2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: OK-I'll put it here-Hillary Lied about coming under fire... [View all]MADem
(135,425 posts)and he has iterated and RE-iterated that it does NOT REFLECT HIS PRESENT VIEWS with regard to women and he has very forthrightly disavowed it.
And he wasn't a child--he was running for public office around that time frame. He'd divorced his college wife. He'd fathered a child with another woman (and the fundies would make a big point of noting that it was Outside The Sanctity Of Holy Matrimony Praise Jesus). He'd already said he was a pacifist and unsuccessfully petitioned the government for CO status. He was active in radical VT politics.
"Very young?" He was old enough to do all that. He was no 'baby.'
Hillary was working for the House of Representatives on the Nixon impeachment around the time he wrote that thing--and she's YOUNGER than him.
Good grief, the infantalizing is absurd! And it shows your bias--really, it does. You will excuse him anything, and her, nothing.
The best response is "He said it was stupid and he disavows it." No 'explanation' can make that pile of garbage right--despite the best efforts of people who thought they were helping him by writing tortured articles on "What he REEEEEEALLY meant." He didn't ask for their help and his "explanation" (it was stupid, I disavow it) is the appropriate one.
Of course they are different things--Bernie wasn't ever IN a war zone (despite his hawkish attitudes towards the conflicts in the region at that time). Hillary never wrote a horrible, stupid, essay about how some morons view sex roles and condone violence as a secret wish.
But see how you try to parse, to find difference, to "defend" when there's no need? Hummmmph--Hillary MISREPRESENTED FACTS, you insist. Are you saying Bernie DIDN'T misrepresent facts? That women DO like to be violated violently by strangers? EWWWWW. See how that shit works?
I would advise that when you're stuck in a hole, stop digging. Bernie and Hill know to do that--he did by saying his essay was trash. Hillary admitted her mistake.
Your insistence that "factual" Bernie's A-OK...but oh, that lyin' HILLARY....! is utter nonsense. And based on those writings, I'd be a bit concerned about not just OPPO research, but old fashioned REPORTING (which is what found that piece in the first place).
Everyone's back home now, vacations over, kids in school--people are going to start paying attention. Faux will eventually turn their attention from the Klown Kar, once those buffoons run out of money and start dropping like flies.
HRC has been vetted, Sanders has not. Since you're so invested in nitpicking, do understand that this kind of thing isn't a one way street. Stand by. The 4th Estate (or Faux--who must be differentiated since they aren't really "news" might not be his friend.
It's all pointless and it is stupid. But volleys will be returned, because that's the nature of the game. You'd think the smart move would be to not attack over resolved horse shit in the first place...I guess that's too much to ask.
Rather than snarky, re-hashing "I'll put it here" threads, why not a thread boosting a candidate?
Tear downs are so easy--build-ups, not so much, I guess.