5 Comments

• 1. Mark Noonan  |  November 12th, 2007 at 1:33 am

  Well golly gee and shucks…poor, little lady can’t be expected to keep track of all that tricky political stuff, now can she? She’s just a woman, after all…and she deserves special consideration just because of that. Aren’t you aware that the whole thrust of feminism was that women are incapable of being as strong as men and must never be held to the same standards as men are?

  Geesh, its like you weren’t even paying attention over the past few years!

  /Sarcasm off

• 2. TiredofLibBullshit  |  November 12th, 2007 at 12:22 pm

  After a news conference, Hillary and her staff were exiting the podium (while reporters were still asking questions). A staff member drew back a curtain so Hillary could make her exit (hastily I might add - no chance for planted questions among this group, if Hillary was avoiding them). Four large American flags fell around them.

  Luckily, they did have the presence of mind to catch the flags before they hit the ground. (I count this as a reflex action rather than conscience thought.)

  Was this an omen?

  Was this the work of ghosts of veterans past?

  Was this due to the hasty exit?

  Time will tell.

• 3. Ricorun  |  November 12th, 2007 at 3:46 pm

  Mark: Well golly gee and shucks…poor, little lady can’t be expected to keep track of all that tricky political stuff, now can she?

  I’m not necessarily excusing her of anything, mind you — and certainly not on the basis of her sex — but if you hold Hillary accountable for everything anyone affiliated with her campaign does, then you also have to account for Jeff Gannon on the same terms. After all, fair is fair, right?

• 4. Almiranta  |  November 12th, 2007 at 7:48 pm

  Fair is fair, but there is a difference between calling on someone you know is sympathetic (and who is probably known to all in the room as sympathetic) and calling on an anonymous person who is planted with the specific intent of tossing out a question designed to make the candidate look better.

  Gannon’s question to Bush was portrayed by the Left as “sympathetic enough to have been a plant” but there was never anything beyond the opinon of some anti-Bush people to indicate that Gannon was, in fact, a plant. Gannon says he posed the question to point out the hypocrisy of the Left. (Guess that explains why they got so upset about it…)

  When Bush would call on Helen Thomas, for example, everyone knew she would do anything she could to try to make him look bad, even quoting invented “facts”. I never saw the radical Left getting upset about Helen, or claiming that she was “planting” spurious psuedo-facts in the record in the guise of asking questions. But once a reporter failed to treat Bush like the enemy, and asked a question that did not try to make Bush look bad, they had a fit.

  Very different case with Hillary, here, Rico. This was not a situation where everyone in the room knew who was who, who had what agenda.

  And the real issue is not whether the question was a plant—it is Hillary’s effort to dodge the issue and, surprise surprise, try to blame it on someone else.

• 5. Tractatus  |  November 12th, 2007 at 9:48 pm

  you also have to account for Jeff Gannon on the same terms

  And those FEMA employees, just to name a recent example. But hey, it’s not as though the Bushies ever paid off, say, Armstrong Williams to shill for the administration. Or created pre-packaged, ready-to-air news stories without disclosing that they came from the administration.

  Oh, wait, they did do those things.

  And then the right wing was outraged!

  Oh, wait, they weren’t outraged at all. I wonder why they’re so huffy now all of a sudden? New site, same hypocrisy.