Remember Gore and the head of FEMA and Texas?
Everyone knows this BS is getting out of hand, and I doubt very seriously if either Obama or Clinton win they'll listen to anything in the blogosphere when they do.
Posted by EZSmirkzz at March 23, 2008 11:11 AMShe "mis-remembered"? Interesting way to characterize a lie. Clinton has touted her "experience" as first lady throughout this campaign. Apparently that "experience" cannot stand on it's own and a little embellishment has become necessary. Unfortunately for Sen. Clinton, she's been caught with her hand in the Tuzla cookie jar.
Interesting as well, the way you state, "I am giving her as much benefit of the doubt as I give to Sen. Obama." Then, for the balance of your piece, you go on to question Obama and his book after giving nothing more than a couple dismissive sentences to the Tuzla controversy. Ignoring it will not make it go away.
Posted by Upton at March 23, 2008 11:36 AMI'm thinking making shit up about being shot at is a little more problematic than forgetting the
name of a FEMA official, especially when there actually WAS a FEMA official!
Bullets flying while you run to a vehicle would be pretty hard to forget if it really happened.
But wait, I just forgot where I was when JFK was assainated so maybe we should all give Hill a pass................
Posted by chaz at March 23, 2008 11:41 AMOf course, Republicans NEVER have the problem of lapse in memory because, well, IOKIYAR.
Posted by ROGNM at March 23, 2008 11:45 AM[sarcasm]Oh, yeah, Hillary just "mis-remembered" the Bosnian incident.[/sarcasm] Because there was NO Bosnian incident. She made this shit up, Eriposte, and you know it. If this were Obama making this shit up, Eriposte,you'd be the first one out there with the 2 x 4's, hammer and nails. Where's your intellectual honesty, Eriposte?
Posted by Brian Bell at March 23, 2008 11:49 AMThis is just becoming sadder and sadder by the day.
Posted by jcricket at March 23, 2008 12:01 PMWhat's with the weird, obsessive use of bolding, Brian Bell?
Posted by otherlisa at March 23, 2008 12:22 PMSo when Obama misstates something it is an honest mistake, but when Clinton misstates something it is an intentional lie. Real consistent there ...
Posted by jwrjr at March 23, 2008 12:34 PMMis-remembered being shot at?!
Come on Eriposte, you are giving Clinton way too much of a pass on this one. Being shot at is one of those things that you would most certainly remember, likely very vividly, for the rest of your life.
Plus had the First Lady every actually been shot at, particularly with media present at the event, we'd have heard a ton about it in the media. Fact is we didn't and clearly that didn't happen at this event. As far as I'm concerned it's reasonable to state that she never dodged sniper fire, ever.
To me the question simply is this. Is Hillary knowingly making this up and lying or worse is she delusional and really believe this happened?
I challenge you or any Hillary supporter to find me a documented incident of Hillary running from sniper fire from an aircraft to a car in any country, ever. Until such an event is found this isn't a mistake of memory. Because there is no memory of the event to confuse.
Posted by Siberian at March 23, 2008 12:35 PMObama and "Ray" are two adults having different recollections of emotional conversations they had decades ago when they were teenagers. Hillary is "misremembering" being targeted by snipers.
Can anybody with a shred of intellectual integrity compare the two?
Look, the central theme of Hillary's campaign is that she is more experienced than Obama. (Unwisely, IMHO. She would have been wiser to target him as a triangulating, Liebermanesque, Unity '08 candidate. But anyway...) OBVIOUSLY she is desperate to pump up every last bit of experience that she got as First Lady.
I don't blame her. But she got busted. Let's say "well played, Obama" and move on.
Posted by space at March 23, 2008 12:38 PMWellll... ummmm..
...at least you didn't DEFEND her.
(Sorry, best I could come up with Eriposte.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=It6JN7ALF7Y
Posted by GreenVTster at March 23, 2008 12:41 PMIt is clear Hillary lied about the "sniper" fire while landing in Tuzla. I cannot see how you can defend this "true lie".
Posted by a4L at March 23, 2008 01:11 PMRev. Otis Moss: “No one should start a ministry with lynching, no one should end their ministry with lynching. The lynching was national news. The RNN, the Roman News Network, was reporting it and NPR, National Publican Radio had it on the radio. The Jerusalem Post and the Palestine Times all wanted exclusives, they searched out the young ministers, showed up unannounced at their houses, tried to talk with their families, called up their friends, wanted to get a quote on how do you feel about the lynching?”
Roman News Network?
Oh yeas, at this silly church, white people are Romans and blacks are Jesus.
Obama attended for 20 years?
Post racial?
Uniter?
It is time for the junior Democratic senator from Illinois to grow up and quit blaming the color of his skin for every problem he thinks he has.
Come on Barry grow up.
Posted by peter at March 23, 2008 01:15 PMWhy would Hillary lie about something so easily debunked? She explained about the security set in place on the plane and that the planned ceremonies were cut short. One of those links talks about her book telling of meeting with the kid and getting a poem. Sinbad may not have been told of all the risks involved as the Secret Service was concerned with Hillary and Chelsea foremost - you know, maybe he and whoever woulda insisted on being in the minimal armored area of the plane causing possible mayhem. National security and all.
Posted by Sharon at March 23, 2008 01:21 PMhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=It6JN7ALF7Y
Sharon, it not just a comedian it the Baltimore Sun and Washingto Post calling her a liar. How does moving in to the airplane cockpit have to do with "running to car and not greeting ceremony."
Posted by a4L at March 23, 2008 01:27 PMHillary: the Wal-Mart years by Brian Ross/ABC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtdwcbqeE5s
Posted by tfitznc at March 23, 2008 01:30 PMHillary not lying about her Bosnia trip, is like W saying "Mission Accomplished."
Posted by a4L at March 23, 2008 02:52 PMClinton's comments were made in apparent reference to something said by former Secretary of the Army, Togo West. Does anyone have a link to West's introductory remarks? He was the one who first mentioned the Bosnia trip. See here.
Good morning. I want to thank Secretary West for his years of service, not only as Secretary of the Army, but also to the Veteran’s Administration, to our men and women in uniform, to our country. I certainly do remember that trip to Bosnia, and as Togo said, there was a saying around the White House that if a place was too small, too poor, or too dangerous, the president couldn't go, so send the First Lady. That’s where we went.Posted by tree at March 23, 2008 03:43 PMI remember landing under sniper fire. 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. But it was a moment of great pride for me to visit our troops, not only in our main base as Tuzla, but also at two outposts where they were serving in so many capacities to deactivate and remove landmines, to hunt and seek out those who had not complied with the Dayton Accords and put down their arms, and to build relationships with the people that might lead to a peace for them and their children.
.So it's a great honor being introduced by Secretary West. I also want to thank rear Admiral David Stone who commanded the fleet off of Kosovo and was an instrumental part of our successful efforts there. And Brigadier General Pat Foote and Major General George Buskirk who are representing the more than 30 generals and admirals who have endorsed me and who provide great assistance and counsel to me and to my staff.
Togo West's introductory remarks
Posted by Sharon at March 23, 2008 04:28 PMMaybe someone took a shot a Clinton when she was on the board of Walmarts. Or maybe someone took a shot at her when she was in that sex-segregated reactionary prayer group. No wait, that was a bolt of lightning. We'll get there, we'll get there.
eriposte: Take a week off, spend some time away from politics and generally deprogram yourself. You'll feel much better about things and maybe the campaign will be over by then.
Posted by Bob In Pacifica at March 23, 2008 05:11 PMMoving on. Are we watching another Love Canal, I invented the Internet situation coming around?
Straws. Grasping. I can't wait to hear the Obama fans scream and cry when their sinking ship is abandoned by the Super D's, who might actually want to win the GE election in November rather than support a bunch of crybabies backing a vanity campaign.
Posted by blogtopus at March 23, 2008 05:34 PMI remember landing under sniper fire. 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. But it was a moment of great pride for me to visit our troops, not only in our main base as Tuzla, but also at two outposts where they were serving in so many capacities to deactivate and
I don't see any reference in there she's speaking in the first person "I" "we", "for me" and no credit to anyone else.
Posted by a4L at March 23, 2008 05:40 PMI've been following campaigns for many many years and sometimes people do conflate and confuse events whether it is 4 years ago, 8 years ago, 12 years ago or fill in the blanks. Those who interpret HRC's statement as a lie are certainly allowed to interpret it as a lie.
An update has since been posted to the Wa Po story. See this MyDD diary.
----------
http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/3/23/202651/602
....UPDATE Friday 6:45 p.m.
Lissa Muscatine, who served as Hilary Clinton's chief speechwriter in 1996 and accompanied her on the Bosnia trip, feels that I have failed to provide a full picture of what took place. She gave me her "vivid recollections" of the arrival in Tuzla, which I quote below:
I was on the plane with then First Lady Hillary Clinton for the trip from Germany into Bosnia in 1996. We were put on a C17-- a plane capable of steep ascents and descents -- precisely because we were flying into what was considered a combat zone. We were issued flak jackets for the final leg because of possible sniper fire near Tuzla. As an additional precaution, the First Lady and Chelsea were moved to the armored cockpit for the descent into Tuzla. We were told that a welcoming ceremony on the tarmac might be canceled because of sniper fire in the hills surrounding the air strip. From Tuzla, Hillary flew to two outposts in Bosnia with gunships escorting her helicopter.
UPDATE Saturday 8:45 a.m.
Gen. Nash says that I misquoted him in saying he was unaware of any "security threat" to the First Lady. While he was unaware of any "sniper threat," he now tells me there were a couple of "security concerns" that day, which he found out about after returning to his headquarters after greeting Clinton at the airport. There was a "non-specific report" of a possible truck bomb in the area. The military also had information that "some of the communications associated with the First Lady's visit were being monitored."
"In both cases, we took appropriate security action," said Nash, adding that Clinton's visit was not disrupted.
Anybody else with first-hand memories of Clinton's Tuzla trip, please send them along.
....[END OF WAPO PIECE]
So, maybe he's not so sure. Maybe he got snookered. That would be understandable since the place he picked up the story from is a notorious right wing blog called Newsbusters by a guy named Rich Noyes:
Hillary Shot At in '96? No Media Mention of Bosnia 'Sniper Fire'
IMPORTANT: Interestingly the Noyes Newsbusters article was originally linked from the WaPo Dodd piece, but that link is no longer in the story. Maybe someone should ask the WaPo public editor about this.
Newsbusters is pretty happy though. They are trumpeting that they broke the "story" and Dodd picked it up.
WaPo Awards 'Four Pinocchios' to Hillary on Sniper-Fire Fable
The Washington Post is aligning its Fact Checker with Rich Noyes of NewsBusters. On Saturday's front page, the Inside box reads: "Four Pinocchios! Hillary Clinton has talked of coming under sniper fire during a 1996 trip to Bosnia. Our Fact Checker shoots that tale down." In the Michael Dobbs "Fact Checker" feature, four Pinocchios means not just fact-shading or exaggerating, but "Real whoppers." (It wasn't prominently featured on the washingtonpost.com home page.)
Mr Dobbs is starting to look pretty funny with four long pinoccios.
So what did happen in Bosnia?
You've all seen the picture:
But have you seen this one:
Here's the story:
Bosnia
The Obama campaign has resorted to mocking Hillary's trip to Bosnia in 1996, belittling it as a U.S.O. tour and saying there was no danger. But Hillary toured the frontlines of the international peacekeeping mission. CNN reported:
At a second outpost, Camp Bedrock, Mrs. Clinton visited a M.A.S.H. unit, the only full-service U.S. Army hospital in Bosnia. The three-hour tour of the frontlines of the international peacekeeping mission were filled with the gritty reality of a military operation, a far cry from traditional first lady photo opportunities, and Mrs. Clinton seemed more than comfortable with that. CNN, 3/25/99
A day later, the Charleston Gazette reported that "Protected by sharpshooters, Hillary Rodham Clinton swooped into a military zone by Black Hawk helicopter Monday...This trip to Bosnia marks the first time since Roosevelt that a first lady has voyaged to a potential combat zone..."
The 'fact check' from the WaPo On Clinton's Bosnia trip is bullshit
Did she mix up a few details about two incidents that happened ten years ago? Maybe, maybe not. The hit piece video mash-up is no conclusive proof of anything except that the Obama supporters have sunk to the lowest level of the past Republican swiftboat attacks. In any case, to take a diplomatic peace envoy trip into a war zone and try to attack Clinton by misrepresenting the broader story is reprehensible.
...
--------------
You know, I came across similar stories about Obama exaggerations months ago, and never bothered to post them because, well, in the big scheme of things, they didn't seem all that important. And really, they're not.
But if his campaign continues to play this dangerous game, I guarantee you they'll come out. If I could find them, so can everyone else.
Posted by Susie from Philly at March 23, 2008 06:45 PMIs Obama gonna pass around another picture?
Posted by itsy at March 23, 2008 06:49 PMConflate is something Ronald Regan use to do. Apparently he too had a problem figuring out what was true and what was his imagination. i don't want another president who can't tell the difference between the truth and her imagination.
Posted by a4L at March 23, 2008 08:56 PMObama admires "Ronald Regan"
Posted by Sharon at March 24, 2008 04:17 AMObama's campaign has gone directly into the gutter. I can't stand to even look at him anymore. And I started out loving him and sending him money. I cheered like crazy after Iowa. Then I started seeing the extent to which they were willing to go. Then I started seeing what he's really about. I'm quite sure I'm not alone in this.
Posted by at March 24, 2008 05:33 AMI would have someone admire Ronald Regan,instead of following in Regan's footsteps like Hillary. Much like Hillary's vote in Iraq was a mistake, she cannot stand-up and said she lied. If she can't remember the truth about when her life is danger than she's not fit or ready to be commander and chief. She threw the kitchen sink at herself this time.
Posted by a4L at March 24, 2008 06:37 AMPutting the matter of "mis-remembering" aside for a moment, what kind of mother puts her child in harms way?
Yeah, right - this argument has some legs.
What kind of a father (and mother) bring their young daughters to be indoctrinated with hate and bigotry at church?
Posted by at March 24, 2008 07:59 AMThis lie is outrageous and a breach of the Public Trust or should be. It goes right to the Heart of Credibility! Why -- The Baltimore Sun calls it a "whopper." - "Four Pinocchios!" says the Washington Post. "Requires enormous suspension of disbelief" raves the Huffington Post. And yet the main stream media is CNN, MSNBC and others are relatively quiet on this matter. This is a big deal. Our politicians should not be able to get away with such outrageous lies and exaggeration. They should be hold to and have a higher and moral character than the rest of us. This is an eggrecious matter and very disingenous, at the least. This is what is wrong with our politics of today, a "do and say" anything that is allowed to be acceptable when we raise our children not to lie and steal.
It is ironic, that Camp Clinton's current strategy is to try make Barack "unelectable" and will "say and do" anything to make themselves look "electable", by these distortions. How are we to believe anything that comes out of Hillary and Camp Clinton's mouth?
Too, what the main stream media is not telling you is that this Race would have been over, but for certain Republicans, edged on by Rush Limbaugh, voted for Hillary and pushed her over the top by 100,000.00 votes. If it were not for those Republican votes, Barack would have won Texas. The Republicans also voted for her in Ohio and gave her a substantial margin. This was done not because they have a particular liking for Hillary, but done because they want to prolong the race between the Democrats and because they think they can beat her in the Fall. Just watch Pat Buchannan and Joe Scarborough and you will see all their talking points. They are no freind to America or to the Democratic Party.
Posted by bacaangel at March 24, 2008 08:14 AMIt is a sad fact of life in our democracy that campaign contests have always, since the very beginning, been contests primarily of misrepresentation and distortion to some degree (negatively against an opponent and positively for a proponent). And the profession of journalism has really never (with exceedingly rare exception) operated as responsible referee of truthfulness. Never. Ed Murrow effectively got canned by William Paley not long after his show on Joe McCarthy.
I was appalled during the 2004 campaign by allegedly liberal minded critics of John Kerry (in particular commenters at dailykos - but elsewhere as well) who routinely betrayed more than anything a monumental ignorance of history and juvenile petulence in service to self-appointed superior political judgment.
Kerry bashing was a popular sport, among self-described "liberal" minds in the blogosphere, and for a long time it distressed me greatly. But I finally recognized it as just part of the deal. People have forever gotten lost in the forest because they focused much too intently on individual trees. And once a sports team becomes a favorite, fanatics do not gracefully concede defeat.
Hillary Clinton is not my preferred candidate, but my first reaction to the charges of "lie" against her in this particular case were that - given the circumstances - she may well have confused separate incidents. However, once pointed out, she could also have been quick to acknowledge such confusion, and point to the situation which did pose the danger. Alas, if she has done so, the press has not reported it.
Although I also harbor serious concerns about Obama, I disagree with Eriposte's political judgment favoring Hillary. But I admire his dedicated commitment to accuracy - even though it does seem so futile at times. The professional news media certainly has no regard for accuracy.
I humbly submit that the problem is infinitely bigger than Team Clinton v Team Obama. The tribalistic competition is a fact of human nature; "my team right or wrong." And convincing an opponent to reconsider - even one who is open to being persuaded - has always been enormously difficult (if not absolutely impossible).
Despite my narrow disagreements re: Senator Clinton with Eriposte (and Joe Wilson and Larry Johnson) I regard them as very good friends, for whom I have high regard and best wishes.
This current internecise unpleasantness shall pass.
Posted by bz at March 24, 2008 12:13 PMObama was given credit in Illinois for bills others passed. And he's taken crdit for them in his campaign. He also adopted Clinton policies on healthcare, fiscal restraint, and bipartisanship. For the rest, he recites far left cliches like his darling baby lambkins foreign policy, or vague rhetorical moves only possible with help from an amoral media. That's when he's not making smarmy comments about 'old politics' and 'a new generation of leaders'.
The Clintons created a national legislative agenda that reversed the damages of three republican administrations. After this particular Bush, we'll need them again big time.
It's too bad. I would so like young people to see our greatest policy experts in action. It's a thing of beauty.
http://a-civilife.blogspot.com
Wow just wow. How can this not be a lie? HRC got caught in a blatant lie, this cannot be spun period. This blog has no objectivity whatsoever, Eri you are so blinded by abhorrence for Obama it is sad. Even when the evidence is plain as day you turn it into a discussion on Obama's book? Somewhere even Baghdad Bob is shaking his head.
Posted by jesse at March 24, 2008 03:09 PMb-b-but Hillary brought peace to Northern Ireland
Posted by gay veteran at March 24, 2008 04:49 PM"b-b-but Hillary brought
peace to Northern Ireland"
And presumably to that runway where all the bullets were whistling over her presidential
head till she stopped and kissed that little girl.
Experience indeed!!
Posted by chaz at March 24, 2008 07:16 PM