Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Clintons HUGE Pakistan Gaffe!!!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
mckeown1128 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:19 PM
Original message
Clintons HUGE Pakistan Gaffe!!!
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton was praised in the wake of the assassination of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto for demonstrating her command of the players and the issues at stake in Pakistan...But in two confident television appearances, on CNN and ABC, Clinton made an elementary error about Pakistani politics: She described President Pervez Musharraf as a "candidate" who would be "on the ballot."

In fact, Musharraf was reelected to the presidency in October. The upcoming elections are for parliament, and while Musharraf's party will be facing off against opposition parties, the president himself is not a candidate.

"He will NOT be on the ballot," said a Pakistan scholar at Columbia University, Philip Oldenburg, in an e-mail. "These are parliamentary elections, where the contests are for a seat in the national assembly.
The prime ministerial candidate typically fights for victory in a local constituency, as well as lead the party in a national campaign."

"If President Musharraf wishes to stand for election, then he should abide by the same rules that every other candidate will have to follow," she told CNN's Wolf Blitzer (.pdf) Dec. 28. "He could be the only person on the ballot. I don't think that's a real election," she told ABC's George Stephanopolous December 30.



Wow.. (just to channel Hillbots) what a rookie mistake.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0108/Clinton_errs_on_Pakistan_.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
pocoloco Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:21 PM
Response to Original message
1. Not ready for prime time??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftCoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:21 PM
Response to Original message
2. I see you like the "Throw shit and see what sticks" method of political campaigning?
Good rookie effort. With any luck you can apply for an internship at FOX in a couple of years and then, there's not telling where you can go. :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. She said what she said. She was incorrect. In trying to look like Mrs. Experience, she now looks
like the rookie! Poor woman needs her advisers to keep her up to date.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #7
96. You know she won't apologize
for her ignorant remarks..she wouldn't look tough enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mckeown1128 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. Go ahead attack me instead of what I posted...nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #2
94. Typical hillary surrogate
response..doing what you are accusing others of.. instead of admitting the really infallible hillary can do some wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:21 PM
Response to Original message
3. zzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. She sounds so inexperienced!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LordJFT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #6
44. and naive!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #6
95. She sounds like she
doesn't know shit except how to vote yea on bush resolutions, bills, and laws.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sniffa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
4. more of her lack of foreign policy credentials showing
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #4
98. You've touched on the
sacred cow..stand down. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indimuse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
5. ok koo koo
:spank:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #5
57. ...ka choo nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #5
97. Yeah, it's obvious there
will be no intelligent comebacks from hillary's surrogates..kinda like hillary's remarks. Musharraf on the ballot..duh.

It's a good thing we don't get our information from hillary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:26 PM
Original message
That's HUGE
she'd better pack it up and go home. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sniffa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:27 PM
Response to Original message
11. agreed
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. Oh sniffa, you're so funny sometimes,
but you're so annoying too. You remind me of my kid brother lol ---> :smack:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sniffa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #14
20. i feel sorry for your brother
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. He wouldn't agree,
and now it seems you're really nothing like him after all. Bye
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sniffa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. poor thing
:cry:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 07:40 PM
Response to Original message
55. That's right. I was her biggest fan until a few seconds ago when I clicked on this thread.
Now I've switched to Edwards.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:26 PM
Response to Original message
9. Another "politico is the source" post. At least the poster didn't try to pass this off in LBN.
F***ing RW online rag. MKJ
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #9
52. Ben Smith is formerly the blogger for the NY Daily News.
He's not a RW nut. He's been following Clinton's career for a long time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #52
53. Might be nice if he wrote for a reputable online mag, then.
politico is the equivalent of FAUX.

MKJ
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #52
63. Smith credits it to a "conservative American commentator"
By the name of Thomas Houlahan, whoever he is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:27 PM
Response to Original message
10. Actually, she didn't make a mistake. Read it again and think about it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mckeown1128 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Ok... I read it again....and ....
she still referes to Mushy as a candidate. sorry
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. If you still can't see how she didn't make a mistake, then you didn't think about what she said
and what she was referring to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:29 PM
Original message
Yet another glaring example of her naivete and inexperience.
Not. Ready. For. Prime. Time. We just can't take the chance on HILLARY! :thumbsdown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:29 PM
Response to Original message
13. Here :
send this to Clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:31 PM
Response to Original message
16. Suggestion for Hillary44 web site
Here's my suggestion:

"When pre-President Hillary Clinton referred to General Musharraf, a man she personally met 1,256 times while doing foreign policy policy as First Half-President Lady, as being "on the ballot" and "as a candidate", it was a reference to when she had met Benazir Bhutto 2,347 times while doing foreign policy policy as First Half-President Lady.

In Pakistan, people are always referred to as being "on the ballot" and "as a candidate" all the time. It is a matter of greeting a person in the morning while going to market to get sheep claws for brunch. Having been in Pakistan more than any American ever, Hillary Clinton knows the fine details due to her experience and likeability tours."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoFederales Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #16
81. Schweeeeeeeeeeet! nt
NoFederales
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stray cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
17. wasn't he the only candidate on the ballet when he was re-elected president?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Debi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #17
50.  Pakastani ballet? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
18. She didn't say "would be," she said "If he wishes to ...."
Now me, I don't find those statements to be synonyms. You do?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mckeown1128 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. You aren't even making sense...nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cui bono Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 10:38 PM
Response to Reply #18
68. He looks damn fine in a tutu, doncha know? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suston96 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 12:50 PM
Response to Original message
23. So where is the "huge error"?
Musharraf's party will certainly be on the ballot. I am sure perceptive readers of Clinton's statement have no problem with that.

But pick away by all means. It seems to be helping your candidate as he runs away with all those polls.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 01:04 PM
Response to Original message
24. I didn't know that either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
2hip Donating Member (350 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 08:49 PM
Response to Reply #24
65. Yeah, but you're not running for office! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Onlooker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 01:05 PM
Response to Original message
25. Wow, so many of you are taking Musharaff's side!
Edited on Tue Jan-01-08 01:16 PM by Onlooker
From the point of view of the Opposition, Musharraf was not elected in October. I would assume that means that from the point of view of the opposition, his name will appear on the ballot if he wants to run for President.

This is from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pervez_Musharraf#Resignation_from_the_Army

In an interview in March 2007, Musharraf said that he intends to stay in the office for another five years.<63>

A nine-member panel of Supreme Court judges deliberated on six petitions ... for disqualification of Musharraf as presidential candidate. Bhutto stated that her party may join other opposition groups, including Sharif's. Attorney-general Malik Mohammed Qayyum stated that, pendente lite, the Election Commission was "reluctant" to announce the schedule for the presidential vote. Bhutto's party Farhatullah Babar stated that the Constitution could bar Musharraf from being elected again because he holds the army chief's post. "As Gen. Musharraf is disqualified from contesting for President, he has prevailed upon the Election Commission to arbitrarily and illegally tamper with the Constitution of Pakistan."

...

On October 2, 2007, 85 Pakistani opposition lawmakers resigned from the country's parliament to derail Musharraf's reelection bid. National Assembly Speaker Chaudhry Amir Hussain stated that the resignations would not affect the presidential election. Under Pakistani law, the national parliament and provincial assemblies choose the president. The current parliament is expected to elect a president before October 15, with the new five-year term starting on November 15.

On October 6, 2007, Musharraf won a vote to be re-elected Pakistan's president. However, the Supreme Court ruled that no winner would be proclaimed until it decides on the legality issue.

On November 3, 2007 Musharraf declared emergency rule across Pakistan. He suspended the Constitution, imposed State of Emergency, and fired the chief justice of the Supreme Court.<68> While addressing the nation on State Television, Musharraf declared that the state of emergency was imposed in the country to safeguard the national interests and counter growing terrorism and the downward trend of economy. In Islamabad, troops entered the Supreme Court building, arrested the judges and kept them under detention in their homes. Troops have been deployed inside state-run TV and radio stations, while independent channels have gone off air. Land and mobile telephone lines are down in Islamabad. The court was to decide whether Musharraf was eligible to run for election last month while remaining army chief.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
creeksneakers2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #25
31. That's a lot of details. I can see why she might use shorthand
All the media referred to Bhutto as running for president. Whatever Bhutto was doing was the same as what Musharraf was doing. Hillary could not go into lengthy detail without taking on the entire media and looking like a lecturer and a hair splitter. Why go through all that?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sniffa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 01:06 PM
Response to Original message
26. didn't also claim Bhutto's father was assasinated?
as opposed to executed by the state?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Karmadillo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 01:09 PM
Response to Original message
27. The President of Canada laughed and laughed when he read your post.
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. !
:spray:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indimuse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
29. Antonyms 1. small, tiny, diminutive.
huge /hyudʒ or, often, yudʒ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective, hug·er, hug·est. 1. extraordinarily large in bulk, quantity, or extent: a huge ship; a huge portion of ice cream.
2. of unbounded extent, scope, or character; limitless: the huge genius of Mozart.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



—Related forms
hugely, adverb
hugeness, noun


—Synonyms 1. mammoth, gigantic, colossal; vast; stupendous; bulky. Huge, enormous, immense, tremendous imply great magnitude. Huge implies massiveness, bulkiness, or even shapelessness: a huge mass of rock; a huge collection of antiques. Enormous, literally out of the norm, applies to what exceeds in extent, magnitude, or degree, a norm or standard: an enormous iceberg. Tremendous, in informal use, applies to anything so huge as to be astonishing or to inspire awe: a tremendous amount of equipment. Immense, literally not measurable, is particularly applicable to what is exceedingly great, without reference to a standard: immense buildings. All are used figuratively: a huge success; enormous curiosity; tremendous effort; immense joy.
—Antonyms 1. small, tiny, diminutive.



What ever......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
30. people know what she meant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xultar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #30
32. Where is the gaffe?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mckeown1128 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #30
33. yeah she meant to pretend to know about ...
politics in Pakistan. Unfortunately we know the truth. That she doesn't know anything about Pakistan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #33
35. There was no gaffe. That's why the only wimper you're hearing about it is from the Politico blog
If there was a big gaffe, the MSM would've been all over it. They don't miss any opportunity to jump.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. Yes there was:
Edited on Tue Jan-01-08 03:38 PM by ProSense
STEPHANOPOULOS: You called President Pervez Musharraf of
Pakistan an unreliable ally. Should he step down?

CLINTON: I’m not calling for him to step down. I’m calling for
him, number one, to agree with an independent investigation of Benazir
Bhutto’s death. I am calling on him to hold free and fair elections
with independent monitors. I believe that it will take a little time
to get that ready, because Benazir’s party will have to choose a
successor leader…


STEPHANOPOULOS: So we don’t need the elections on the 8th?

CLINTON: Well, I think it will be very difficult to have a real
election.
You know, Nawaz Sharif has said he’s not going to compete.
The PPP is in disarray with Benazir’s assassination. He could be the
only person on the ballot. I don’t think that’s a real election.


more


Why hasn't the MSM been all over it? Well it wasn't as important as the botched joke!


Pakistan elections postponed:

The two leading opposition parties have demanded that the government press ahead with early elections.

Bhutto's widower, Asif Ali Zardari, told CNN's Wolf Blitzer that he was confident the Pakistan People's Party -- which he has taken control of since Bhutto's death -- would be victorious in the poll.

Nawaz Sharif, leader of the Pakistan Muslim League-N party, told reporters earlier that he believed Musharraf intended to delay the vote because his party would not garner enough seats in parliament to rule.

The United States has kept its distance from the issue, saying it was up to the Pakistanis to decide on the timing of the elections.





A U.S. Embassy official based in Pakistan, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the United States "wants to see the election held," but if there is a postponement, "we would not object to it."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. Then why didn't Stephanopoulos, or anyone but Politico, for that matter, call it a gaffe?
It's because Politico is the only one foolish enough to think it was a gaffe, when it wasn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #37
38. Are you asking me why Stephanopoulos didn't do his job?
No clue, unless he's equally as clueless about the situation as Clinton's comments suggest she is.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #38
40. Nope. I'm just saying he didn't jump on any gaffe where there wasn't one
It's the same reason MSM didn't jump on it...because there wasn't any. Whoever wrote the Politico article obviously isn't too intelligent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #40
46. Right, Hillary doesn't make gaffes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #30
99. Like we know what she meant
Edited on Wed Jan-02-08 02:56 PM by zidzi
when she voted for bush resolutions, bills, and laws for years? We read her fucking mind?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Onlooker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 02:59 PM
Response to Original message
34. Who is spreading these ignorant lies about Hillary?
Edited on Tue Jan-01-08 03:28 PM by Onlooker
Musharaff and Bush are the only ones who recognizes the legitimacy of the last election. Not even the Pakistani Supreme Court has upheld the results of the election. The opposition to Musharaff said the election was illegal. Therefore, the opposition, who I presume most of us are sympathetic to, does not recognize the election. If Musharaff wants to be President, he has to run for office in a democratic way.

In other words, the OP's website is touting a right-wing line. If you support Musharaff and oppose Bhutto, then you agree that Musharaff was legitimately elected in October and does not need to be a candidate in the upcoming elections.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eurobabe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 03:45 PM
Response to Original message
39. Biden just pointed this gaffe out in his town hall meeting
She should know better.

Hillary: Not ready for prime time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #39
41. As much as I like him, Biden's the last person who should be pointing out someone's gaffes
unless they're his own.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eurobabe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #41
43. Why not, everybody else always point out his gaffes
and he admits they are gaffes. Would Hillary admit her gaffe?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
medicswife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 07:51 PM
Response to Reply #43
58. really good point, 48percenter. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Think82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #41
59. Biden's never made a gaffe with regards to actual foreign policy questions. Big difference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inuca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #59
62. We replied
the same thing at the same time ;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennifer C Donating Member (760 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 08:43 PM
Response to Reply #59
64. Excellent point. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inuca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #41
60. Can you point to
a Biden verbal "gaffe" when discussing serious policy issues?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #41
91. This is extremely different than the Biden gaffes - caused by unfiltered Biden verbiage
Edited on Wed Jan-02-08 01:47 PM by karynnj
There are two very different HRC gaffes.
1) Where it is clear that she was speaking beyond her knowledge of the political situation in Pakistan and made some bad assumptions on the purpose of the upcoming election.

This is a bad gaffe as she has been pushing that she has far more foreign policy experience than the others -in fact Biden and Dodd could likely run circles around her.

2) She made a very emotional speech about how well she knew Bhutto and how there was an event where the Bhutto children and Chelsea were there. I took it at face value. It was quite reasonable that there would have been enough in common between the western educated Bhutto who was a prime minister and HRC. That she then referred to her TWO children, when she has THREE - makes it seem that she exaggerated the relationship and the friendship. This hurts as it makes her seem phony.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #39
42. Everybody makes a goof. At least it wasn't like Obama calling for the
invasion of Pakistan if they don't cooperate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ripple Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #42
51. He didn't call for an invasion of Pakistan
Edited on Tue Jan-01-08 06:23 PM by ripple
He was talking about targeted Special Operations to take out bin laden and his surrogates- and only if Musharaff refuses to act. Show me a candidate that'll say they won't do that if they have actionable intelligence and I'll show you a sure loser.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alteredstate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #39
45. Yep --- Biden didn't mention any names
but it was obvious he was referring to Hillary Clinton's gaffe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Onlooker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #39
47. So Biden agrees with Musharaff and not Bhutto?
Biden believes that the staged election Musharaff held was legitimate, even before the Pakistani SC has made a final decision and even though the opposition refused to recognize that election? Wow, Biden really is quite conservative!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jillan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #47
49. hello???? That is not what Biden said. Stop putting words in his mouth or go get a job at FOX.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mckeown1128 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #47
66. Wow you are terribly confused...
NO ONE IS SAYING that Musharaff's election was legitimate....this post is about Clinton thinking that Musharaff is coming up for reelection on the 8th. This of course is wrong...the election on the 8th is not for Musharaff's position. You are blabbing on and on about god knows what. RE-read the article.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IronLionZion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 01:19 AM
Response to Reply #47
72. You better find a link with that full quote in context. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 06:08 PM
Response to Original message
48. Kick! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calteacherguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 07:10 PM
Response to Original message
54. She pretends to know, but she does not know a damn thing, really. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gorekerrydreamticket Donating Member (422 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 07:45 PM
Response to Original message
56. Hey! Come on! She never said she was an expert on Pakistan...
Stop the piling on!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Think82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #56
61. I thought she was a "dear friend" of Ms. Bhutto?
And don't you want a president who knows what's going on?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 09:05 PM
Response to Original message
67. Reminds me of Bush calling Africa a country and SSA not a fed program
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dugggy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-01-08 10:44 PM
Response to Original message
69. I thought she has the most "experience"?
I am astounded that she did not know Mush is already elected as President.
The upcoming election is for congress. Even dummy Dugggy knows that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Miss Chybil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:09 AM
Response to Original message
70. This will make a lot of people who intend on voting for her
change their minds. Not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnLocke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:22 AM
Response to Original message
71. Kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 08:24 AM
Response to Original message
73. I don't get it
he is a candidate for prime minister, isn't he?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donald Ian Rankin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 08:30 AM
Response to Original message
74. One of those thread titles that one knows instantly won't match the post.
The correct word is "negligable", not "huge".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knitter4democracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
75. And when Bush was running, he didn't know where Pakistan was.
I'm just sayin' . . . awfully small mistake considering Huckabee not knowing anything about Pakistan at all and Bush's constant foreign policy mistakes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #75
77. So Hillary is an "awfully small" improvement over Bush?
I couldn't have put it better myself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knitter4democracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #77
82. Not really. I'm just saying I find it interesting we're holding her to a much higher standard.
I'm a Kucinich person myself, but even I can't get all that upset about this supposed "massive gaffe." It's easy to misspeak, and it's ridiculous to parse absolutely everything a candidate says off the cuff so darn carefully when we're not doing it to everyone equally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 10:28 AM
Response to Original message
76. Would Laura Bush have made the same error?
I mean, they have almost the same amount of foreign policy experience.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MethuenProgressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 10:30 AM
Response to Original message
78. No gaffe - "If President Musharraf wishes to stand for election,"
More RW Hate Points posted on DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Karmadillo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 10:32 AM
Response to Original message
79. The President of Canada laughed and laughed when he saw 39 recommendations for this thread.
Edited on Wed Jan-02-08 10:34 AM by Karmadillo
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 10:35 AM
Response to Original message
80. Laugh it up. Musharaf is building a dictatorship, and Clinton knows it.
Are you naive enough to think that Musharaf is playing by rules? Do you seriously think that Hillary Clinton is stupid? This post and the blog you've linked betray incredible naivete.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #80
83. Really? Musharaf is building a dictatorship? Who'da thunk it? Duh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #83
84. My point exactly. Parsing Hillary's comments in this situation is stupid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 11:36 AM
Response to Original message
85. I think the "John Edwards just farted" discussion
has more legs than this non-event.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 11:37 AM
Response to Original message
86. delete
Edited on Wed Jan-02-08 11:37 AM by Tarc
Internet hiccup
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 11:37 AM
Response to Original message
87. delete 2
Edited on Wed Jan-02-08 11:38 AM by Tarc
Internet hiccup 2
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillTheGoober Donating Member (417 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 11:43 AM
Response to Original message
88. This post is a gaffe ...
You know -- when people start grasping for straws, it is very telling.

This is a ridiculous post and as a Democrat, I just think it is a shame. As someone who likes Barrack Obama, it is terrible that his supporters are sinking to this kind of low. It doesn't mirror the attitude of Barrack and that's unfortunate.

If we want our candidate to win, we need to do whatever we can do to get out their message -- to get out their views. We need to boost our candidate, not attempt to sink another.

But --
Hillary clearly has made this election about her. People have become with Pro-Hillary or Anti-Hillary, as opposed to Pro-Their-Candidate. Elections are about energy and nobody in the Dem or Repub side commands more energy than Mrs. Clinton.

Proudly,
W.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KaptBunnyPants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
89. If it were Obama or Edwards, it might be an issue.
She's already proven her gravitas to the beltway insider crowd.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suston96 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 01:08 PM
Response to Original message
90. There was no gaffe - Musharraf's party is on the ballot.
...and everyone knows that Musharraf IS his party.

Hillary displayed an excellent grasp of Pakistan politics and elections.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Outlier Donating Member (98 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 02:26 PM
Response to Original message
92. HRC "Gaffe"
Now the number 2 headline in upper left hand corner on Drudge. Looks like MSM will be picking it up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 02:30 PM
Response to Original message
93. I saw nearly everyone making this mistake, also heard many
reporters claiming a "major world leader" was assassinated. Bhutto wasn't leader of anything but a political party in Pakistan.

I am not a Hillary fan but I do give her credit for doing better than most of the reporters. Not bad considering how busy she is with campaigning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 07:39 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC