希拉里夸大事实招致对手批评
希拉里承认“说错了话”。
美国民主党总统参选人希拉里有关其访问波斯尼亚时"身处险境"的夸张说法,招致了竞选对手的猛烈抨击。
希拉里在上周的一次讲话中,绘声绘色地讲述了自己在1996年陪同丈夫克林顿前往波斯尼亚访问时遭遇"枪林弹雨"的惊险经历。
但事后有关当年访问的电视录像资料显示,希拉里和克林顿乘坐的专机抵达图兹拉之后,二人受到了有关方面的热烈欢迎。
事后希拉里承认,她的确"说错了话"。但她同时表示,这件事将不会影响她的可信度。
在克林顿担任美国总统期间,希拉里曾多次作为第一夫人陪同克林顿飞往不同国家进行访问。
而如今当希拉里以个人名义参选总统时,她也不时提到当年的那些陪同访问,以突显自己丰富的外交阅历。
夸大事实
希拉里上周在讲述1996年访问波斯尼亚的经历时说,"原以为会有人在机场欢迎我们,但没想到等着我们的却是狙击手的子弹。"
"我们只好急忙弯腰跑入在那里等候的车辆中,匆匆赶回驻地。但那一刻对我个人来说,是值得骄傲的。"
但有关电视录像资料却显示,希拉里一行抵达图兹拉后非但没有险象环生,反而受到了热烈欢迎。
陪同希拉里一起访问的还有女儿切尔西,俩人在机场还受到了一群当地儿童的欢迎。
批评人士说,希拉里夸大事实是为了炫耀她的外交资历,但有关的电视录像资料却让她很没面子。
==============
An embarassing red face. Some good comedians will not miss that. But shouldn't cause too much trouble for herself.
Obama needs to engineer a good and decent blow.
- Re: 希拉里夸大事实招致对手批评 (BBC )posted on 03/26/2008
- posted on 03/26/2008
希拉里的这个错误没什么,虽然与其在众人中干练的印象大相径庭,犯的很低水平。她的错是立即转移目标,说OBAMA的姥姥不能选择,但牧师可以选择。这种几天前赞,几天后为自己的利益又批的作风,对她也只能见怪不怪了。美国法律多如牛毛,但没有对竞选人说什么进行规范的法律。可能认为竞选人都比较有自我道德约束,不会胡作非为;殊不知这导致了在法律范围内厨房水槽政策的大肆泛滥。我看以后应该有这方面的法律。民间中不能诽谤污蔑,竞选中也不能。
希拉里赢的可能性首先在于争取更多的白人蓝领。白人蓝领不喜欢别人攻击自己的国家。所以希拉里拿OBAMA的牧师来转移目标。这不是我的分析,是<时代>杂志JOE KLEIN说的。 - Re: 希拉里夸大事实招致对手批评 (BBC )posted on 03/30/2008
Cannot believe she will make such a mistake. It makes no sense.
On the other hand, I believe it is a honest mistake. - Re: 希拉里夸大事实招致对手批评 (BBC )posted on 03/30/2008
It made perfect sense: she would do anything to get her own ass into the White House.
Were it an honest mistake, no liar has ever walked on earth.
pepper wrote:
Cannot believe she will make such a mistake. It makes no sense.
On the other hand, I believe it is a honest mistake. - posted on 03/30/2008
港苹果日报/着名的网上杂志《Slate》最近开始为民主党参选人希拉莉开闢一个新栏目,名为「Hillary Deathwatch」(「希拉莉号」沉没记)。顾名思义,这个栏目是估计希拉莉还有多少「生还」(Survival)机会,评估希拉莉还可以在选战中挣扎多久。
逼退选压力越来越大
根据《Slate》的评估,希拉莉目前只有百分之十二的机会赢得民主党的提名,因为越来越多人包括较早时观望的另一位退选候选人理查森(Bill Richardson)倒向奥巴马阵营,因为希拉莉赖以反败为胜的佛罗里达州及密歇根州不会进行重选,也因为最新民调显示喜欢希拉莉的人只有百分之三十七,远比其他两位候选人为低。
《Slate》杂志的编辑说,他们会考虑不同因素来进行评分,包括民调数字、民主党超级党代表(Superdelegates)的态度、奥巴马的动向、未来党内初选特别是宾夕凡尼亚州初选结果等。但他们认为,即使奥巴马阵营再出甚麽乱子,即使希拉莉在宾夕凡尼亚州初选大胜,她赢得提名的机会也不会超过两成。
这个「Hillary Deathwatch」的栏目当然不是甚麽科学的论断,但至少反映了一个残酷的政治现实,那就是有越来越大的政治压力要逼退希拉莉,有越来越多人把希拉莉视为「垂死的狮子」,只是还不肯嚥气而已。事实上最近不同的传媒、报章专栏、电台Talkshow都出现大量对希拉莉冷嘲热讽的声音,有的指她只求一己私利,罔顾党及国家的利益;有的指她「捨我其谁」的心态要不得;有的甚至认为她只是不甘寂寞才坚持不退选。
几个月可发生大变化
从各种表面证据来看,希拉莉的确像《Slate》所言胜望甚微。但政治是瞬息万变的,从现在到八月党大会还有好几个月;这几个月时间还可以发生重大变化的。只要奥巴马的诚信再受质疑,只要再出现涉及种族矛盾及爱国心之类的争议,奥巴马的「政治金童」形象便会不保,而民主党的大老便要重新考虑提名何人参选总统,更何况民主党根本没有一套行之有效的规则及方法处理叮噹马头的初选,任何决定都可能分裂党,都可能引发诉讼。对希拉莉来说,既然游戏规则仍不清不楚,当然没有理由提早弃权了! - Re: 希拉里夸大事实招致对手批评 (BBC )posted on 03/31/2008
怎么会是Honest mistake呢?Hillary这个错误不是犯了一次,是几次。也许她把自己都骗得相信自己了。这个故事被她用来夸大自己的关于国家安全的经历。她惯于夸大自己的经历,比如说自己有35年外交内务治理国家的经验,别人质问:她这是把自己毕业工作后的所有经历都算作白宫经历,包括她在公司的工作,第一夫人的经历。这些经历怎能和政界要员的经历比较呢? - posted on 04/01/2008
I am surprised many people consider that Hillary self-promotion lie is more singnificant than Obama's lies concerning Rev. Wright, and more important than Obama's double dealing on the NAFTA issue.
Obama repeatedly lied about his relationship with Wright
1. Before the ABC's broadcast of Wright's speech, Obama denied that Wright made any anti-american speech
2. After ABC's broadcast, then he admits that he was aware that Wright sometimes made anti-american speeches. But he insisted that he cannot "disown" the pastor.
3. Recently he changed his story again, saying if the pastor did not leave the church,
he would have left the church.
ZT
Dumbfounded by Obama's Poll Numbers
Monday, March 31, 2008 2:15 PM
By: Edward I. Koch
I am dumbfounded that there has been no drop in Barack Obama’s standing in the polls following revelations that he sat in Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s church for 20 years and did nothing, publicly or privately, to voice disagreement with Wright’s hate speech.
Indeed, Obama’s poll numbers are going up. The most recent CNN national poll shows Obama with 50 percent and Hillary with 40 percent of likely Democratic voters.
One reason for the uptick in Obama’s popularity may be that Hillary Clinton has had to explain her out-and-out falsehood of having been under sniper fire years ago in Bosnia. Her account of landing in Bosnia amidst sniper fire was totally demolished by a video clip taken at the time and now flashed all over tv showing her strolling across the tarmac with Chelsea to receive flowers and kisses from a waiting child.
Are the actions of our two United States senators, both candidates for the presidency, to be condemned equally? I don't think so. Hillary's failure, as gross as it may be, is related to self promotion. Barack's failure, in my judgment, is an out-and-out failure of moral strength, as he was unwilling to stand up to his bigoted minister, Wright, for 20 years while Wright denounced from the pulpit whites, Jews and the state of Israel.
We learned recently that Wright's defamatory comments published in church bulletins were, on occasion, also directed at Italians. ABC News reported on March 27, “Trumpet Newsmagazine, of which Wright is the chief executive officer, published an article written by Wright in which he described the crucifixion of Jesus as ‘public lynching Italian style.’” He also wrote, according to CNSNews.com, “The Italians for the most part looked down their garlic noses at the Galileans.” Finally, CNN reported on March 28 that, “They [church bulletins] also quote a historian who said that ‘what the Zionist Jews did to the Palestinians is worse than what the Nazis did to the Jews.’”
Let me report on the mail I received after my commentary of last week criticizing Sen. Obama and Rev. Wright. Some of that correspondence defended Wright's attacks on the U.S., whites, and Jews and Obama. Here are some excerpts from three readers of my commentary:
1. "I have read your recent message re: Sen. Obama's speech and I find your attacks totally unconvincing. The fact that you disregard the Reverend's positive contributions to his community and the positive aspects of the relationship between the Reverend and the Senator demonstrates either ignorance or bad faith, either of which is unbecoming of a man of your influence."
2. "I disagree with all that [Wright's charges against America] and ALL his hate speech. But I have no problem concluding that it does not represent Obama and that Obama should not be deemed unworthy of being president because he embraced the good in Wright and did not walk away when he heard the bad."
3. "I thought Sen. Obama's race speech was one of the most inspiring, hopeful, uplifting speeches I have ever heard in modern politics. You and I have been in politics long enough to know that guilt by association is a great way to create doubts about a candidate, but I have no doubt Sen. Obama has the best chance of getting us beyond stereotypes."
These readers seek to excuse Barack Obama’s conduct, but I remain unconvinced. Obama told us in his brilliant and moving speech on March 18 that "I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can disown my white grandmother," who engaged, he said, in racial stereotyping.
But now, on television talk programs, he tells us a somewhat different story.
According to The New York Times of March 29, "Mr. Obama, who has run the gamut of news shows in recent weeks to defuse the ado over his relationship with Mr. Wright, had no trouble finding longwinded words to demarcate his allegiance to his longtime pastor. 'Had the reverend not retired and had he not acknowledged that what he had said had deeply offended people and were inappropriate and mischaracterized what I believe is the greatness of this country, for all its flaws,' he said, 'then I wouldn't have felt comfortable staying there at the church.'"
Did something happen since his speech of March 18 when he, in effect, offered excuses for his pastor's hate speech and his own reaction? I think not.
Rather, I think he decided his prior silence was unacceptable. So now he tells us that but for his pastor's retirement and "acknowledge[ment] that what he had said deeply offended people and were inappropriate and mischaracterized," he would have left the church.
May I suggest Obama's sudden expressed desire to separate himself from his pastor came only after the media storm that followed the public outcry voiced at his pastor's remarks, particularly his having said, "No, no, not God Bless America. God damn America." If Obama becomes the Democratic nominee for president, he will be subject to withering attacks by the Republicans on this issue.
Does Obama's belated recognition of his minister's bigotry satisfy me? No, it does not. Indeed, I am surprised that Obama's description of his minister's hate speech, which he condemns, is limited to the words, "controversial," “inexcusable,” "inappropriate, "troubling” and “appalling.” Why hasn't he called it by its rightful name — hate speech?
I think what Hillary did in exaggerating the danger to her in Bosnia and seeking to convey a bravery that she did not exhibit in landing there years ago is to be condemned and not passed over as she and many of her supporters do, by saying that she "misspoke." Nevertheless, Obama's explanation of why he was silent until now and the manner in which he characterizes Wright's remarks are worse.
Interestingly, he also refers to an apology by the Rev. Wright, which I've not seen published anywhere. Have you?
And, more importantly, why did it take him 20 years to come to this conclusion?
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
- posted on 04/01/2008
I don't think Obama has lied about Rev. Wright. Wright is hot-headed and his oratory seem inflammatory. But reading his most "damaging words" collected in Times magazine I realized that a lot of people would think the same way. These were harsh words directed at his own country without the niceties of political correctness. America should allow self-criticism, no matter how damaging these criticisms seem to be.
As far as NAFTA is concerned, Hillary is as hypocritical as anybody.
By the way, Ed Koch is a Jew.
pepper wrote:
I am surprised many people consider that Hillary self-promotion lie is more singnificant than Obama's lies concerning Rev. Wright, and more important than Obama's double dealing on the NAFTA issue. - posted on 04/04/2008
Pepper, let me help you understand why Clinton's lie is more significant than Obama's pastor Rev. Wright's anti-American speeches:
1. Clinton repeatedly shamelessly lied and exaggerated her activities when she was a former First Lady, a private lawyer and an intern for public figure during college years as valid public service and foreign policy experiences. Since her campaign is based on so-called richer experiences that make her more qualified for picking up that Red Phone at 3am, her purposeful lies destroy her acclaimed qualification. The foundation of her candidacy is damaged.
2. Obama’s pastor’s words were not Obama’s. Obama did not say those words; he cannot control what his pastor says. His association with the pastor does not make him guilty or responsible for what his pastor did wrong. His denial of a close association does not damage his qualification of being a candidate having better judgment; on the contrary, the way he has handled this crisis is a great evidence to prove to the world how he can take the true issues head on.
3. Clinton did not only appear as a liar after she had to admit she did not say the truth, she also appeared as a person having no sincerity to the public concerns. Obama’s handling of the crisis shows that he understands issues and he is willing to deal with tough situations in a responsible way.
Isn’t it clear who is a better candidate?
pepper wrote:
I am surprised many people consider that Hillary self-promotion lie is more singnificant than Obama's lies concerning Rev. Wright, and more important than Obama's double dealing on the NAFTA issue.
- posted on 04/05/2008
PO:
Sorry I was away for a couple of days and could not reply earlier.
Yes, Obama cannot control what Rev. Wright said. But I suppose that Obama can control himself and can distance himself from Rev. Wright. But the public record shows that Obama DID NOT distance himself until the video become public. Actually, on the contrary, when Obama first decided to run for the president, whom did he talked to? Rev. Wright! (I'm curious about what Wright said to Obama. " bring down the house"???)
You mentioned that you're impressed by the way Obama handled the affaire. Sorry I am not. Moreover, I am troubled by the way that Obama changed the story several times as more information became public. I am impressed that Obama can tell multiple version of a story both at different times (in the case of Wright) and at the same time (in the case of NAFTA).
Please paste HTML code and press Enter.
(c) 2010 Maya Chilam Foundation