<p>Aw, c’mon, Garland - it’s an election campaign. Advocates of one candidate or the other get to make comments that make their guy look better than the other guy (or gal.) Everyone has baggage. Arguing that you candidate has less baggage than the other candidate is part of the discussion. (It certainly is a big part for me. I just can’t figure out which of my candidates has less baggage!)</p>
<p>It may be pinochionino, but it really, really turned my dh off. Interesting because I only just barely persuaded him to vote for Obama in the primary.</p>
<p>Bill Clinton also said , “I did not have sex with that woman”.</p>
<p>We all know what the patriotic comment meant. Oh wait. Maybe we don’t… :rolleyes:</p>
<p>^red herring.</p>
<p>McCain: an “honorable man” who cheated on his first wife with his second-wife-to-be. Who voted with Bush against the bill banning torture, despite his statement that “we don’t torture.” Who is using Karl Rove to help run his campaign.</p>
<p>“as big as the mass-murderer thing?”</p>
<p>500,000 dead children and a spokesperson saying “we think it was worth it” isn’t something to joke about.</p>
<p>^^^
WTH?! What are you guys talking about? Who said that ********?</p>
<p>Internet thread drift…</p>
<p>Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?</p>
<p>Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price–we think the price is worth it.</p>
<p>–60 Minutes (5/12/96)</p>
<p>Adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948.</p>
<p>Article 2
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
* (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;</p>
<p>intent to destroy is difficult to prove, mini. did rumsfeld truly conspire to kill children?</p>
<p>Rumsfeld, Albright, and Co. knew that the bombing of those water treatment plants and the embargo of life saving anti-dysentery and anti-diaharreal medication was a good as a death sentence to hundreds of thousands of people, many of whom would be children. But they thought it was “worth it”.</p>
<p>ROFL!!!</p>
<p>[Clinton</a> ‘misspoke’ on Bosnia trip - Yahoo! News](<a href=“http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080324/ap_on_el_pr/clinton_bosnia]Clinton”>http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080324/ap_on_el_pr/clinton_bosnia)</p>
<p>“misspoke” = lied (again)</p>
<p>It is what it is. A lie by any other name is still a lie. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>Usually when you “misspeak” it is an error and/or mistake, something confused or perhaps forgotten.</p>
<p>When you “misspeak” about your trip to Bosnia and your involvment with N. Ireland accords and NAFTA and SChip legislation… you really are just a liar.</p>
<p>“and SChip legislation… you really are just a liar.”</p>
<p>Not so fast.</p>
<p>Giving Hillary Credit for SCHIP
March 18, 2008
Despite disparagement from political rivals, we find she deserves ample credit for expanding children’s health insurance.</p>
<p>Kennedy, of course, is now backing Clinton’s rival, Barack Obama, for the nomination. But last year, before that endorsement, he was quoted by the Associated Press as saying something quite different, which the Globe did not note in its story:</p>
<pre><code>Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Oct. 6, 2007: The children’s health program wouldn’t be in existence today if we didn’t have Hillary pushing for it from the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue.
</code></pre>
<p>In that same story, The AP’s Beth Fouhy concluded, “While Kennedy is widely viewed as the driving force behind the program, by all accounts the former first lady’s pressure was crucial.” She quoted Nick Littlefield, who had been a senior health adviser to Kennedy, as saying, “we relied on her, worked with her and she was pivotal in encouraging the White House to do it.”
…</p>
<p>Clymer, in an exchange of e-mails, told FactCheck.org:</p>
<pre><code>Adam Clymer: On balance, I would say of course Kennedy and Hatch deserve most of the credit, but Hillary helped by making sure the Administration stuck with the $24 billion in [the Senate-House] conference. She didn’t write the legislation but she played a significant role in getting it passed.
</code></pre>
<p>Other accounts at the time the legislation was passed and since give Clinton substantial credit. The pro-Republican Washington Times newspaper credited (or perhaps more accurately, blamed) Hillary Clinton for the program in a 1997 article. The paper said it had obtained documents from 1993 showing that the White House “plotted” to push a “Kids First” insurance program if Mrs. Clinton’s universal health care proposal failed.</p>
<pre><code>Washington Times, Aug. 6, 1997: The plan signed into law yesterday by Mr. Clinton and pushed by the first lady is a duplicate of the 4-year-old health care task force idea, except that it is paid for by a 15-cent tax on cigarettes.
</code></pre>
<p>…</p>
<p>Years later, when Clinton was first running for the Senate, Kennedy’s aide Littlefield was still giving her credit. The New York Times quoted him as saying, ‘‘She was a one-woman army inside the White House to get this done.’’ He said that when President Clinton himself was showing reluctance to back the new legislation out of fear it would upset a budget deal with Republicans, "We went to Mrs. Clinton and said, ‘You’ve got to get the president to come around on this thing,’ " and she did.</p>
<p>More Than Just Legislating</p>
<p>Moreover, Hillary Clinton took a major role in translating the new law into action. The program leaves to the states the job of setting up coverage and getting children enrolled, a task that continues to be a struggle to this day. In February 1999, after 47 states had set up SCHIP programs, the Clintons launched a drive to “Insure Kids Now.” Hillary took the lead, speaking first before her husband in an East Room event at the White House.</p>
<pre><code>Hillary Clinton, Feb. 23, 1999: At least half of all uninsured children are eligible for federal-state health insurance programs, but too often their parents don’t know or don’t believe they qualify. As successful, for example, as Medicaid has been, an estimated 4 million eligible children are still not enrolled.
</code></pre>
<p>In April that year the first lady gave a speech saying nearly 1 million children had been enrolled during the previous year, but that increasing the figure was “one of the highest priorities” of her husband’s administration. She said the president would seek $1 billion to fund a five-year “outreach” effort, with a goal of increasing enrollment to 5 million by 2000.</p>
<p>Our conclusion: Clinton is right on this one.</p>
<p>[FactCheck.org:</a> Giving Hillary Credit for SCHIP](<a href=“http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/giving_hillary_credit_for_schip.html]FactCheck.org:”>http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/giving_hillary_credit_for_schip.html)</p>
<p>Ready to lie from day one!</p>
<p>The following quote about Hillary is from an interview with Dick Morris who was a former adviser to Bill Clinton. (Feb. 2007)</p>
<p>“Bill is effortlessly charismatic. He walks into a room and everybody loves him. She knows she’s not, so she has to kind of pretend she’s something she’s not to make up for that, so that people will relate to her. And her entire presentation is phony, anybody can see that and there is you know Bill lies about sex, Hillary lies about everything.”</p>
<p>She may be a liar, but is she Christ-like as Mr. Carville intimated? Is Richardson a traitor? Is he a Judas?</p>
<p>Judas:</p>
<p>If Obama wins GE, it will be interesting to know what his price was.</p>
<p>Simba, if you mean Richardson by “know what his price was”, you’ll probably find out prior to the GE 'cause my guess is Richardson will be Obama’s VP running mate. I watched the announcement on TV while stuck out of town in a hotel room, and it sure sounded and looked like a Pres/VP moment. There was a quality to that endorsement announcement that wasn’t apparent for example, when the Kennedy announcement was made.</p>
<p>Did anyone else watch Richarson and Obama and get that impression? You know, Pres/VP?</p>