I'd like to get everyone's take on Senator CLinton's Bosnia "Sniper Fire" Comments

Question:
How do you view Senator Clinton's Bosnia "sniper fire" comments?

Choices:
A slip of the tongue
An exaggeration
A whopper
A fatigued mistake

 

Just another in a continuous string of lies. Too bad for her, this one has video to disprove her comments.

What was she thinking? It wasn't even a good lie. There were tons of other people there when her plane landed. Surely she knew someone was going to come forward and dispute her story.

I just wonder if this was her only lie. What about her claims about Northern Ireland peace making? Rwandan refugee rescuing? Kosovo border visiting? It all seems so much more doubtful now!

big deal, she exaggerated it a little. Too bad Obama is not placed under the same scrutiny for his many lies.

She didn't exaggerate — she completely made the story up.

But you're right in the sense that few are questioning Obama's claim that he disagrees with his hate-spewing racist pastor. You do not disagree with everything someone stands for and continue to support them for 20 years.

When it comes down to it, Obama's lies are much more dangerous than Clinton's.

quote:

Originally posted by wodiej:
big deal, she exaggerated it a little. Too bad Obama is not placed under the same scrutiny for his many lies.

There is a huge difference between stretching the truth, padding a resume, putting a more positive spin on something than merited, and totally making something up. The Bosnia comments included a cancelled ceremony (it was not), ducking for cover (she walked calmly to a girl giving her flowers), rushing away in a car (did not happen, I'm afraid), and the now infamous sniper fire.
We all have slips of the tongue or exaggerated memories; for me, it is hard to see this as anything but an intentional falsehood.

As to Senator Obama's supposed free ride in the media and his lies (care to share a few?), let's stop the vague insinuations and get specific, if it's not too much to ask.

Too bad that Obama won't come clean about his relationship with Wright and Rezko. Oh, and BTW...we have the video to prove Wright is a black power seeker. Is this what we want our government to be?

Oh come on people - I bet none of you have ever fibbed at least once in your life -
Being an African American senior citizen - I am more interested in the candidate that gives me personally hope and change - that would be Hillary Clinton - for those that have been told that their dreams and hopes are worthless - I look to her as a symbolic figure.
Change by Obama supposedly to get rid of the old politicans in Washington DC - but he accepts the endorsements of Kerry, Kennedy and many many others.
I have watched the Clintons for decades giving hope with homeless shelters and job assistance programs - Bill was recently in New Orleans with Brad Pitt giving hope - Hillary attended an assembly even though the voters did not vote for her - Obama was too busy with his campaign - guess he already got his votes - same as in Penna -
I can only HOPE that my brothers and sisters in Indiana will vote with their hearts and conscience and not like some of my own family members and friends by COLOR - no matter who wins the nomination you will STILL have to WORK for a living.

God Bless our America

It is Obama who has a problem telling the truth. He lied three time during the last debate. He lied about never saying he didn't wear flags pins, he lied about his signature not being on the hand gun questionaire and he lied about not raising taxes. Here are a few more:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/john-stephenson/2008/03/30...es-media-will-ignore

Talves is from California and started posting anti-Obama posts 2 weeks ago. She is part of the Clinton campaign. She is posting at all the Indiana "Hey Martha " community sites. We have called her out here in Terre Haute along with Clinton campaign posters Factcheck2 and Laura Ingalls. We are encouraging everyone to turn them in to your media outlets.

I am a Clinton supporter, unabashedly so, but I am not a campaign poster. I am not a campaign staffer. I just think we need a candidate who is tough enough. Obama suggests we negotiate; Senator Clinton says "obliterate". Which resounds with the voters? I don't think much of President Bush but two elections have shown that the voters want bluster and threats to our enemies, not "discussions". Telling the Iranians that we might just "obliterate" them makes the world safer for Israel and protects us from them.

Threatening obliteration makes us safer? Makes Israel safer? Is this the vaunted 3AM experience and wisdom?

I understand why you are concerned but by saying that there will not be a 3am call. She took care of it. Obama said he would attack Pakistan and that was even more idiotic. I didn't even know Obama before January and now that I'm starting to finally get some information I am really apprehensive. He may make a good president someday but he is not ready now. The Republicans are already attacking him. Sure, a lot of it is a blatant lie but he wilts under pressure and what else is out there that we don't know. If you want to win in November, you'll vote for Clinton.

Ever wonder how these Calofornian posters for Clinton just "happened on these Indiana community forum sites? Look at their history of postings and you can all see for yourself the type of misinformation they have spreading. Sincxe they were called out 2 days ago they have become much more carefuk in their tale spinning.