In the interview, she dismissed suggestions that revelations her campaign had planted questions during campaign stops in Iowa reinforced any image for calculation.
"I think in campaigns things happen and you just go on, and that's certainly what I've done for 35 years and it's what I've done for eight years in the White House and now seven years in the Senate," said Clinton. She has indicated she knew nothing about the planted questions, but some of her rivals have cited the issue to argue she is less than genuine.
"First, I've been tested, I've been through it," said Clinton. "I have no illusions about what the Republicans will do to keep the White House."
"People aren't going to vote for us because of who we are, they will vote for us because what we'll do, what we've done and what difference we can make," said Clinton.
She's admitted to being "We are the President" for eight years in the White House. She's already been President for eight years, how can she even be considered for POTUS again?
What does she mean "what the Republicans will do to keep the White House"? Is this her excuse when the Democrats don't choose her as their candidate? Or if they do, when she loses the election?
Anyone besides me notice that she never actually answers a question? "What question?" "I didn't hear a question." "I think we've already covered that." No we haven't! Hillary hasn't been truthful because she has not answered the questions posed to her. And she doesn't ever plan to answer the questions. If it's not Baraka Hussein Obama's "Read My Book" all the while knowing he was only partially truthful in his books, it's Hillary Rodham Clinton's "we've already answered that" knowing full well that she has done nothing of the kind. How can either of these persons be acceptable to thinking people as candidates for POTUS?
And just how will she whine and spin Norman Hsu?
No comments:
Post a Comment