You can't make this ish up. Lying comes so easily to the Clintons, its almost pathological. <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/RKkTYGrUL5Q" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
I saw that. Pretty damn sketchy! A very Ted Cruz'esque lie. Of course Jimmy Carter was an honorable man and it got him nowhere in the White House. Lesson learned I guess.
Hillary is just a difficult sell if principles are qualities you are looking in a candidate. Everytime I watch her debates vs. Sanders, I need to pause and question stuff that she says. On the Republican side, the Canadian-born Cuban is proving to be quite a sleazy scumbag, whose presidential race will soon be over. Sanders might be a socialist, but if you spend any time listening to him, you know him to be a principled person, perhaps too principled for this political cycle.
Haha, she isn't lying there. This is always one of her weakness. She doesn't seem that aware of the perception of her answers. Something that politicians, by nature, need to be strong at.
As I've stated to the board before, I have been through significant training to detect body language as well as verbal cues that indicate when someone is not telling the truth. Hillary is lying in this video. She exhibited the obvious signs.
this evil b**** sucks at lying about lying. could have made a joke about lying to a teacher or a friend as a kid or something and lighten the mood.
Politicians lie? Wow that is big news. I do not care if someone lies as long as they are competent and get the job done. We are not picking saints here.
The crazy thing is if anyone else ran on Hillary's middle of the road politics, they'd be a shoe in to win..but Hillary's always had this reputation for being a dishonest person and she's been so polarizing in the past because of her crappy attitude and lack of respect for others, that it makes it very hard for moderates to vote her in to the white house.
Oh please. Ya'll act as if we (the public) are obligated to know everything about the government. Obviously there are some pretty big kept secrets from the public, but does that mean the government is lying to us even if they were asked about it and didn't admit to it? No -- it just means there are certain things that should be kept confidential. Of course, to lie for personal gain or deceit of others is not cool. And shouldn't be tolerated. But working for the government -- there's some things you're going to hold back from the public. That's just the way it is.
Terrible response by Clinton but also a very unfair question to ask. She's been heavily involved in policy since the 1990's and was also Secretary of State. Of course she's has to lie and hide the truth from the public. Everyone who has been in those positions has had to. I'm pretty sure Sanders has had to prevaricate considering as a Senator he's probably been in classified briefings yet I doubt Pelley would ask him the same question.
As I've said before I can fully agree with that assessment and still think she is a better choice than Sanders and than the leaders of the GOP race. This has been a long problem with politics in the age of media saturation. People are more interested in likeability than capability. This was a very big problem with Al Gore in his race with GW Bush where many cited that GW as being someone you would like to have a beer with as a reason to vote for him. For me personally I've never seen a presidential candidate who agrees with me on all issues. While there are certainly candidates who I think I would enjoy hanging out with given that I most likely never actually will I don't see that as a big issue. The time I can see likeability as an issue would be in how they represent the US to the rest of the world. That said GW Bush by most accounts was a very likeable guy but that didn't help US standing under his presidency.
Can you provide a concrete example of when it's appropriate to lie as a Secretary of State or as a high level government official? Classified or confidential can remain as so. No? Why is lying the choice when you could refuse to answer or provide classified/confidential info?
IMO the biggest problem for Gore was the morons who kept repeating the insane lie that there would be no difference between a Gore Presidency and a Bush Presidency. And I hear a lot of Sanders supporters spouting essentially the same BS, in justifying why they won't support Hillary if she wins the nomination.
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/UErR7i2onW0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> if the job they sold you was a lie how can they get the job done?
Well it's hard to say for sure that all of those were "lies", he might have just been naive enough at the time to think he could actually deliver on some of that. There's a thin line between naivete or ignorance and outright lying.
EXACTLY the type of thinking that allows politicians to continue to screw the people over and EXACTLY what they are rebelling against on both sides of the aisle.
Well I'm not excusing it really, just saying that it might not have been all lies. Saying that a politician was too ignorant or naive to know that the BS he was spewing was false doesn't mean that it's okay, it just means that the people elected someone they shouldn't have. You basically get to pick from ignorant, naive, or untrustworthy to describe Obama as a candidate yet he still won twice. The issue is that the American people don't hold it against politicians for being ignorant, naive, or untrustworthy. If they really cared about someone being ignorant, naive, or untrustworthy there's no way Hillary would still be in the race because she'd have no support. She's not only completely untrustworthy when it comes to the things she says, she also displayed a criminal level of incompetence when she held high office in the past.
