Even if she did imply it - hell, even if she outright SAID it – what of it? She said what she believed to be true. The mere fact that it later proved to be untrue is not a reflection upon her integrity.
Hey, everybody! Aren’t we getting into kind of a rut here? There are many, many reasons to dislike Hillary Clinton. Why are we focusing so hard on this one relatively minor aspect? For example, I don’t like her cheekbones! And I don’t like the way she pivots around in an odd sort of gliding way when she’s trying to look elegant. And I don’t like that she’s keeping me chained to this computer.
See? There’s lots of stuff. Perhaps we could move on now.
(And don’t assail me for the cheekbones crack; we all have our imperfections you know, and if we can’t laugh at others you know who that leaves.)
SA, you’re leaving out the part where you give her credit for thinking it was nobody else’s business, and being angry at the prying into it anyway. You know, just like a normal wife would have replied? Or does the purity of your hatred prevent you from entertaining that thought? “If my recollection is accurate” is not a reassuring statement from you.
Full transcript for the intellectually honest. It’s a Google cache, the original having apparently disappeared, but there ya go.
Bricker, your calmness in making that concession is most welcome, and I’m sure I’m not the only Doper to hope you continue it.
I’m simply paraphrasing your own words, man. You wrote:
In short, all of your reasoning sounds a lot like that of a middle school brat who says “that Hillary thinks she’s like soooooo smart and stuff, but she’s soooo not! I mean, she’s such a snob who thinks she’s soooo better than everybody else, and ohmygod, you can like totally see it in her snobby face!!!” In other words, it’s not very compelling in an intellectual sense. This is probably why even your fellow conservative brethern are scratching their heads over your posts.
SA
It looks like you’re relying on stereotypes to form your opinion about the Clintons. I could easily look at Bush, with his Southern drawl and Texas roots, and suspect of him being racist and homophobic and abusive to Mexicans, but that would be rather prejudiced of me. It seems that you’ve come to a lot of conclusions about the Clinton’s lifestyle based on stereotypes and generalizations about hippies.
How can you do that and NOT expect to be called on it?
Here we go again:
The transcript shows that she was referring to the full set of allegations that were being made by the VRWC, including the murders and drug-running stuff that Falwell and Robertson were (and maybe still are) peddling on their video.
Translation: Okay, you’ve all proven me to be a hatefilled, ignorant sack of crap, but I don’t have the guts to admit it.
Bricker, your attempt to defend Hillary is admirable. You are one of the quality posters to this board and I hesitate to challenge you as a result, for I know your motives are noble.
But be that as it may, you simply don’t know, as an irrefutable matter of fact, that she said what she believed to be true. I’ve said the same thing in regard to those who behave as though Bush “lied” about WMD. Unless you’re inside these peoples’ heads, there is simply no way to know for sure whether they lied or not. Thus, we rely on observation of them in the main and our own judgement in making a determination as to whether or not they are likely lying about something. My judgement and observation of Hillary leads me to believe she was lying. It’s only my opinion, and I’ve never said it was more than that. But what you’re saying is only your opinion as well.
The fact of the matter is none of us is ever likely to know as an absolute fact whether she was deliberately trying to be deceitful or not.
So some of us will perceive her as being a dishonest manipulator, and others will simply be wrong.
(I keed, I keed. Oh, ouch, stop…I take it back.)
Oh. My. Sweet. Fucking. God. The woman stood up in front of the world and defended her marriage and her husband. But that’s not good enough, that’s not showing the family values the right is consistently screaming about, because “you simply don’t know, as an irrefutable matter of fact, that she said what she believed to be true.”
:eek::eek: Are you for fucking REAL??? What did you want her to do? Denounce her husband as a slimy dirtbag and break down in a storm of weeping? Okay, yes, I see that would have made more spectacular television, and would certainly have given her critics and haters something to feel good about, but gimme a break! She conducted herself with grace and integrity and refused to be the victim. Good for her.
Rick, I’ll add my thanks to the others. Thank you for being a calm voice of reason, it is certainly appreciated and makes up for me having to apologize to you in public a while back and eat my words. bastage.
Yeah…pretty much.
Again, I’m giving my opinion, my perception as to why she’s disliked…as requested by the OP, remember? It doesn’t necessarily have to be compelling to those who disagree and it doesn’t have to be proven. It’s simply my opinion.
They are? I hadn’t noticed.
I don’t ‘expect’ to not be called on anything. Calling each other on things is what we’re doing here. That is what I expect.
OK. Then I’ll substitute: “The mere fact that the allegations about her husband’s sexual affair with a White House intern proved to be true in no way reflects on her integrity.”
Of course. But there is another principle at play here. I agree that I don’t know, for sure, that she was telling the truth, any more than you know she was lying.
But which position should be adopted as the default, and which position has the burden of proof?
I recognize that it’s only your opinion – but in my view, even opinion requires something more substantial than, “It’s just they way I feel.” Opinion must be supported with reasonable, articulable facts. An inchoate hunch or feeling may well create opinion, but, frankly, not the sort of opinion that should serve as any sort of basis of argument.
I believe that Mrs. Clinton is entitled to the initial presumption that she is telling the truth. Her story is not inherently incredible; she is a lawyer and (now) a sitting U.S. Senator. I recognize that these precise reasons may be viewed by others as reasons NOT to trust her, but that sort of thinking is mere ad hominem nonsense. We start with the assumption that she is telling the truth, and then see what evidence exists to the contrary. Here, there is no evidence to disturb that initial supposition.
Count me in as another tip of the cap to Bricker.
She stood up in front of the world in order to try to make lemonade out of her lemon of a husband and turn the focus onto the right for the sake of political expediency.
Maureen. Please…calm down. I pointed out to Bricker that he didn’t know as a matter of irrefutable fact, etc. It had nothing to do with my doubt.
Well, I would never have expected it, but yes…it would have made me think more highly of her, and we probably wouldn’t be having this conversation today.
Refused to be the victim?? There is hardly anyone in this country I’d think of less as being a victim than HRC.
Actually, that does answer the OP. It asked why some people hate Hillary so intensely. The answer, by your example (and those of a few others) is that there is no sound, factual, logically and morally consistent set of reasons; you just do hate her, and on a middle-school level at that.
It isn’t a surprise, unfortunately.
As has every other first lady when defending her husband to the media or whoever. And she was right. The right made an orgy out of a little stain. All the while wasting tax dollars that they claim to want to stop the left from spending.
Well, I was, but DAMN! There are limits to even my bullshit meter, y’know?
Oh, c’mon. To quote Jimi, “Let us stop talking falsely, now. The hour’s getting late.” No one would have thought more of her, and a great many people would have thought less of her were she to react in any way other than the way she did. Me, for example. And just about every woman I know.
Exactly. And why do you think that is? Because of the way she carries herself. Because of her dignity. It’s probably her most admirable trait.
That all may be true. But really, when you deconstruct the reasons you have for disliking Hillary, one thing is obvious. You dislike her because you dislike her.
I don’t know if that’s the kind of answer the OP is looking for. :: shrug ::
I believe in this case, given the OP, that no proof is required at all. The OP asked for opinions as to why HRC is so reviled, and I gave my take on it.
Well, there are at least two parties involved in any argument. Any arguments I’ve become involved in here were foist upon me in response to the opinions I’ve expressed. I’ve tried to avoid arguing about it in terms of debate. Instead, I’ve simply been stating my views and, when challenged, explain why I hold them. It’s not my intent to prove my adversaries wrong, but to explain what they appear not to understand about my POV. And of course, if smacked I will likely smack back somewhat. This might be perceived as arguing, but it really isn’t. Again, I’m just stating my POV.
I would agree if we were in a court of law. But here we’re in the court of public opinon, where people are supposed to make judgements about public figures who will have an impact on the lives based upon what they glean through their own observation. My observation of Hillary Clinton, when viewed in light of what I’ve learned through my life’s experience, leads me to believe that she is manipulative and dishonest, and so that’s what I go with.
You’ve got to be kidding. You think I was born not liking her? She started out as a blank slate. Anything was possible. The impression I have of her now is one of her own creation.
Can you say d-e-n-i-a-l? Sure. I thought that you could. Now, can you say d-e-l-u-s-i-o-n-a-l? Very good.
Now try to eliminate those from your brain.
Nope, you’re not trying…
Well, guys, it’s been fun. But life and family beckon so I must bid you adieu for now.
Cheers.
Attention, please:
Hypocrisy.
Hypocrite.
Hypocritical.
And Bone is an idiot.
Thank you, that will be all.