Why don't folks like ______look up the woman's actual record?
Y’know what always gets me about the way the media covers people who are obviously pretty smart—you know, like people in high office and frequently in the public’s eye?
WHY?
Do you ever put a thought to “why,” _______ (a Kos diarist who claims that s/he never gets a specific response to his/her Clinton criticisms and in whose comment thread I originally posted this)?
Like, why the heck would Hillary Clinton lie about something that happened that could be easily investigated by her opponents and other detractors?
This applies to any non-Gomert-level politician in high office. Why? They aren’t stupid. It’s we who get “stupid” about the motivations—and thus the honesty—of such people.
If you apply a “why test” to Clinton (or Bernie’s) actions and words, you get an entirely different picture...but that’s yet another thing it appears you aren’t willing to do, are you?
Right now, Donald Trump lies constantly, but the difference is that he knows his followers are slugs who won’t ever bother to look stuff up. You aren’t a slug. You don’t write like a slug. But why do you insist on thinking like one—or pretending to?
Btw, changing a stance on policy or pending or potential legislation, btw, is not lying, in my book. It’s one of three things:
1.) sticking your finger in the air to see which way the wind is blowing and going in that direction until/unless the wind changes,
2.) finding out later that some unappetizing things have been stuck into the bill making in unpalatable by the time it gets a vote or
3.) telling your audience what they want to hear with no intention of following through on what you say
[NOTE: There is not really a fourth possibility when it comes to legislation or policy, but there is a different possibility when it comes to saying stupid stuff that anyone can look up and find is wrong: ERROR. And that’s important, but widely overlooked because so few ask “why.” Again: Why would Clinton lie about being shot at when the entire world could find out she was lying? Stupid mistake maybe—probably. But slugs cannot or will not ever consider that—even as they gripe about how “calculating” she is. If she is so calculating, why didn’t/couldn’t she calculate that a blatant lie would quickly be found out? DUH!]
Anyway, when it comes to legislation or policy, the first possibility is not a complimentary one, but is probably tied with the second as the most common. But when you think about it, both are somewhat justified. The first because it reflects (well, might reflect) popular will.
[I concede that it might also reflect some powerful forces exerting pressure on the person—forces that do not reflect popular will...but even as I write that I again ask “why” when there would be a clear legislative record exposing that fact. And the reason I come up with is that such behavior in smart politicians is either appeasement or risk. They SAY something that will seemingly expose them to criticism from their proletariat constituents in order to appease their elite (and funding) constituents, but never actually act on it—not when they are going to continue to run for higher office—because they know there will be a record of it if they do. Or they do act on it and hope they won’t be found out...but I don’t see how someone running for the HIGHEST office would think they could get away with that. Doing so would just be a stupid risk...or a Republican tried-and-true technique.)
The justification for the second type of political “lie” (or dishonest action, I suppose we could call it) is already quite clear and frequently seen in important but controversial bills: poison pills or other types of unacceptable amendments or details that the candidate/politician has no control over.
The third justification—the one you, _______, seem to want to attribute to Hillary the most, which is just stupid—comes straight out of the playbook of Donald Trump and probably 95% of all Republicans, and it’s done for the reason I’ve already described and I know you know well: Candidates/politicians know that most of their constituents and/or supporters won’t look stuff up to see what their representative actually ended up doing or they won’t even notice when that the person flip-flopped.
Because you never ask “why,” YOU, _______, post as though Hillary subscribes to #3 most often. It’s the only consistent way to identify why you think she is a liar, not just a TYPICAL politician: Somehow, she’s so smartly stupid that she thinks she can “get away with” just blatant lying. And that’s kinda what we mean when we point out how she’s being treated like no other in history, possibly because of her gender. What is commonplace with other politicians is seen by the likes of you as extraordinarily horrific and a deep-rooted symptom of a warped personality...or something.
And, of course, you absolutely refuse to recognize that you’ve been stewing in the very real “right wing conspiracy” to paint the woman (who was clearly going to run for high office eventually, even when she made the right wing conspiracy statement on the Today Show) as exactly that which you, with willfully ignorance, rant that she is. You’ve been pickled in Republican propaganda for decades (assuming you are old enough to have been) and even though there is no lid on the jar, you still refuse to climb out.
Sour. Yup, that’s what you are, sour and “soured.” And I don’t know why I’ve written all of this, except to try to relieve some of my frustration about how many pickles are in that damn jar...and the fact that you can’t unpickle a pickle.
