To DU members who oppose Hillary Clinton

[karynnj]

51. I agree with you that Republicans will do what they can to stop any Democrat

However, at this point, HRC is not the nominee and some here - and more disturbing near her - want to call any negative comment a smear. One example is the ridiculous list put out of words they declared were sexist if applied to Hillary. Almost all those words were words that could and would be used speaking of a male who did the same thing. (This was idiotic - because it almost begged for someone to simply argue that HRC was really all of those things.)

There are two recent issues - the email and the Clinton Foundation funds - that are valid issues to look at. It is not a smear to say on the email, while she broke no laws, she certainly did not act in a spirit of transparency. The real problem is that because she retained sole control AND then wiped the server, she opens herself to speculation that there could have been something that she hid - especially if it is true that top aides were on her server too.

As to the Clinton Foundation, more explanation is needed before we can say for sure if she complied with her agreement with Obama. Note: I don't think this is a legal issue, but it is a character issue - and if she broke that agreement, what does it say about whether others should trust her to keep her word.

Now, look back at your list:

Obama DID provide his birth certificate and the campaign pointed to a Honolulu newspaper announcement FROM THE HOSPITAL on his birth.

John Kerry had hundreds of pages of the official Navy record on his website in 2004. (All the fitness reports were there, were glowing and if you looked at the dates, there were no gaps. Some were even written by the SBVT! Had the media bothered to read them, they showed an extraordinary, mature, principled, compassionate young man.

The Gore charges were not that significant and had little to do with the election being close. Gore might even have been hurt more because Bush, a drunk until he was 40, was able to run on restoring morality to the WH! Not to mention, remember the Buddhist temple incident that did hurt Gore -- that was from 1996 and the Clintons' loose standards on foreign support that stung other democrats as well.

Then there were the Clinton charges:

Bill Clinton really did have a problem which his own aide referred to as having "bimbo eruptions". Even in the primary, we KNEW he had this problem and knew that he would lie and blame others when caught on things. We elected him anyway.

On Whitewater, one problem was that - maybe out of embarrassment - they refused to just put everything out on the deal early on. (In fact, Sid Blumenthal (still a HRC aide) spoke in his book on the Clinton years of a group of Senators coming to the WH and advising just that - and having HRC go ballistic after they left.


The difference is that on some issues with the Clintons, there was something actually there -- and on others they worked so hard to preserve secrecy that they made it look like there could be something there.

I will defend Clinton on anything WHERE I KNOW THE FACTS AND THEY SUPPORT HER. If that is not the case, I won't.