THE REAL PROBLEM WITH HER BELATED “GLASNOST” POLICY
|| By FITSNEWS || Images of national reporters being corralled behind a rope line so as to be kept a safe distance from presumed Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton have gone viral – doing real damage to her candidacy.
And rightfully so …
It’s embarrassing Clinton is so scared of the press. Just as it’s embarrassing the press is so subservient to Clinton.
Anyway, Clinton is vowing this week to be more accessible … which is probably a good idea with stories like this starting to pop up.
From Fox News’ Howard Kurtz …
Hillary Clinton has decided to make herself more available to the media and will begin doing national television interviews in the next week.
She reached this decision after an internal debate and the move is supported by many top campaign officials, along with her husband, Clinton insiders say.
“She’s all on board,” Jennifer Palmieri, the campaign’s communications director, told me in an interview. “America will see more of her.”
Ah, yes (editor’s note: sarcasm ahead). There’s nothing quite like calculated, tightly controlled glasnost, is there?
Clinton’s paranoia isn’t just manifested by her stubborn refusal to participate in the marketplace of ideas. It’s seen via her mass email deletion. And her foundation’s tax “discrepancies.”
Oh, and there are compelling reasons as to why she doesn’t want the truth out there … reasons the mainstream media has inexcusably glossed over as it’s written all these process stories about her lack of availability.
Therein lies the real story behind Clinton’s decision to belatedly begin interacting with the media … the fact there was a reason she didn’t want to in the first place. And the fact she got away with it right up to the point of literally lassoing the media into line.
Hillary for Prison 2016!!
Flip needs to join her, he’s a fellow socialist who loves taxing people.
You forgot BENGAHZI!!! lol
Yes we will screw you but you should vote for us because
If you think Lois Lerner/ IRS is a fake scandal you are a large part of what’s wrong with america.
??? ??? ??????? I keep telling you, she’s going to be assassinated by her lawn gnomes.
I had to run that through my super-duper Captain Midnite decoder ring/ alarm clock/ smoke detector/thermometer to decipher.
First part is right, the second part is true only if she is more evil.
That’s the trouble with English idioms. ?????? (men-YAH-yet) isn’t exactly “the difference.” It’s more “changes,” in Russian. But Muscovite Russian, which is what I was taught in college, allows the idiomatic reading fairly parallel to, if not congruent with “difference.” A Moscow Russian would ask, “What does it change?” rather than “what difference does it make.” This is why the dummies around Clintonette got the word for “reset” wrong, when she was trying to be clever. You stay with that super-duper Captain Midnite decoder ring/ alarm clock/ smoke detector/thermometer. It is far more accurate than I.
Yeah, I dug deeper and it seems to translate to “what does it change.”
“what difference does it make.” Was the first Translation I found.
Nyet and AK47 are the only Russian words I know.
Good words to know.
We don’t have have an impartial press corp, we have a partisan group that is the unofficial mouth organ of the left.
“It’s embarrassing Clinton is so scared of the press.”
“Just as it’s embarrassing the press is so subservient to Clinton.”
Somehow, those statements seem contradictory, but all so true.
Is it paranoia, on both sides? I am confused, not an unusual state of being for me.
Who she is, is damaging her campaign. The rope line incident only demonstrated to the idiots in the media, who she is.
The Clinton’s could tie up the press, keep them in bondage until after the election is over and the press would then still kiss the Clinton’s rings, asses, and their feet after thanking them.
I have said for the last few years that the organized press in this country should lose their First Amendment rights if they are going to be so openly partisan.
Might be worth it if we could get rid of Fox, Beck, Rush, Drudge, etc. etc etc. But the truth is what you are saying is total crap. Only from the view of the far right wing nuts are the regular news programs openly partisan. It is commentary programs that are partisan. That means Fox, Beck, Rush, and yes, MSNBC (most of time), etc. etc. The other net works are middle of the road.
To the right wing nuts, any anchor that does not blast Obama is partisan. They wold not know news if it bit them in the ass.
You are a typical repugnut. You have no facts to back you up so you just make up crap, and disparage anyone who trys to provide facts. The rest of us can’t help it if facts prove you right wing nuts are lying most if not all the time.
You wouldn’t be a little partisan yourself now would you? Maybe the Christian Science Monitor use to be close to the middle of the road but everyone and ever organization leans one way or the other.
What is your definition of partisan?
You don’t know the definition, you used the word more than once.
Nice shot at deflection though.
What question have I not answered? As I said different people define partisan in different ways. Using my definition of partisan, I am not a partisan. Does that clarify my answer?
“What question have I not answered? As I said different people define
partisan in different ways. Using my definition of partisan, I am not a
partisan. Does that clarify my answer?”
I can’t believe you posted that.
Gravely to the Left: CBS, NBC, ABC, MSNBC, NYT, WAPPO, The Statist, The Greenville Nudes, SCETV, WCIV-TV, WIS-TV, WOLO-TV, and half of WXLT-TV. (I specifically did not include CNN, because nobody watches unless forced to in an airport.)
As with most right wingers, you define the legitimate news sources as partisan; therefore you are free to ignore the facts they provide. The real problem you have with these news outlets, is they don’t only recite facts that support your point of view, and they don’t attack Obama and Clinton. Constantly attacking Obama, Clinton and Democrats is the right wings definition of non-partisan news..
How amazing you are! A genuine mind reader! Can you also summon lightning with your farts?
I’m sorry, maybe I missed it, but there are no facts to back up your assertion.
You can’t disprove a negative. If someone is claiming a particular person is partisan during a time designated as straight news, then produce examples. I can’t list all the news reports that were not partisan. That is stupid. But if you want I will come up with ten or fifteen news cast that were not partisan if that makes you feel better.
Links or it didn’t happen. I’ll be waiting.
I could do this all day, but no matter what anyone says, you are never going to believe if if its not on Fake New.
That’s only 8, apparently you can’t count either.
Ok, thats ten
Figured you cheap out and go with the lower promised number.
Yep, I cheap. See another example of name calling. You guys just can’t stop.
Switch Brittany to Hillary and here Jack
You don’t know the difference between the use of an adjective and name calling. I’m glad I don’t go around looking for the next situation to make me feel marginalized.
I don’t feel marginalized in the least. Why would I feel marginalized.
He is hard to figure, is Jack in or is Jack off.
Don’t mess with him, he won’t debate. Just calls his perceived opponents names and shows off his ignorance.
I love nothing better than providing facts to Wingnuts. They hate facts. Despite my providing numerous facts, in the form of proof that I both know the difference between news and commentary; I also proved the major networks and CNN provide straight news stories. You have provided nothing of value as usual.
You don’t know the difference between “news” and “Commentary.”
Get a grip, get a clue, you are coming across as an ill-educated, ill-informed, and just plain ill jerk.
If so, it takes one to know one.. You are a total idiot, of that there no doubt.
Come on Jack, “it takes one to know one”, that’s so play ground.
Surprised he break out the ole, “i’m rubber and you’re glue” routine.
Yes, sometimes you have to sink to the level of your detractors. Right wing nuts like to call people names. Its what they do. It was the Carl Rove strategy under Bush. If you don’t like the question, attack the person.
When someone calls you names, you just have to do the same back. What is to debate?
Stop wasting time and publish those links to the 10-15 non partisan news reports.
“When someone calls you names”…”repugnut”…pot meet kettle.
Exactly. I gave up not playing that game with the far right long ago. They always result to the name calling. Its their primary means of debate. As I said, its the Rove Strategy. Libtard, lazy, taker, pervert, jerk, Dimm, Partisan Hack, etc. etc. The far right almost always starts that way. So best just to deal with that up front.
Mommy, mommy, erneba hit me back first.
I call that deflection, wanna play some more?
Again, if you want facts I have provided them. I will stay away from the name calling so long as the far right does, but that is not going to happen. As you can see you are doing it right now. There was no name calling in my last post, but you responded by implying I am a “cry baby”. As I said, if you don’t like what people say you attack the speaker. You guys just can’t stop.
Hey Jack is back crying anytime anyone speaks ill of his lesbian sith lord. This is Jack when someone says something bad about that bitch. Just change the name https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHmvkRoEowc
Idcydm I rest my case. Thank you!
Then why to you come here if not to push other people’s buttons because it’s obvious they are pushing yours.
Because all Jack can do is use misdirection to make himself think he is making a point. You can list all you want about facts and wrong doings by Hillary, but all he will ever do is use slide of hand then say you aren’t doing anything if you cant defend your own side (what ever republican crap he tries to deflect it to) all the while he NEVER actually disproves the original point. All he does is change the subject and cries like a 12 year old girl. Its a common trait among all Hillary supporters. Now he claims he “rests his case”, yet he never made one to begin with. The article is about Hillary and he is talking GW Bush abd other out of no where BS. What point did he make? None. and he knows it. Now I can say things like I rest my case and drop the mic or whatever but just because I say that, doesn’t mean I won my argument, and he knows he didn’t win his. like I said he is a Taylor Swift kind of groupie that blindly defends anything bad ever said with out actually proving what was said is actually wrong. Watch this he talks Republican, but Ill point out Kennedy cheated on his wife with Marilyn Monroe. What does that have to do with anything being talked about? Nothing, but I will “rest my case” and walk away. Mic drop!!
You’re right he didn’t rest anything, he just ran away without responding to my first comment.
I did reply. I asked how you defined Partisan, as people define that a lot of different ways. If you are asking do I always support one side. No, I do not. If you are asking, am I a progressive. I would say yes. If you are asking me if I always support Democrats, absolutely not. If you are asking me, if I always oppose Republicans, no I do not, in fact Teddy Roosevelt is on my top ten list of Presidents.
So help me out, what are you asking?
“I did reply. I asked how you defined Partisan, as people define that a lot of different ways.”…that’s bull shit. If you’re so big on facts look up the definition of “Partisan” because if you can’t use the defined definition your facts are also what you perceive them to be.
You also ignored my, “everyone and every organization leans one way or the other” to your, “The other net works are middle of the road.” Since you make up your own definitions for words you wouldn’t know the middle of road if you were standing in it.
Actually I made several points. First I provided numerous example of straight unbiased news stories by ABC, NBC, CBS and CNN, whom I still contend are middle of the road and provide accurate news coverage.
Second, i said the far right are name callers. That they are always attacking the person, like you just did. I said rest my case when “Jill” did exactly what I said the right would do.
I come here for the same reason everyone does. To express my opinion. It has nothing to do with pushing buttons, unless pointing out people are wrong is pushing buttons. I try to provide facts if people want to hear them, but most on the far right do not.
You still haven’t responded to my first comment to you. All you’ve done is deflect from “everyone and every organization leans one way or the other”.
Like is said no one debates on this site, not even you.
Angry man: WHADDAYOU WANT?
Man: Well, Well, I was told outside that…
Angry man: DON’T GIVE ME THAT, YOU SNOTTY-FACED HEAP OF PARROT DROPPINGS!
A: SHUT YOUR FESTERING GOB, YOU TIT! YOUR TYPE MAKES ME PUKE! YOU VACUOUS TOFFEE-NOSED MALODOROUS PERVERT!!!
M: Yes, but I came here for an argument!!
A: OH! Oh! I’m sorry! This is abuse!
M: Oh! Oh I see!
A: Aha! No, you want room 12A, next door.
A: Not at all!
– MPFC The Argument Sketch”
Name calling is for the intellectually bankrupt.
I don’t disagree, but its what the far right does. So you just have to play that game while trying to make your points.
No you don’t, you choose to because it makes you feel good. Go ahead, admit it.
No actually I don’t care one way are the other. I can either play that game or not. But its easier just to play, because if you don’t the more facts you bring up the worse the name calling gets.
They all just take marching orders. Ask one of the liberals to think for themselves, and they are lost.
Right wing robots. Just take your marching orders from Fox, Rush, Beck, etc. Ask a wingnut to think and not only is he lost, he even lacks the information to know he is lost; because he lives inside a right wing echo chamber and has been lied to for so long.
Wingnuts will vote against their own interest because they hate blacks, browns, and gays, and the Republican party plays on their prejudices and fears.
I don’t care how hard her campaign tries, you can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.
Hillary Skittery needs more chain —- chain mail, with the body armor!
Today I went to my retirement stash of Silly Putty and inventoried it. Also weighed it to make sure that Hillary Skittery doesn’t get any of it to squash inside her skull… now I’ll have to do a check every week.
I heard a rumor that she will steal it, the next time she’s in her area. Unfortunately, I heard it on WIS-TV, so it may not be true.
ha-ha-ha-! (that’s 3 for ya’)
89$/hour I looked at the draft which said [email protected]