Community >> View Thread

Author
Comicguy1


Member Since: Tue Apr 04, 2017
Posts: 1,275


Statements like this for example:


http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/oct/16/hillary-clinton/clinton-gun-industry-wholly-protected-all-lawsuits/


It's pretty hypocritical too when she keeps on going after the NRA and other politicians regarding gun control.


Posted with Google Chrome 48.0.2564.116 on Windows 10
The Black Guardian

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 24,731


She's certainly not being entirely truthful, but what hypocrisy?


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 10
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 15,940


What hypocrisy? She is not telling the truth but if one wants to be honest about the gun control debate than one has to acknowledge that both sides are full of liars.

It is sort of the nature of all politics in the current climate but in particular things like gun control and abortion are highlighted by lies, half-truths and various other incorrect things.

Not saying that Clinton has never been a hypocrite or that the other side doing it makes another ok but what hypocrisy is in this example in particular?

In my experience, like I said, there are very very few debates about gun control that are not full of pretty much the worst sort of honesty and analysis. It is almost a prime example of starting with your end point and then working your way from it through the evidence to justify the conclusion.




Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 7
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 2,219



    Quote:
    Statements like this for example:






    Quote:

    It's pretty hypocritical too when she keeps on going after the NRA and other politicians regarding gun control.


...the DNC wanted Clinton at all costs and thus swept this kinda thing under the rug. Kinda like how you will see FOX do with a ;lot of Trump stuff.


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
atrimus


Location: Saint Louis, MO
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 1,993



    Quote:
    Statements like this for example:






    Quote:

    It's pretty hypocritical too when she keeps on going after the NRA and other politicians regarding gun control.


As others have said, it isn't so much hypocrisy as it is bending the truth.

But I wonder why this is being brought up now, when the article is over two years old. Not to say that the past can't be discussed, but has she said something recently that broached this topic?





Posted with Google Chrome 63.0.3239.84 on Windows 7
Unstable Molecule


Location: Calgary, AB Canada
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 2,816


Why would anyone need to call her out? She's not a senator, not a congresswoman, not a representative, not a judge or a dog catcher. She's a private citizen who will never be in politics again. Her opinions aren't relevant.




And a lean, silent figure slowly fades into the gathering darkness, aware at last that in this world, with great power there must also come -- great responsibility!
Posted with Google Chrome 63.0.3239.132 on Windows 10
Comicguy1


Member Since: Tue Apr 04, 2017
Posts: 1,275


The Hypocrisy comes from her always bashing the NRA for spewing BS about guns (Which they do.), and saying that them and Republican lawmakers were "Complicit." in the Vegas shootings. In fact, pretty much right after the shooting she blasted the NRA in a Tweet. I guess that she didn't even have to wait for the facts to come out, or the fact that the guns were obtained legally and that he was stockpiling (Which most gun owners certainly don't do.). Not to mention the BS that she said about Bernie Sanders siding with the gun manufacturers instead of the children and families of the Sandy Hook shooting after he said that he didn't think that gun manufacturers should be sued. That's where the hypocrisy comes from.


Posted with Google Chrome 48.0.2564.116 on Windows 10
The Black Guardian

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 24,731


Lying or twisting the truth is not hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is when you say one thing but do another. Were she secretly supporting the NRA, then there would be some hypocrisy.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 10
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 15,940



    Quote:
    The Hypocrisy comes from her always bashing the NRA for spewing BS about guns (Which they do.), and saying that them and Republican lawmakers were "Complicit." in the Vegas shootings. In fact, pretty much right after the shooting she blasted the NRA in a Tweet. I guess that she didn't even have to wait for the facts to come out, or the fact that the guns were obtained legally and that he was stockpiling (Which most gun owners certainly don't do.). Not to mention the BS that she said about Bernie Sanders siding with the gun manufacturers instead of the children and families of the Sandy Hook shooting after he said that he didn't think that gun manufacturers should be sued. That's where the hypocrisy comes from.


As BG points out, that is not hypicrisy. Those can be considered varying degrees of lies, half-truths and cherry picking but they are not hypocrisy.

From what you are describing, she is consistent with all of this.

For what it is worth, the NRA deserves more blasting than it gets. As it has corrupted what gun rights were in the US for about two hundred years.




Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 7
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 2,219



    Quote:

      Quote:
      The Hypocrisy comes from her always bashing the NRA for spewing BS about guns (Which they do.), and saying that them and Republican lawmakers were "Complicit." in the Vegas shootings. In fact, pretty much right after the shooting she blasted the NRA in a Tweet. I guess that she didn't even have to wait for the facts to come out, or the fact that the guns were obtained legally and that he was stockpiling (Which most gun owners certainly don't do.). Not to mention the BS that she said about Bernie Sanders siding with the gun manufacturers instead of the children and families of the Sandy Hook shooting after he said that he didn't think that gun manufacturers should be sued. That's where the hypocrisy comes from.



    Quote:
    As BG points out, that is not hypicrisy. Those can be considered varying degrees of lies, half-truths and cherry picking but they are not hypocrisy.



    Quote:
    From what you are describing, she is consistent with all of this.



    Quote:
    For what it is worth, the NRA deserves more blasting than it gets. As it has corrupted what gun rights were in the US for about two hundred years.


Her hierocracy is in calling others liars, or that she supports other or that she wanted to bring this country together while only talking to certain segments of it. So agree in this at least she was not full of hierocracy...she probably is somewhere else...all politicians are.


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 15,940



    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:
        The Hypocrisy comes from her always bashing the NRA for spewing BS about guns (Which they do.), and saying that them and Republican lawmakers were "Complicit." in the Vegas shootings. In fact, pretty much right after the shooting she blasted the NRA in a Tweet. I guess that she didn't even have to wait for the facts to come out, or the fact that the guns were obtained legally and that he was stockpiling (Which most gun owners certainly don't do.). Not to mention the BS that she said about Bernie Sanders siding with the gun manufacturers instead of the children and families of the Sandy Hook shooting after he said that he didn't think that gun manufacturers should be sued. That's where the hypocrisy comes from.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        As BG points out, that is not hypicrisy. Those can be considered varying degrees of lies, half-truths and cherry picking but they are not hypocrisy.

        Quote:

          Quote:
          From what you are describing, she is consistent with all of this.

          Quote:

            Quote:
            For what it is worth, the NRA deserves more blasting than it gets. As it has corrupted what gun rights were in the US for about two hundred years.



    Quote:
    Her hierocracy is in calling others liars, or that she supports other or that she wanted to bring this country together while only talking to certain segments of it. So agree in this at least she was not full of hierocracy...she probably is somewhere else...all politicians are.


I am not saying she has never been hypocritical. I just do not see it in the example being pointed out right now. As you say, politics is about different levels of hypocrisy.

I do find it telling though that we are still talking about Clinton, or some are. She has no direct political power, is not in a position of power and is reported to have no interest in going after it. Yet we are worried about what a private citizen thinks on a matter like this.

Why do we care at the moment if she is going to bring the country together. Seems like the guy in power is doing a bang up job of tearing it apart while lying more than pretty much any previous president has (see a post I had some down on the matter).

That should be more concerning at this point than Clinton not being truthful anymore. Don't get me wrong. She is a liar. In my mind she is the definition of a politician. What we ended up with is both hypocritical, a liar and surrounded himself with a propaganda army of yes men that is in the process of using law enforcement to directly do the president's will.

But let's worry about Clinton still.

I went way off track on that, but it is just frustrating to me.




Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 7
Superman's Pal

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 3,154



    Quote:
    I do find it telling though that we are still talking about Clinton, or some are. She has no direct political power, is not in a position of power and is reported to have no interest in going after it. Yet we are worried about what a private citizen thinks on a matter like this.

I thought at first that it was just Trump being a sore winner. It wasn't enough that he became President, he had to continue to tear down those who didn't, or no longer were. Or it was a deflection; every time he was criticized he would go to his nearest punching bag.

My new theory is that he doesn't want any other Dems to have a voice or build a following. Keep Obama alive in everyone's consciousness because he can't run again. Keep Hillary alive because he beat her once and thinks maybe he can again. Don't let any other Dems into the spotlight. There must be some reason he continues to slate them a year later. I doubt it has anything to do with seeking justice for their alleged wrongdoings.


Posted with Google Chrome 63.0.3239.111 on Linux
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 15,940



    Quote:

      Quote:
      I do find it telling though that we are still talking about Clinton, or some are. She has no direct political power, is not in a position of power and is reported to have no interest in going after it. Yet we are worried about what a private citizen thinks on a matter like this.

    I thought at first that it was just Trump being a sore winner. It wasn't enough that he became President, he had to continue to tear down those who didn't, or no longer were. Or it was a deflection; every time he was criticized he would go to his nearest punching bag.



    Quote:
    My new theory is that he doesn't want any other Dems to have a voice or build a following. Keep Obama alive in everyone's consciousness because he can't run again. Keep Hillary alive because he beat her once and thinks maybe he can again. Don't let any other Dems into the spotlight. There must be some reason he continues to slate them a year later. I doubt it has anything to do with seeking justice for their alleged wrongdoings.


There may be something to that. Trump has consistently shown a very thin skin to everything. And even if not insulted he will call out and insult others just because.

Clinton is a favorite scape goat because she was his foe in the election. At this point most presidents are no longer talking about the election or their opponent from over a year ago. Sore winner comes to mind.

I know some look at it as tactics, but given the various reports over time I think Trump is just an extremely reactionary guy who likes to repeat stories over and over again. The guy cannot stay on message even if it is in his interest. Other than everybody is out to get Trump but Trump is the greatest at everything.





Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 7
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 2,219



    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:
        I do find it telling though that we are still talking about Clinton, or some are. She has no direct political power, is not in a position of power and is reported to have no interest in going after it. Yet we are worried about what a private citizen thinks on a matter like this.

      I thought at first that it was just Trump being a sore winner. It wasn't enough that he became President, he had to continue to tear down those who didn't, or no longer were. Or it was a deflection; every time he was criticized he would go to his nearest punching bag.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        My new theory is that he doesn't want any other Dems to have a voice or build a following. Keep Obama alive in everyone's consciousness because he can't run again. Keep Hillary alive because he beat her once and thinks maybe he can again. Don't let any other Dems into the spotlight. There must be some reason he continues to slate them a year later. I doubt it has anything to do with seeking justice for their alleged wrongdoings.



    Quote:
    There may be something to that. Trump has consistently shown a very thin skin to everything. And even if not insulted he will call out and insult others just because.



    Quote:
    Clinton is a favorite scape goat because she was his foe in the election. At this point most presidents are no longer talking about the election or their opponent from over a year ago. Sore winner comes to mind.



    Quote:
    I know some look at it as tactics, but given the various reports over time I think Trump is just an extremely reactionary guy who likes to repeat stories over and over again. The guy cannot stay on message even if it is in his interest. Other than everybody is out to get Trump but Trump is the greatest at everything.


I think its because its in his mind that they are looking to his potential Russian connections...so she still makes a good scapegoat to turn the focus away from him.

He hasn't been completely terrible in all areas, and things are currently pretty decent as far as economy and such. But he also has dome some incredibly terrible things...so shift the focus to anyone else and how terrible they are works in his interests.


Posted with Google Chrome 58.0.3029.110 on Windows 10
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 15,940



    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:

          Quote:
          I do find it telling though that we are still talking about Clinton, or some are. She has no direct political power, is not in a position of power and is reported to have no interest in going after it. Yet we are worried about what a private citizen thinks on a matter like this.

        I thought at first that it was just Trump being a sore winner. It wasn't enough that he became President, he had to continue to tear down those who didn't, or no longer were. Or it was a deflection; every time he was criticized he would go to his nearest punching bag.

        Quote:

          Quote:
          My new theory is that he doesn't want any other Dems to have a voice or build a following. Keep Obama alive in everyone's consciousness because he can't run again. Keep Hillary alive because he beat her once and thinks maybe he can again. Don't let any other Dems into the spotlight. There must be some reason he continues to slate them a year later. I doubt it has anything to do with seeking justice for their alleged wrongdoings.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        There may be something to that. Trump has consistently shown a very thin skin to everything. And even if not insulted he will call out and insult others just because.

        Quote:

          Quote:
          Clinton is a favorite scape goat because she was his foe in the election. At this point most presidents are no longer talking about the election or their opponent from over a year ago. Sore winner comes to mind.

          Quote:

            Quote:
            I know some look at it as tactics, but given the various reports over time I think Trump is just an extremely reactionary guy who likes to repeat stories over and over again. The guy cannot stay on message even if it is in his interest. Other than everybody is out to get Trump but Trump is the greatest at everything.



    Quote:
    I think its because its in his mind that they are looking to his potential Russian connections...so she still makes a good scapegoat to turn the focus away from him.



    Quote:
    He hasn't been completely terrible in all areas, and things are currently pretty decent as far as economy and such. But he also has dome some incredibly terrible things...so shift the focus to anyone else and how terrible they are works in his interests.


Yes, but is the economy on him. Given that it was already pretty decent at the end of the Obama years? What major economic policy has Trump or the GOP done to have the various gains attribute to him alone?

There was the tax cut, but that just happened in very late December. Before that the stock market was happy, but that is not a great indicator of total economic prosperity.

The economy is good, but I think we have to keep in mind that just because Trump or any president likes to take credit for things when they are good it is usually not their doing. Particularly if they have done little and taken other steps that will hurt economically down the line.

His unpopularity is very much unprecedented, same with the GOP, considering the economic state of things. Does not bode too well for them.

Also, I am not sure a current decent economy is worth losing a competent government for. More than any other group he is replacing competent individuals with yes men than do the will of corporations. Granted, all do that at varying degrees, but he is quite open about it.






Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 7
Comicguy1


Member Since: Tue Apr 04, 2017
Posts: 1,275


But Hillary should still be called out. Granted, she's not really all THAT relevant anymore, but to me she does come off as hypocritical when she bashes the NRA and others for doing some of the same stuff that she does, and politicizing tragedies (Her comments regarding Bernie Sanders and Sandy Hook.). just like they do. Maybe hypocrisy isn't the right word, but I think that you get my point.


Posted with Google Chrome 56.0.2924.87 on Linux
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 15,940



    Quote:
    But Hillary should still be called out. Granted, she's not really all THAT relevant anymore, but to me she does come off as hypocritical when she bashes the NRA and others for doing some of the same stuff that she does, and politicizing tragedies (Her comments regarding Bernie Sanders and Sandy Hook.). just like they do. Maybe hypocrisy isn't the right word, but I think that you get my point.


No, but again lies are not hypocrisy. One is not hypocritical for pointing out things with others that may be hypocritical.

One could even be hypocritical about one thing but have a point in something else. I just do not see her as being hypocritical here. If she praised the NRA in one breathe and then turned around and knocked them that would be hypocritical. That has not happened, that I know about anyway.

I think, at least in my view, that calling what she says out at this point is very much pointless. It is much more useful to call out individuals with power and abusing the power in the first place. A politifact statement of a quote made some time ago is not really that relevant.

She is not really relevant anymore outside of Trump's deranged mind. If we are to call out lies, cherry picking, hypocrisy;s and so on there are much better targets in the US to worry about than Hillary Clinton.




Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 7
MysteryMan


Member Since: Fri Apr 28, 2017
Posts: 2,219



    Quote:
    Statements like this for example:






    Quote:

    It's pretty hypocritical too when she keeps on going after the NRA and other politicians regarding gun control.


...she was a terrible candidate. I mean really...losing to Trump?!?!


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 10
Trent Trueheart


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 734






    Quote:
    ...she was a terrible candidate. I mean really...losing to Trump?!?!


She was a terrible candidate because people thought she was a terrible candidate. She had too much baggage, both real and imagined. If she had done everything she's been accused of, but only became nationally known in 2015-16, she would have easily won. Obviously Trump has been nationally known longer than she has, but since he wasn't involved in politics (much), I don't think most people had strong feelings about him either way before he said he was running for president.

In some ways, I think they were the right opponents for each other. For most people, I don't think the truth matters when it comes to their opinions of either of them. It didn't matter if you could prove or disprove accusations against either of them. Once an opinion was formed on them, most people would not be swayed.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 10
Comicguy1


Member Since: Tue Apr 04, 2017
Posts: 1,275


She must have, because every time she was discussing guns and the like, she kept on evoking dead families (Emotional manipulation.) and saying stuff like "The NRA and gun manufacturers are bad, gun violence is bad.", and people seemed to love it. Bernie Sanders was getting booed and accused of siding with the gun lobby because he said that he didn't think that the families of Sandy Hook victims should sue because guns are a legal product (Um, how is that wrong?). She got a lot of applause whenever she mentioned how bad banks and Wall Street are (Without really getting into all of the thousands of dollars that they've given her and that she took for at least a decade.).
She said a lot of stereotypical things that a lot of people wanted to hear, and she did manage to beat good old Bernie. The media seemed to like her a lot more, that's for sure.


Posted with Google Chrome 48.0.2564.116 on Windows 10
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 15,940


she won the popular vote by a sizable margin. Some like to say it is California but that is still part of the US. When we talk about support from most people it is true that more people supported her.

That said, she did lose important states. By small margins in a few that still represented big flips.

We also tend to forget how strange this race was and just blame her outright. Really it highlights some potentially disturbing trends in some areas of the electorate. Or that the FBI said there was nothing between Trump and Russia, despite internal evidence not showing that at that point in time. And the FBI public ally announcing new email data that turned out to be nothing right before the election.

Trump won, but it was hardly a standard race. It ran from scandal to scandal for the most part with swings like that. And from most polling data it was based more on racial sorts of concerns than economic ones. Which I find troubling. Does not change the result, but it is not a good look for the US.




Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 7
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 15,940


How is that much different than conservative Republican NRA supporters getting a pass for implying that folks should rise up against government, shooting cut-outs of Democratic leaders and so on and so forth? Those may even be worse IMO.

Or the various lies from that side that are never called out. Seemed like Clinton was at least fact checked on a fair bit. Some things may have been brushed over more simply because the rate Trump lies at is unusual and never before seen in American politics.

Nearly everything the guy says is a cherry pick, half-truth or outright lie. It is hard to compete with something like that for air time.




Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 7
bd2999


Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 15,940


http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article195231139.html

Speaking of the NRA. Apparently the FBI and others are looking into some questionable money they had received to aid Trump. Not a good look at any rate, nothing may come of it, but it is not a good look at all.




Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 57.0 on Windows 7

Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2018 Powermad Software