On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 12:02:17 -0400, "jeffc" wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
Uh-oh....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...900855_pf.html


OK now I read it.

Why?

Clinton, who has tried to cast her rival as too inexperienced for the job
of commander in chief, said of Obama's stance on Pakistan: "I don't believe
that any president should make any blanket statements with respect to the
use or non-use of nuclear weapons."

But that's exactly what she did in an interview with Bloomberg Television
in April 2006

No, she made a statement in context (she quite clearly said "Iran", which is
not a "blanket statement".

Er, no...she made at least TWO blanket statements (and one was about
Iran) and even contradicted herself contemporaneously (in the Bloomberg
interview).

I really don't have much of an opinion one way or another. But folks who go
snooping around for gaffes usually make gigantic non sequiturs and end up
looking like nidiots (that's my sniglet for nitty idiot.) Why snoop around?
Politicians make obvious gaffes all the time.

Obama saying "the President of..." when referring to the PM of Canada
(and I suspect most sensible people have no doubt he knows Canada has a
PM, not a President) is a gaffe, Kerry's easily-twisted comment about
the military was a gaffe. Bill and Hillary Clinton don't make many, if
any, "gaffes" and IAC, this wasn't a "gaffe."

And also IAC, my, er, primary point wasn't HRC's statements, gaffe or
otherwise, but rather, the public beginning of the end of "no negative
campaigning" for the Dems, and the "flip-flop" was more a reference to
the "Romney girls" video.

HTH,
R