaken to say that voters do not want to talk about it. I can only speak for myself. As I said, this voter finds issues like this (and Samantha Powers, and Jeremiah Wright, and whether or not Obama really used cocaine) to be useless and silly distractions. I would rather that the race focussed on other matters more substantive. That said, Bosnia fantasy aside, Clinton has less than no "commander in chief" credibility with me, so if she really were trying to win me over to her candidacy, she would get off this subject like a cat off a hot stove.
March 27, 2008 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Some Monsters lie.
And some lies are Monsters.
March 27, 2008 10:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am a voter and I disagree with Her Majesty Queen Hillary Nader-Huckabee Clinton. I actually do want to talk about Her Majesty lying to us.
March 27, 2008 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton is no Huckabee. Huckabee at least had the class to defend Obama vis-à-vis Rev. Wright.
March 27, 2008 11:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Mrs. Clinton, when I said I wanted to see more bullets on your resume, I meant substantive talking points"
That's Hillary - ready to dodge sniper bullets at 3AM on day one.
March 27, 2008 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
C'mon Hillary, in for a penny in for a pound. Just tell us it was you, not Jackie Robinson, who broke baseball's color barrier. It was you, not Joe Louis, who ko'd Max Schmeling. It was you, not Les Paul, who created the electric guitar. It was you, not George Washington, who led America in the Revolutionary War.
March 27, 2008 11:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
That Bosnia snipers flap is not what I want voters to want to talk about.
pishaw.
March 27, 2008 11:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, where are the usual trolls?
If they don't come out to defend Hillary on this, then maybe they are really Republicans, ever think of that?
March 27, 2008 11:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
They are hiding out behind the circled wagons with the other Taylor Marshians where they have gone beyond quoting and praising Limbaugh, O'Reilly and Faux News..... yesterday they were copying and pasting and agreeing with Karl Rove's talking points about Obama.
March 27, 2008 12:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary: Bosnia Sniper Flap Not What Voters Want To Be Talking About
Gee thanks Hiilary, but you do want to keep talking to them about a church that you have never been in.
March 27, 2008 12:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is this wishful thnking, delusion, or another lie. Because people are clearly entertained by this one.
March 27, 2008 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
It amazes me that Hillary seems to think that because she says it, it must be true. If voters DIDN'T want to talk about it, then why are they? Why has the issue caught such fire? In the same way that, at the time, voters wanted to talk about Rev. Wright, voters now want to talk about the fact that she blatantly fabricated the entire story. Out and out lied.
I agree, let's talk about the issues like health care, the economy, and national security (among other things), but honestly, at this point, we've heard it time and time again. I know where Hillary stands on all those issues. I know where Obama stands. And as long as it's between the two of them, I don't really need all that stuff reiterated to me. I think many voters are on the same page. Let's be realistic: do I want to hear another 20-minute speech about why Hillary's health care plan is the best, or do I want an explanation as to why she lied to me? Honestly, I'll pick the latter. And until I get an honest answer, I doubt I'll stop talking about it. I don't think I'm the only one.
March 27, 2008 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Because, you know, when you've been on a campaign for 14 months there's all kinds of other distractions, but at the end of the day this is a hiring decision."
Yeah, Hillary, that's right: it's a hiring decision. And we were really hoping to hire a congenital liar. That's why the ad says, "Seeking liar-in-chief."
March 27, 2008 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink