Hillary: Experienced? Not Even Informed!

Hillary Clinton has made the campaign’s focal point as her “experience.”

But she doesn’t seem to see facts as important.

Yesterday I noted Mike Huckabee’s excuse for not being aware of the Iran NIE report.

Hillary Clinton is under the impression that President Musharraf is running unopposed for reelection in Pakistan. In fact, Musharraf was reelected on October 6. The upcoming elections are for parliamentary seats.

“If President Musharraf wishes to stand for election, then he should abide by the same rules that every other candidate will have to follow,” she told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer (.pdf) Dec. 28. Two days later, she told ABC’s George Stephanopolous “[Musharraf] could be the only person on the ballot. I don’t think that’s a real election.”

A spokesman for Clinton, Howard Wolfson (one of the most obnoxious public spokesmen ever), said Clinton was referring to Musharraf’s party, not the president himself. However, Hot Air says that “she gets nearly everything about the Pakistani political situation and upcoming elections wrong.” Check his explanation.

42 thoughts on “Hillary: Experienced? Not Even Informed!”

  1. Why should a war goddess acquaint herself with paltry facts? Her husband and Bush Jr. have set the standard: Bombs away and facts be damned!

  2. History is glossed over in U.S. public schools.
    Historical facts are distorted and misrepresented. For example, shameful events such as internment of American citizens of Japanese ancestry during WWII are hardly ever mentioned, presented as an anomaly.

    In addition, there is no direct material gain from learning about history and discovering uncomfortable truths. So why bother.

    It is no wonder that the products of the disinformation machine cannot discern fact from fantasy and our politicians lead the country into the ravine.

    ** Those who do not know their country’s history are doomed to repeat the errors of the past ***

  3. The wannabe Empress is as educated on the issues as the rest of the degenerate media selected front runners. None of them are capable of running this Empire because they don’t live in reality.

  4. “History is glossed over in U.S. public schools.
    Historical facts are distorted and misrepresented. For example, shameful events such as internment of American citizens of Japanese ancestry during WWII are hardly ever mentioned, presented as an anomaly.”

    Absolutely false. I’ve taught history in public schools, and the textbooks I’ve seen and used deal extensively with issues such as slavery, indian removal, and – yes – the internment of Japanese citizens during WWII.

    But I’m not sure what any of this has to do with Hillary Clinton.

    1. mike,
      Then the abysmal ignorance of the great majority of our youth becomes harder to explain. The cretinism of American high school and university students in history and geography is legendary. If the textbooks are adequate and the courses mandatory, than this sorry state of affairs is perplexing. One possible explanation is perhaps the pervasive culture of greed and mindless consumerism that kids are constantly assailed with. The ‘idiot box’ warps their priorities and history is relegated to permanently deleted cerebral files.

    2. Yes, they “dealt” with those issues, but from what perspective, with what bias, and with what mixture of disinformation? For example, did your “history” texts detail Franklin D. Roosevelt’s involvement in pressuring the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor? Or Harry Truman’s refusal to accept the Japanese’ unconditional surrender in order to “demonstrate” U.S. nuclear power to the Soviets by way of the murder of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians? Just two of an avalanche of facts not “dealt with” in the public drone factories.

    3. “Absolutely false. I’ve taught history in public schools, and the textbooks I’ve seen and used deal extensively with issues such as slavery, indian removal, and – yes – the internment of Japanese citizens during WWII.”

      Bah. Easily 90% of what I would categorize as uncomfortable truths about U.S. history, especially the devilish details that would preclude the telling of whitewashed/fairy tale/limited hangout versions of the same events, are not to be found in public school textbooks. It’s mostly left to individuals on their own initiative outside of the state indoctrination centers known as public schools and the mainstream corporate media system to learn the unvarnished truth about this country. Looking back and knowing what I know now, it’s stunning just how brainwashed, ignorant, conforming, servile and lacking in the capacity for critical, independent thought people run through the public school system come out as. It has to be by design.

  5. Is it possible that there might be a more repellant public figure than Hillary Clinton? Seemingly a cross between Leonid Breszhnev and a senior level partner at some Big Six accounting firm, Clinton’s planned personality attains to the almost reptilian at times.

    I haven’t voted since 1992 but I’d seriously consider voting Republican next time out solely to ensure her defeat. That’s how utterly detestable I consider her. They could even put that paramecium, Giuliani, up and I’d vote for him just to keep Clinton’s tentacles off the wheel. I mean really, what have we become?

    1. Fantastic description! The ugly face of democratic pluralism!

      But seriously, John, let’s hope that a Republican vote doesn’t mean having to vote Giuliani. To do so would be opening the door to letting people like Norman Podhoretz (one of Giuliani’s top foreign policy advisors) call the shots, and I do mean shots… directed at Iran. It would then be our duty to the country and the rest of the world to vote against that nightmare, even if it meant voting Hillary (who, unfortunately is also a hawk on Iran).

      Hopefully, we’ll have a clearer picture of the Republican field after Iowa and NH. Wouldn’t it be nice not to vote for the lesser of two evils, just for once?!

      1. Hello Brian,

        I apologize, encouraging you to think as I did that I might actually vote for Giuliani or for any of the other Republicans except Paul. I am not a fascist and I shouldn’t be allowing others to think that way of me. But you see what the thought of a Clinton Presidency can do to an otherwise healthy human being. You become crazed, grasping at straws.

        I have abstained from voting for many years now and have only self respect to show for it. I only hope that in my dotage some usurper won’t come to the nursing home and con me into some absentee ballot hoax.

      2. That’s because we only have one party here in the US, and that’s the WAR party. No need to vote for the lesser of two evils, just vote Ron Paul. He voted against the war, and opposes undeclared war. Hillary, and Guiliani all bow down to AIPAC, just like all the other puppets, who are suppossed “front runners” They all work for special interests, not Americans like you or I.

    2. Thank you John for elucidating this matter for me. I was always at a lost trying to figure out the order, genus, family and species Giuliani belonged to.

      1. Hi Stan,

        Yes, one finds taxonomy a useful exposure when it comes to describing politicians. Happily, Giuliani presents little in the way of a challenge in this regard, although I’m not sure whether it was the multi-leggedness or the absence of a shell that made his case interesting. In any event, I’d see a doctor if you were to find evidence of him swimming around in a blood sample anytime soon. I’m told that early treatment is usually efficacious.

  6. I don’t mean to excuse ignorance, and I’d rather be posted on a pole like the Zulus used to do to their enemies than vote for Hillary, but I wonder if we don’t expect a little much sometimes. You’re campaigning 16-18 hours a day, you’ve got to have some ready retort for just about everything (since we insist on pestering our presidents and candidates about even the most jejune matters), and you have to remember mountains of trivia.

    Bush couldn’t name the Prime Minister of Thailand in 2000. Now that I think about it, I can’t either. Is it really that important? Get the big things right and fill in the details later. The correct knock against Hillary is that she gets the big things wrong. Piddly stuff is, well, piddly stuff, even if knowing is better than not knowing.

  7. “Two days later, she told ABC’s George Stephanopolous “[Musharraf] could be the only person on the ballot. I don’t think that’s a real election.'”

    I expect she’d be talking out of the other side of her mouth if she happily found herownself as the one and only on the ballot.

  8. Years ago I use to like the Clintons, but that´s quite different now. I follow the articles about the American candidates, seen from my German eyes, and I am shocked about all of them except Ron Paul!
    Wether the democratic nor the republics are clearly informed, most of them clueless and egotist.
    Guiliani was hiding and running at 9/11, leaving destortet radios.
    Huckaby got a fone call from God (?). Hillary says something, an then she utters the contrary. And all of them are pro WAR and stand for Israel first, not getting what the zionists had done to them and others. the rest is nuts – except Ron Paul.

  9. She CANNOT be wrong on anything – her arrogance informs her opinion. She CANNOT care about anything – her malevolence assures all others are just small people. She CANNOT be a leader – unless she divides and conquers, holding no leadership qualities innately that draw people in. Unfortunately, and sadly, she fits the “amerikan leader” mold perfectly.

  10. Very early on her campaign realized that one of her weaknesses was her lack of experience. So she immediatly started touting her “experience” she found one way or another to work this theme into every answer she gave. You know the old adage, tell a lie often enough and even you will believe it. So this is simply what she and her campaign staff are up to. Tell a lie often enough and mabey you can get enough voters to believe you.

  11. Clinton and “facts?” The old ‘shill-bag’ wouldn’t know a “fact” if that aforementioned “fact” walked up behind the old girl and bit her on her spreading bottom. Hillary Clinton and “facts?” That’s pretty darn funny and if it weren’t for the serious nature of the upcoming ‘presidential campaign’, the ‘Hill’ could do three or four minutes on Leno and it’d be a laugh riot.

  12. My problem with Clinton is not that she does not know all the ins and outs of the current political situation in Pakistan or the internal operating procedures of the various political parties of Pakistan. My problem with Clinton is that she is ignorant of these facts, yet contiues to support an interventionist foriegn policy.
    I think one of the primary problems with an interventionist foriegn policy is what Hayek refered to as the knowledge problem. I do not think it is realistic to expect any person to know all the ins and outs of the current political situation in the Sudan, or even to be knowledgeable about the differences between the Sunni and Shia variations of the Muslim religion. This knowledge along with the knowledge about the postponed elections in Pakistan would not be relevant if the United States Government did not meddle and just minded its own business. The only reason this information matters at all is because of the interventionist foriegn policy of the United States government. I think Clinton’s ignorant comments about Pakistan proves the wisdom of a noninterventionist foriegn policy, and vindicates Dr. Paul’s postion that the United States Government should not interfere in the current political situation in Pakistan, or anywhere for that matter.

  13. Dame Hillarious
    Just a continuation of all that ails this country.
    What a buffon
    It needs another Dynasty candidate like a hole in the head.
    What about Mena and the other dirty linen – why hasn’t the so called media picked up on that?
    I see Dr Paul is the only one of them who doesn’t think he has to visit Israel for the customary ‘annointing’ approval.
    Good enough for me !

  14. Hitlery has about as much chance of becoming president of the USA as did Pat Paulson.

    She is a joke.

    Just ignore her.

    1. I like “Hitlery” very much. Excellent imagery, although I think Brezhnev more of a match at a personal level. These might otherwise be subtle things, but imagining Hillary atop Lenin’s tomb with dour face together with four or five plumpish sixty-five year olds in overcoats is a lot easier than her in brown shirt with peaked cap and arm band beating up on some Social Democrat, wouldn’t you agree? And besides, her friends at the New York Post vastly prefer a less histrionic sort, one more predictably malleable as normally would be required of a manager of a Middle Eastern polcy tethered to a client state. I’d say “Breszhnevery”, then, as opposed to “Hitlery”, but have it your way if you insist.

  15. Well, I never thought I would be defending Hillary Clinton on here but she is certainly more experienced than Obama. And to call her "Hitlery"? I mean you guys really love to throw around that Hitler term for anyone you are angry at. Kind of childish if you ask me.

  16. Hillary’s so called experience is not worth squat. She voted for war with Iraq without reading the intelligence report. She voted to allow illigal aliens drivers licenses. She’s all for bombing the hell of Iran. She has given all her love and support to Isreal regardless how many international laws Isreal breaks and now she thinks Musharrif is running for reelection. She’s only a legend in her own mind. Sipping tea with Bhutto doesn’t make her an expert on foreign affairs. Look at who is financing her campaign and it will tell you who owns her. ” tell me who you associate with and I’ll tell you who you are”. She is associated with a bunch of unscrupulous and criminal characters. She will lose big time.

  17. The only experience Hillary has is at lying and stealing. She’s worse than Bush because she would do her crimes with better PR.

  18. Billary not only speaks out of both sides of her mouth but her ass as well. The corporations (military industrial complex) will win this election no matter who wins. Anyone who tries to deviate from their course will be eliminated by a lone-nut (witness J.F.K., M.L.K, and R.F.K.).

  19. I don’t care whether Hillary knows about Pakistan’s elections or the difference between a prime minister and a president, she will have plenty of time to learn these details. I worry more about her desire to interfere in the internal affairs of other countries even to the point of military action. Even if she had answered that question correctly I would still suggest that we vote for Ron Paul.

  20. Oh my gawd, you did NOT just link to Hot Air!


    Hillary is a turd. We don’t need to rely on the word of the mouth-breathers at Hot Air to confirm it.


  21. So now we know that not only is La Clinton pro-war, anti-gun, pro-police state, etc., but she turns out to be every bit as contemptuous of reality as our current reigning emperor, Shrub “Dubya” Enron. And she’s just as willing to take us to war for no reason but her corporate raider owners (she’s the top pick of the military-industrial complex) tell her to. More of the same corporate welfare and big-government liberal-conservatism. A vote for Hillary is a vote for Bush. She’s no different from Il Giuliani, that fascist paramecium. “Hitlery” indeed!

    If the GOP are so depraved as to reject Ron Paul for yet another Emperor Enron, Dr. Paul had better accept the Libertarian Party’s offer to run on their ticket. Then we can bypass the Republicrats and vote for the first electable Libertarian candidate. President Paul 2008!

    1. Dennis,

      “A vote for Hillary is a vote for Bush. She’s no different from Il Giuliani, that fascist paramecium. “Hitlery” indeed!”

      Ah, yes, a man sufficiently familiar with both parasitology and the history of National Socialism to make a meaningful contribution to today’s political discourse. A unique combination of talents but one badly needed at this time. Nicely done, Dennis.

Comments are closed.