Does she not know we have a video of her landing???
The statement that she said today still doesn't match up with the video.

anyone else find her dismissal of the 8yr old girl on the tarmac a bit harsh?

I don't understand why she felt it necessary to tell that story in the first place. What kind of foreign policy experience is making one landing on a war zone under fire? How does that equate to: I'm the best choice for CIC?

When it comes down to it, McCain really didn't see much combat, either. He was shot down very early in his career and spent the war in a prison. He definitely gave his all for his country in that prison, but that's not the same thing as being in combat.

But really, what difference does being in combat make vis-a-vis who is better at foreign policy? Since when does being shot at make you smarter?

So what is the deal with this nonsense anyway? Are military people necessarily better at foreign policy? I don't think so and I don't know why anyone thinks it matters that Hilary got shot at or Hilary didn't. It has no bearing on her supposed experience.

If this is what she meant by being better able to handle the position of CIC - well, lord help us all.

THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS!! FOR HILLARY!!!

Once again,

Lets look at the timeline...

Sinbad's comments to the Washington Post on March 10th, calling into question Hillary's earlier accounts of the plane trip, created a ruckus as soon as they were published, and news of them spread throughout the news media and blogoshere almost immediately.

The Clinton campaign HAD to be aware of the new-found-doubt of Hillary's version of events, that was raised by the Sinbad story

From this point, THEY HAD SEVEN DAYS before Hillary Clinton's March 17th speech at George Washington University to LOOK INTO THE RECORDS of the flight and the landing ceremonies, both their own and those of news reports, AND CORRECT Clinton's highly erroneous earlier accounts.

But what did they do? Instead, they choose to not only stick with her original story, but actually ramped up its details.

100 REASONS NOT TO VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON

The one thing that awful about this: There's just no way to parse this. It is just so obviously a lie. And it is so thoroughly blatant a lie that any attempt to parse or correct it only further emphasizes that it was a lie.

Sorry, I can't help myself:

However, the mood upon first landing at the Tuzla airport was light. Children were there on the tarmac to greet the first lady, Chelsea was by her side, Bosnian dignitaries had gathered: It felt safe.

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/03/24/couricandco/entry3962828.shtml

I was told we had to land a certain way, we had to have our bulletproof stuff on because of the threat of sniper fire. I was also told that the greeting ceremony had been moved away from the tarmac but that there was this 8-year-old girl and, I can't, I can't rush by her, I've got to at least greet her -- so I made a -- I took her stuff and then I left, Now that's my memory of it."

Can someone cue the video? I want to see which one of these accounts is accurate. Which one is misspeaking...

"if I said something that made it seem as though there was actual fire"

IF!!!

God!!

Why can't a clinton just own up and say, I was wrong. I screwed up?!

They always, always, always, parse with, "if i said something you misinterpreted" or "if you took it the wrong way" or "if i said something that wasn't true".

who the f*#$ needs four or eight more years of this?

Just watch them spin this into something to benefit their campaign. I don't know how, but wait for it... wait for it...

Obama cannot win PA by pointing out Clinton's lies. Yes, he can win some points by calling out her dishonesty and hypocracy. But that's not enough.

Obama needs to connect on a practical level with PA. Not high-minded talk of unity or a more perfect union. But rather day-to-day economic concerns and worries. He needs to show that he has a grasp of the issues and some detailed solution plans. He needs to match Hillary on points.

He needs to connect emotionally with the working class male, ehtir fear, burden, and desire to provide for their wives and children. He needs to sound like one of them, not an Ivy Leaguer professor combo.

If Obama can win a majority of male in PA, he could win PA. It's that simple. It would put an end to the electability argument and fear that Hillary has been spreading, quite effectively I must say.

The big state argument is not convincing until PA, IN, NC, all turned Hillary. A slim popular vote majority and a few tens of pledged delegates wouldn't cut it among SDs.

No more talk about race. Focus on putting food on the table and getting sick children healthcare. Talk about social security and prescription drug benefits.

No more NAFTA talk, kitchen-sink talk, Iraq vote talk. That don't connect with working class males. That should have been painfully clear from OH.

Obama 08!

Now what's more damning: being unable to reject the pastor who introduced you to Christianity, or being unable to tell the truth about a recorded event, even when presented with said recording?

She "misspeaks" quite a bit. Let's see, Bosnia, NAFTA, FMLA, SCHIP, Rwanda, Northern Ireland, Kosovo, and her legislative record...pretty much everything her campaign is based on. A lot of misspeaks:

http://www.thepersonalispolitical.com/search/label/Mythbusting

She is so full of shit. I can see, but not agree with, arguments that Obama can't win because white people won't vote for him, or that he can't possibly do all he says, or that he is just a dreamer, but there really is no way you can say Obama is full of shit.

Clinton is totally full of shit. Sorry, no more full of shit lying assholes for president. Been there. Done that. Got the t-shirt.

Hillary, please, just sit the fuck down.

Tuzula Tess

No do-overs on the Commander-in-Chief test

Anyone going to defend her on this one? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

The GOP is gonna LOVE this in October. They don't even have to make their own Switboat ads. Hillary has made the ads for them.

I hope the Superdelegates are paying attention. She's caught redhanded in a total lie, and ends up a mockery. Sort of like Dukakis in the tank. She is toast.

It is easy to understand how this could happen while speaking 'millions' of words per day (or more than one word every 0.86s for 24 hours straight).

MILLIONS of words a day? MILLIONS of words a day? I'm sorry, but that is the most ridiculous thing I have heard coming out of a campaign in quite some time, and I include all of Mark Penn's statements in there. I say millions of words a day so not all of them can be right??? But, it's okay, MOST of them are?

I'm sorry, but words matter.

Say you misremembered. Say you lost the hard drive. But, "millions of words a day?" What kind of an excuse is that?

Serial exaggerator ring a bell?

Someone should compile a list..

Oh..Olbermann just did. Too bad Sargent was tied up on that conference call with Wolfson

KimmerDC is right,

The correct rate of speech would have to be 1 word every 0.086 seconds.

My earlier calculation must have been a misstatement.

That is the problem with bold-faced lies, err um... misstatements - they are hard to weasel out of when caught.

What really gets me on all of this is that there wasn't much reason for her to embellish. She is like a compulsive liar, lying for no reason. Yeah, cause we need more of that in the White House. The last 16 years hasn't been enough.

As Hillary says she visited 80 countries or so and has trouble remembering the exact details. Just to clarify the issue how many countries has Obama visited? None I suppose. It seems to me the whole issue is being unfairly twisted by Obama supporters, there clearly was a threat of sniper fire and attacks, there was a genocide going on there at the time.
If it had been Obama on the plane I imagine his supporters would be saying there might have been far more danger, and how much more he loves children than the monster Hillary. They would have listed every kind of weapon the Serbs were using and where, and marked on a map how close it was to the airport, where the soldiers were and how all of this could have been waiting for him.
Really the whole issue is just breathtaking in its bias and unfairness, and I can see Obama as a well qualified candidate. Why not just admit Obama supporters will grasp at any distortion and negative campaigning for him? Hillary still has nearly half the delegates and would likely have clinched the nomination if it wasn't for all the negative media and bloggers against her.
I would like to see someone make an analysis of all the pro Hillary and pro Obama posts by bloggers, it must be 99% Obama's way. It makes it very difficult for people to make up their mind fairly, the distortions are worse than anything Rove could dream up. Does Hillary get any credit for flying into a war zone with very substantial threats of snipers and missiles while Obama was probably sitting on his butt in a Harvard cafe at the time? Why didn't he join the army if his supporters are intent on turning Hillary into a chickenhawk now? Did he have other priorities?
Maybe the constant negativity by Obama supporters and bloggers is backfiring on him, has anyone considered this? It's impossible to read anything fair about Hillary in blogs, left or right. A lot of people probably see this as like the right wing attacks in the 90's and that Obama is no better than Gingrich in his tactics. I certainly don't think he is any more honest and fair than the Republicans were, since he fails to protest against his negativity and uses his aides to keep it going.
People say Hillary lost a lot of votes by her and Bill going negative. Isn't Obama losing votes with all this negativity? If I was a Hillary supporter I would be grossly offended by all this slander on her for not encountering enough sniper bullets as the Secret Service no doubt warned her might be there. If she had run across the airfield Obama supporters would be saying she was cowardly or staging it for the cameras with no snipers. If she didn't run then she is lying about the very real dangers. How many people on this forum remember exactly what they were doping on that day? No one.
I think Obama is a good talented candidate, but I seriously wonder that anyone who is behind the most negative Democratic campaign in history deserves the nomination. And don't try and tell me that he doesn't know about this latest Hillary slander and approves of it. The only good thing is he may be an even dirtier politician than Rove and this might help him when they start the swiftboating.

So I had to sign in to put an end to this. As a Bosnian I kinda know what I’m talking about. She landed in 1996. War ended in 1995, mkay? You can’t really say “we landed in Germany in 1946 under threat of snipers”, and this is same thing. I’m sure it was unusual experience and all, but there was no real danger whatsoever. BTW Tuzla was probably chosen for US Army bases because it was one of safest places in Bosnia for US soldiers. Serbs never got near to the city, and it even managed to sustain social-democratic government during the war.
Sorry for my English
Peace

Even if she had been fired at by snipers, what does that have to do with commander in chief experience? I mean, I don't even understand why America thinks that being a veteran ( ala Kerry or McCain) makes you commmander in chief material. Having been Dwight Eisenhower or Colin Powell is commander in chief experience. But having carried a rifle somewhere? Unh, I don't think so. And I especially don't think getting shot down and sitting in a prison cell gives you the right POV -- much less landing in Bosnia with Sinbad and Sheryl Crow. The whole discussion and the level of discourse is ludicrous. Are we really that stupid here?

Under all that stress in Bosnia she kept on smiling. Hillary saved her tears for New Hampshire............Hmmmmm. Post traumatic stress, do you suppose!!!!!!

I could be totally wrong but she is toast. The contrast between her bragging St. Patrick's Day speech and the tape of the event is so damning. She lied, worse she appears to believe her own lies. Clinton seems to have a problem with veracity when it is to her disadvantage. For example, we have the myth that she tuned down great corporate law jobs to follow Bill to Arkansas. Even her closest friends didn't know she had flunked the DC bar and couldn't have practiced there unless she tried again. I hate to say it, Senator Clinton has a George Bush problem. She has to go fast.

Here is how Camp Clinton will get out of this one: Hillary needs to Reject and Denounce her own story about dodging sniper fire, blame this whole farce on the media being too critical of her, ask if Obama needs a pillow, and then point out that only her and McCain have actually been under fire during wartime.

This, too, shall pass.

Obama 2008

liam:

Check out the part where she is asked about what Sinbad said. She tried to convince the reporter that Sinbad was not to be believed because he is a comedian.

I made nearly the same point on an earlier TPM thread. Someone poo-poohed my point without seeing the deeper meaning.

Do you remember when George Bush told Bill Hangley: "Who cares what you think" in 2001? Bush's statement went viral in left-blogosphere back then:

http://dir.salon.com/story/opinion/feature/2004/03/19/bush_encounter/index.html

Why?

Because Bush essential trashed a voter and a citizen. What Hillary did to Sindbad is even worse. She called him a liar. She denigrated a citizen and a voter, and an entertainer acting as a US ambassador. On top of that she now claims she misspoke about her own lies.

Think about it. What sort of person behaves like that? You judge people by how they treat others. That is the ulitmate human measure. And it is the only measure in the end that matters...

She is not kind. She is not large. She is not fair. She is a failure.

The MSM is latching onto this.

You can't lie this blatantly and get away with it.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/24/eveningnews/main3964921.shtml

With all due respect, that is the comment of the day. Sinbad for Scty. of Transportation!

This is what scares me about Hillary Clinton as CIC. She has been over killing the "I'm tough enough" concept now for years in an effort to win the Presidency. I'm sure that she feels that as a Dem and a Woman that she needs to come on strong in the Foreign policy department and this has led to several bad choices like her Iraq vote and the Iran vote last year.

I'm afraid that she will over react to her first threat, not because she is a woman or anything sexist like that; but because she is desperate for us to think that she is tough enough to be CIC.

Can somebody get a hold of that 8 year old girl from Bosnia.

Now that she's 20 years old, it'd be interesting to hear her recount of what was going on not only on the tarmac prior to Clinton's arrival, but in the surrounding city.

Also might be nice to hear what her thoughts are on Senator Clinton. I'd assume this would be a very memorable and meaningful experience to someone that age at that time in that place. To hear that her poem, which likely allowed her the spot to greet the First Lady of the United States of America, had been all forgotten and replaced with visions of danger ... on a day that was probably the safest she had known for some time.

Rather than responding to a few posts here is wht I think.
1. I think Obama and Hillary are good candidates, not perfect but good. I don't know which would be a better president, but if this fighting continues neither will be president. So it's pointless for me to support either one.
2. The Republicans are using this to their advantage, sitting on the sidelines watching Hillary and Obama destroy each other letting McCain win. The only way that stops is if both sides stopping attacking each other. You might think Obama or Hillary will give a knock out blow but it won't happen.
3. When this race started becoming negative Obama and Hillary should have agreed that whoever had the least delegates (maybe superdelegates maybe not) then the loser would be VP. The job of VP is usually ceremonial anyway. I suspect Hillary was willing to do this but Obama was not, so in that case it is his fault they are fighting like this.
4. A lot of Democrats and independants here don't like Hillary but the same ones probably hated Dubya and participated in forums like this against him. You might think McCain is better, but he seems to have the same advisors and policies. The only difference seems to be he doesn't smirk as much.
5. If you prefer McCain over Hillary, fine. If you prefer Obama then fine. I get that independants like him, I like him too. If you want Obama though you have to go about it the right way or you won't get him.
6. The race is now polarised between Hillary and Obama with few defections on either side. It is as polarised as it was between Bush and Gore. Don't expect to sway Hillary supporters with negative campaigning, it will only make them angry and maybe you will lose some of your own supporters with your tactics. The same goes for Hillary supporters.
7. With the race this polarised then whoever gets the nomination, a lot of the loser's supporters will not vote or vote for McCain. That's what polarisation has caused. Obama and Hillary are both toast unless this polarisation ends, which can only come from them compromising and joining forces. If you don't like that, then fine. Just don't expect to win if it doesn't happen.
8. Imagine if Obama was not running. Now Hillary would be the nominee and McCain's operatives would be attacking her. The same arguments Obama supporters make against Hillary are exactly what Rove would do word for word. Also the people here would have been taking my position on these issues, defending against Rove. The Obama supporters, if someone had come here and said what they say now, they would be labelled as a troll or Rove operative. The same applies if Hillary didn't run. We have seen the enemy and he is us.
9. So the whole debate has become dishonest. People are making Rove like arguments, forgetting they did Rove and Bush no good in the end. They destroyed the Republican party and they would destroy the Democratic party.
10. It's up to Hillary and Obama supporters to end this fight and tell them what you want, to beat McCain. If you prefer McCain then fine. Otherwise these attacks have to stop. Elections are decided with a small percentage of voters, so every vote counts. Nader is already taking some from the Democrats and perhaps fraudulent election machines are taking some more. McCain is already doing well against either Hillary or Obama. If you really want to beat McCain then tell your candidate to stop this fighting now. It may already be too late.

I'd also like to point out that this time ... that all the news on the political ticker at CNN ( http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS ) have zero mention, ZERO, of a presidential candidate CLEARLY caught in a meaningful, advantageous and impactful fabrication of actual historic events.

Instead, they are running headline news about an Obama backer's (already apologized and retracted) statement about Monica Lewinsky's dress and the stain left on it by former President Clinton.

Thanks CNN, for ranking the words of a far-removed supporter's statement before that of a candidate herself.

So, RJH,

"3. When this race started becoming negative Obama and Hillary should have agreed that whoever had the least delegates (maybe superdelegates maybe not) then the loser would be VP. The job of VP is usually ceremonial anyway. I suspect Hillary was willing to do this but Obama was not, so in that case it is his fault they are fighting like this."

-

WOW. Just WOW.

Because a Senator running for President of the most powerful nation on earth wouldn't allow his right hand to be given to him, because he would rather CHOOSE his running mate and closest executive advisor, its HIS FAULT for the spurious and vicious attacks that have become a part of the openly discussed "kitchen sink" strategy ?

THAT is an amazing stretch of logic.

Oh, and by the way, if Karl Rove were advising the Obama campaign .... what you would have seen thus far is constant reminders of Monica Lewinsky, Paula Jones, Roger Clinton, Watergate, Peter Paul, the largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case, etc. etc. etc.

It's alarming the number of people I know who were genuinely on the fence about Obama v. HRC up until a few months ago when this kind of crap started spewing from the Clinton campaign. You get some hints early on from WJC's remarks abut Jesse Jackson, but maybe those were honest mistakes, and then it just gets worse and worse. She's like a walking focus group -- some consultant tells her what sound bite to use (how many times did we hear the "speech he gave in 2002" line after the first time when it could just have been a slip up). But this particular brand of truth-stretching is just dumb. Once Sinbad weighed in it was time to pull the cord.

It's time for Pelosi and the Democratic heavies to weigh in hard and end this. It's getting uglier by the minute.

oh, I think Clinton has the same problem of a lot of people from her social circle i.e. well bred Ivy educated do-gooders, which is to see themselves as heroic actors on a big stage. At my law skool, the more committed to civil liberties or abortion rights or AA or whatever a professor was, the more they seemed to think their silly op-ed piece for some paper or some law review article they wrote was the last bulwark againt fascism/rollback of womyn's rights/progress for black peoples. She probably within days of her Tuzla visit had reworked that story in her mind into a heroic tale of braving sniper fire. Eh, I like Clinton, but it's an ugly, ugly aspect of her class. Me? I'm planning a trip to Grozny soon, and I've spent time in Bosnia right after the war, without a security detail, and I never feel the need to embellish the times I've come within range of danger. Meanwhile, you pussies cancel your vacation plans to France during the 1999 Kosovo air campaign.

And a funny thing about you folks. You all get weepy about our GIs in Iraq, but I can imagine none of those Arkansas and West Virginia hicks would be welcome at your tony colleges or at your swank cocktail parties.

oh, apropros of Bosnia, I see a mention of Ron Brown. Favorite joke of mine [keep in mind he went down on the approach to Dubrovnik same day as that girl Jessica McClure crashed]

Ron Brown's pilot's last words: Piece of cake, a 7 year old could do this.

Oh and I know one of you smartypants types will pipe up and say, THAT WAS CROATIA, NOT BOSNIA!!!!

"There was this 8-year-old girl, and I had to stop, even though of course that put the girl into the line of fire...."

What silliness. Why isn't that CBS video playing over and over?

oh, the crazy angry black preacher saying crazy ignorant shit sounds *a lot* more entertaining. and it says something a lot more disturbing about Obama's sensibilities than an old video that proves that Clinton exaggerates her bio a bit. Duh. As does Obama, as the NYT has reported.

Hillary has compared running for the President as applying for a job. Now imagine, you are the hiring manager interviewing a prospect for a prestigious position, and you find that one of the pillars of experience for the posistion is a falsehood. How do you respond?

"I DID NOT ACCEPT FLOWERS FROM THAT LITTLE GIRL!!!"