Modern Journalism: Viral Lying

WALKER 2016-2

Scott Walker has done it again. And by “done it” I mean “been the victim of a vicious media smear.”

T. Becket Adams:

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker believes forced ultrasounds are “just a cool thing for women,” a handful of online news sites reported Wednesday.

Problem is: That’s not exactly what the Republican governor and likely 2016 presidential candidate said.

In an interview Friday with conservative radio host Dana Loesch, Walker defended a bill that he signed into law in 2013 mandating that women seeking abortions must also be provided with ultrasounds.

The measure, Senate Bill 206, or Sonya’s Law, reads, “This bill requires … that before a person may perform or induce an abortion the physician … [must] perform, or arrange for a qualified person to perform, an ultrasound on the pregnant woman using whichever transducer the woman chooses.”

Walker bragged in his interview with Loesch that he and his team, “defunded Planned Parenthood.”

“We also signed a law that requires an ultrasound. Which, the thing about that, the media tried to make that sound like that was a crazy idea,” he said.

The Wisconsin governor, who is also the father to two sons, then marveled at the technology behind ultrasounds.

“Most people I talk to, whether they’re pro-life or not, I find people all the time who’ll get out their iPhone and show me a picture of their grandkids’ ultrasound and how excited they are, so that’s a lovely thing. I think about my sons are 19 and 20, you know we still have their first ultrasound picture. It’s just a cool thing out there,” he said.

“We just knew if we signed that law, if we provided the information, that more people if they saw that unborn child would, would make a decision to protect and keep the life of that unborn child,” he added.

Newsrooms took it from there, editing together Walker’s comments so that they could claim in headlines that the Republican lawmaker said “forced ultrasounds” are “cool.”

Right Wing Watch, a left-wing watchdog group, was one of the first to take on Walker’s comments, publishing a story Tuesday titled “Scott Walker: Ultrasounds Should Be Mandatory Since They’re ‘A Cool Thing.'”

On Wednesday, multiple newsrooms appeared to follow Right Wing Watch’s lead.

Talking Points Memo published a headline that read, “Scott Walker: Mandatory Ultrasounds Are ‘Just A Cool Thing’ For Women.”

“Potential 2016 Republican presidential candidate and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) said in an interview on Friday that mandatory ultrasounds for women hoping to get an abortion was ‘just a cool thing,'” read the opening paragraph to TPM’s write up of the Walker interview.

Politico published a story with the headline, “Scott Walker on mandatory ultrasounds: ‘It’s just a cool thing out there.'” That headline has since been amended so that it now reads, “Scott Walker defends mandatory ultrasounds.”

The Week chimed in, “Scott Walker defends mandatory ultrasounds: They’re ‘just a cool thing.'”

Not to be outdone, Salon claimed in its write-up of Walker’s remarks that he said, “Women should be forced to have transvaginal ultrasounds because they are ‘a cool thing.'”

Raw Story also jumped in with a story titled, “Scott Walker: Women should be forced to have ultrasounds because they’re ‘a cool thing.'”

Then there was Mother Jones, which published a report titled, “Scott Walker Says Mandatory Ultrasounds Are ‘Just a Cool Thing’ for Women.”

Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards cashed in on the media brouhaha Wednesday afternoon by saying in a statement to NPR that, “Women are very clear that forced government ultrasounds are not ‘cool.'”

Technically, you could argue (as Josh Marshall was doing last night) that the original story is true because Scott Walker actually said all the things he is quoted as saying. But if you argued that you would be both wrong and stupid.

There is a word for selectively quoting someone out of context to distort or change the meaning of what they said. That word is “lying”.

Meanwhile, over at the New York Times:

Carly Fiorina, in an Ambush of Hillary Clinton, Gets Defensive

Carly Fiorina spends a lot of her time as a Republican presidential candidate attacking Hillary Rodham Clinton, the leading Democratic candidate, and has earned considerable news coverage for it. On Wednesday, with Mrs. Clinton set to give a speech at a South Carolina hotel, Ms. Fiorina arranged a news conference outside – for little reason, it seemed, other than to taunt her.

Unlike Mrs. Clinton, she pointedly assured reporters, she would take their questions.

And she did – saying, for example, that she did not regret appearing at one Clinton Global Initiative event herself, despite the controversy recently over foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation. “Last year we didn’t know all the things that we now know about the Clinton Foundation,” Ms. Fiorina said.

Would she go back? “Well, that was a hypothetical,” she said. “My guess is, they won’t invite me again.”

But Ms. Fiorina quickly grew discomfited when the questions seemed to treat her more as a heckler pulling a stunt than as a formidable candidate making an otherwise significant campaign stop.

One reporter asked if Ms. Fiorina was being used by the men in the Republican field to harass Mrs. Clinton.

Ms. Fiorina insisted she had planned her trip here “many, many weeks ago, so perhaps she’s following me.” She said she had lots more to offer than merely Clinton-bashing: “Anyone who has sat through these avails over many months knows that I will take any question on any subject, and the vast majority of my speeches in front of anyone are about a host of issues.”

About 20 reporters and photographers circled her near a side entrance to the Marriott, leaning in to hear Ms. Fiorina, the former Hewlett-Packard chief executive who spoke softly, at times barely audible.

One reporter asked if she was here because of Mrs. Clinton.

“I planned to be here weeks and weeks ago!” she said. “I have a luncheon to go to, with the G.O.P. here.”

At this hotel?

“This trip has been on my itinerary for a very long time,” she said.

Ms. Fiorina was only too glad to discuss immigration reform — she criticized President Obama and Mrs. Clinton — and equal pay. “A man can sit in a government office and watch pornography all day long,” and still earn more than a hard-working woman in the same job, she said. Women, she said, were “held to different standards.”

She did not indicate whether she felt that was true of Mrs. Clinton as well. But she stressed that Mrs. Clinton needed to be held accountable.

“I hope you will continue to be as aggressive with Mrs. Clinton, wherever she is,” Ms. Fiorina said.

“All right, thank you, everyone,” an aide interjected after about 11 minutes.

A reporter tried to pose another question. But Ms. Fiorina demurred.

“Thanks, you guys — I have a lunch to go to,” she said, carefully stepping across the cables stretching to the satellite trucks that had arrived to record Mrs. Clinton’s appearance inside the hotel.

Did you see what they did there?

That is certainly a different definition of “ambush” considering that Fiorina never spoke directly to Hillary. While it is fair to point out that the news conference was a campaign stunt, so is pretty much every campaign appearance Hillary makes.

The life of a reporter is just so unfair:

Sadly, yes:

Clinton Foundation paid Blumenthal $10K per month while he advised on Libya

Sidney Blumenthal, a longtime confidant of Bill and Hillary Clinton, earned about $10,000 a month as a full-time employee of the Clinton Foundation while he was providing unsolicited intelligence on Libya to then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, according to multiple sources familiar with the arrangement.

Blumenthal was added to the payroll of the Clintons’ global philanthropy in 2009 — not long after advising Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign — at the behest of former president Bill Clinton, for whom he had worked in the White House, say the sources.

While Blumenthal’s foundation job focused on highlighting the legacy of Clinton’s presidency, some officials at the charity questioned his value and grumbled that his hiring was a favor from the Clintons, according to people familiar with the foundation. They say that, during a 2013 reform push, Blumenthal was moved to a consulting contract that came with a similar pay rate but without benefits — an arrangement that endured until March.

A Clinton loyalist who first earned the family’s trust as an aggressive combatant in the political battles of the 1990s, Blumenthal continues to work as a paid consultant to two groups supporting Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign — American Bridge and Media Matters — both of which are run by David Brock, a close ally of both Clinton and Blumenthal.

Nope, nothing to see here. Move along.


About Deplorable Myiq2xu™

I'm a basket case.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

111 Responses to Modern Journalism: Viral Lying

    • Jeffhas says:

      I expect that video will make the rounds all across the Major Media outlets today and all week long… Or not.

    • Constance says:

      I really admire this woman. She is not media savvy she is real and she gets up and states her case whenever she has a chance. I am just sick that she lost her son in such a manner and how could Hillary and Obama lie to her face?

  1. leslie says:

    I was just starting to read twitchy r/t @blakehounshell’s tweet. I think the “journalists” are a-scared to cover these stories lest they be banned from the WH should Hillary win in 2016. I’m a-scared that they won’t. If more (any, really) had actually investigated bronco, we wouldn’t be stuck as we are now.

    • Constance says:

      There is a huge opening right now for media that actually put forth some semblance of the truth and cover stories vital to the country. Because the current media are such a pack of liars no one believes what they print and fewer and fewer people pay for their content or watch it for free. I’m wondering if Jeff Bezos and his Washington Post might fill the gap in the 2016 election. He is a renegade not a standard thinker. He has reasons for everything he does. He lives in Seattle, why did he buy a newspaper in Washington DC? There are struggling papers for sale on the west coast and he is smart enough to realize the reason newspapers are failing is because the business model of selling lies and heavily edited quotes is not working.

  2. leslie says:

    I’ve gotta catch a train to get to work. Have fun everyone. See y’all tonite.

    • Somebody says:

      Have a good day Leslie, oh and you have less than 30 times left to catch said train!

  3. Lulu says:

    The media is barely covering the Fifth Circuit decision either. Most media outlets included quotes from the dissenting opinion which was ridiculous on its face to appeal to their ignorant readers. Only a few legal blogs touch it. No one is talking about the ramifications of it.

    • Lulu says:

      I wrote this out trying to make sense of the Fifth Circuit decision both practically and politically. I am not a lawyer but can read plain writing which this decision has a lot of.

      The White House announced (after Bronco popped off about the quality of the circuit court decision and the abilities of the judges) that it won’t take the appeal of Judge Hansen’s opinion staying Bronco’s ninnies illegal scheme re: illegal aliens to the Supremes.

      First off that circuit’s expedited or emergency reviews are done by Scalia. He supposedly NEVER grants them for emergency review if the district federal judge and circuit court agree as in this case. But I think the DOJ is coming to the conclusion that they are simply being out-lawyered. It has been apparent for several years that the Obama lawyers are ideologues and politically connect cronies. Some are ok but most are like Obama and really third rate and have gotten their asses kicked. This Fifth Circuit decision (written mostly by a judge appointed by Reagan) lectures the DOJ on the misapplication of cites and precedents. He also brings in other recent cases before that court where the DOJ argues the opposite of what they are arguing here and calls them on it. Since injunctions are based upon the probability of the plaintiffs winning, the appellate court gave Judge Hanson numerous tips on what the appeals court wants to see in his final decision which again is bad for the Bronco. The DOJ is defending a clusterfuck of a hashed up mess.

      While this suit is full of legal technicalities and obscure (to me!) standards the core issue is do the states have to pay for Bronco’s campaign promise of letting the entirety of Mexico and Central America over the border. Nowhere does the term “unfunded mandate” come up in the suit which the Supreme Court has ruled on numerous times to a resounding no. Presidents can’t do stuff unless they have the money. And they get the money from Congress. Presidents can’t tell individual states to bear the brunt of his whims. He will have to misappropriate funds and starve some programs for his folly. Now we will see if the hordes come (they might drown in Texas!) and if they do where they will go. 26 states have no intention of paying for them and with the injunction they don’t have to since the hordes don’t have legal status except in the mind of Bronco and his minions. If they ALL have go to “sanctuary” states who welcome them will that become a tax revenue and political problem for state and local leaders there putting them in a bind created by Bronco.

      While the suit will wind its way through the courts it won’t be finished by the end of Bronco’s term. It will continue to half ass straggle along unless a Republican president has it withdrawn. Another failure. Another Bronco clusterfuck. And Hillary wants more illegal aliens and more illegal presidential dictum. Good luck with that dumbass.

      • piper says:

        ty for interpreting the court decision.

        • Lulu says:

          I struggled. It is a very technical decision but I wanted to know how it would affect things. I wondered if the DOJ would keep at it or give up. They gave up. The White House will still try to make states pay for illegal alien expenses but states can point and say “Injunction do we need to file ANOTHER motion to make you go away?” The Bronco administration’s intent was to lure illegal aliens with the promise of beginning legal carve-outs for certain classes of illegals and expanding it to all of them. This was a campaign promise to La Raza types who backed Bronco instead of Hillary in 2007-2008. Bronco really doesn’t give a rat’s ass or he would have done it early in his term. The lure was freebies, education, and getting to live in the US and work if they wanted to do so. The taxpayers where they wanted to live were to pay for it. Social spending for legal residents was to be diverted to illegals with zero authorization or say so from Congress or states. The Fifth Circuit specifically addressed the Bronco administration trying to make states change tax and fee laws to pay for illegals as a “burden” and the feds can’t do that without paying for it which of course they can’t do with a Republican house since 2010. The Republicans want illegals too but only the ones that work. It was a bait and switch and they (and the illegals who trusted them) loose. Bronco will continue to demagog on it but will do squat. It really is an out for him and he will quickly loose interest. But he leaves the Dems vulnerable on this crap but I think they will walk away from it too.

          • lizzy says:

            Thanks Lulu. I don’t see well and long texts are difficult for me to read. You do a great job of summarizing the information.

  4. votermom says:

  5. piper says:

    Where reality is stored.

    • DeniseVB says:

      I don’t get it🙂 As much as I love old phones and aquariums and chest of drawers, would love to know the reality message😉

  6. DeniseVB says:

    I like to call this “Twitsplaining”. Geller is the master of it😀

  7. driguana says:

    Viral lying is certainly one of the most despicable features of modern journalism and, unfortunately, one of the most effective. Put out a lie of any magnitude and let it rip. Come back after you’ve been caught and just say….”ooops”….bad intelligence….bad source…the dog ate my notes…my twitter’s been hacked….and all is forgiven but the lie is perpetuated. The one incident that I think really illustrates this the best is the infamous “spittin/N-word” attack at the anti-health care bill demonstration. All of the politicians involved withdrew their comments about racial epithets and intentional spitting, Breibart offered a huge reward for any video that proved the incident happened but no takers and yet the viral lying has continued to this day. Sad.

  8. DeniseVB says:

    Here’s another clickbait article headline that misleads …. doesn’t mention after 20 weeks, so it’s not really a “ban” is it? That’s 5 months gestation.

  9. HELENK3 says:

    bikers plan armed protest outside mosque. wonder how this will be covered?

  10. HELENK3 says:

    I posted this before. 11 alternative investigative journalism sources

  11. DeniseVB says:

    This link is dated Feb 2015 but just got it in an email to update me on all the “wonderful things they’re doing for Peace and the Planet (and cop hating)” …. so if you were wondering where all those anti-war protesters of the Bush era went……here they are !!!!!!!

    • DeniseVB says:

      I’m not even sure why Hillary wants to follow the Bampot since his legacy will be like the sticky floor residue left after a bar room brawl. AND, she spilled some drinks on it too😉

      • HELENK3 says:

        I just post three different links from today’s headlines at No Quarter. One about NATO and Russian, one about China saying war is coming and one about the vacuum left in Syria being filled by islamists. During this backtrack is focusing on climate change and tee time.

      • swanspirit says:

        Great metaphor , just great!!

        • DeniseVB says:

          Wow swan, thank you. Was it the Bampot(stolen from a commenter on motus who likened BO to a Pol Pot wannabe) or sticky bar room floor(which I have personal experience with) ?😉

  12. Dora says:

    For anyone who is actually trying to keep track.

    EXCLUSIVE: The Day-by-Day Clinton Scandal Tracker

  13. HELENK3 says:

    this is interesting. where did the claim that the video caused Benghazi come from?

    • elliesmom says:

      I’m heavily involved in the online sewing community, and the uproar there is often over “vegan leather”, which is heavily stylized plastic. We used to call it “pleather”. One one side you have the “Save the cows from being jackets so we can make them go extinct instead” group. On the other side you have the “Plastic clothing depletes our petroleum supplies, the processing pollutes the environment, and discarded clothing remains in landfills for millions of years” folks. What’s interesting is that neither side suggests there’s really no reason to wear clothes that are made from or look like they’re made from animal hide. I grew up with dairy cows grazing under the clothesline. They were well-cared for, seemed happy enough. It’s kind of hard to know what a cow is thinking, but standing around all day eating grass and only being expected to get your milk pumped twice a day seems like an easier life than most human moms of infants have. They died from natural causes, and when they did, their hides were salvaged. It would have been wasteful in my dad’s eyes not to. Other than shoes, I’m not into leather clothing whether it’s real or simulated from plastic, but when I’m bored, I mention that cows are indeed vegan.

      • DeniseVB says:

        I diddled in animal rights for a few years, not quite to the Animal Liberation Front extremes, but found out it’s about the animal’s welfare more than giving them the right to vote or something. Also, it was quite the little nest of whackos when fake fur and pleather looked so real, they were still attacked by red paint throwers🙂 I’m against killing animals (like the mink) solely for their pelts under cruel living conditions and anal electrocution (can’t hurt the fur!).

        Of course being liberal meant supporting liberal causes, then I realized how much of my donations weren’t going to help the animals at all, gotta pay the staff and rent …. and to educate. Like donating to the Clinton Foundation😀

      • 1539days says:

        You can make plastics from plant oils, but it’s still pretty expensive. As far as animal cruelty, there’s a difference between milk-fed veal style cage farming and “free range” small farm cattle raising. Theoretically, you can have wild chicken (or turkeys where I live) running around, but there’s nowhere for cows to run (or walk slowly) free.

    • foxyladi14 says:

      YES!!!! 😀

  14. HELENK3 says:

    the law of unintended consequences.

    before the backtrack bunch is finished how many more Balitmores will we have?

  15. HELENK3 says:

    this one makes sense.
    before Amtrak stopped the Desert Wind from LA to Chicago which made a stop in Vegas, it was packed everyday to that stop.
    The only way now is to drive the 15 from LA to Vegas and that can be a nightmare.
    They are about 20 years late but better late than never

  16. Dora says:

    For your summer reading pleasure. 🙂

    Everyday Americans, Rejoice! Hillary Clinton “Road To The White House” Comic Book To Be Released…

  17. foxyladi14 says:


  18. gainny says:

    Ultrasound may be cool, but mandatory ultrasound is not cool.

      • gainny says:

        Briefly: It adds to the cost of the abortion. It is a forced procedure that does not benefit the woman’s safety but is propaganda against her decision. It adds psychological trauma. It is meant to coerce childbearing. The state is putting the fetus ahead of the woman’s autonomy.

        Decades ago I saw a film that showed a fetal ultrasound. It was an emotional appeal to identification with the fetus. At the end, it turned out to be of a fetal pig.

        Women have always had abortions (some societies left newborns outdoors to die of exposure). Old-school doctors were for legal abortion because they had to deal with wards full of women with botched abortions.

        • elliesmom says:

          While the Supreme Court has said women may kill their unborn children with impunity, they didn’t say they could do it without acknowledging the humanity of the life they are ending. If seeing an ultrasound of her unborn child before she kills it makes a woman think twice about being in the same situation, it will ultimately save her money.

        • 49erDweet says:

          The number of women who later expressed regret over their decision, and say they “feel” they were rushed into it, makes this law something seen by society as a non-intrusive way to level the playing field for inexperienced young people relying for advice solely on an “industry” that supports but one POV.

        • 1539days says:

          It’s been argued that abortion itself is a forced procedure made necessary due to economic hardship. Requiring the review of an ultrasound is kind of a ham-handed way to get informed consent, but abortion providers have a history of leaving out any language that may hint at the fact that a fetus is largely a living person.

          Women are also not hothouse flowers, If seeing an ultrasound makes them less likely to have an abortion, I would argue that knowledge, not trauma, is influencing those decisions. The state is putting the prospect of a fetus’ life ahead of a woman’s autonomy. In a few months, a pregnant woman will be free of a child. In the case of an abortion, the fetus is gone forever. That’s the fundamental debate in abortion. At what point does offspring have the right to life?

          Abortion laws in the US used to be based on English Common law. Those laws held that a fetus could be aborted until the quickening, when the baby started to kick. That’s about the same halfway point that many Republicans want to use as the legal viability point for a fetus.

        • gainny says:

          OK. “women may kill their unborn children” “seeing an ultrasound of her unborn child before she kills it”—if abortion is murder, charge and try the murderess. “If seeing an ultrasound of her unborn child before she kills it makes a woman think twice about being in the same situation, it will ultimately save her money.”—what does this mean? She won’t get pregnant again? It’s cheaper to have a child than pay for an abortion?

          “The number of women who later expressed regret over their decision, and say they “feel” they were rushed into it”—I don’t know what this number is, but most women feel relief. “seen by society”—who is this society? “non-intrusive way to level the playing field for inexperienced young people relying for advice solely on an “industry” that supports but one POV”—so it’s the “industry” that made her decide to go to a clinic and have an abortion?

          “It’s been argued that abortion itself is a forced procedure made necessary due to economic hardship.”—so if money weren’t a concern, every pregnancy would be carried to term? Economic hardship is the only reason women get abortion? For many women, economic hardship delays their ability to get an abortion. “kind of a ham-handed way to get informed consent, but abortion providers have a history of leaving out any language that may hint at the fact that a fetus is largely a living person”—so women seeking abortions don’t know that pregnancy results in a baby? “If seeing an ultrasound makes them less likely to have an abortion”—remains to be seen; I look forward to the studies. “The state is putting the prospect of a fetus’ life ahead of a woman’s autonomy.”—yes indeed, exactly. “In a few months, a pregnant woman will be free of a child.”—free? If this means giving up for adoption, read about women who give up their babies and wonder every day what happened to them.

          Since we disapprove so strongly, let’s make abortion illegal again and imprison these baby-killing monsters.

          • swanspirit says:

            What happened to, terminating a pregnancy is strictly between a woman and her doctor, because it is a medical procedure? And being a medical procedure, is subject to all privacy and HIPAA laws.

          • 1539days says:

            I can already see this turning into a bunch of straw man arguments.

          • gainny says:

            Great, succinct comment, swanspirit: “What happened to, terminating a pregnancy is strictly between a woman and her doctor . . . ?” That was before 2008. We’re on the Red team now.

  19. HELENK3 says:

    US military pilots complain hands tied in frustrating fight against isis

    are the air strikes just a backtrack show so he does not have to really do anything about isis?

  20. Myiq2xu says:
  21. HELENK3 says:

    Reverend Al Sharpton


    #KeepingItReal QOTD: Do you think the #TexasFlooding is related to climate control or God’s rebuke?Call 8775325797 or tweet me your thoughts

    DiogenesMiddleFinger @DiogenesKnows

    @TheRevAl Climate Control? Yo Al, let someone with a working knowledge of vocabulary twit your tweets for ya there big guy…
    8:10 PM – 27 May 2015

    • Mt.Laurel says:

      I have also heard an interesting argument that voucher programs are unfair to existing (non voucher) student population who were enrolled with certain expectation as accepting vouchers inherently changes the nature of the private/parochial school environment in order to meet the regulations.

      • Lulu says:

        Yeah if all the public school kids get vouchers for charter and private schoolsthen all the private school kids can go back to public school and save rich people a lot of money. It could work. /s/

        • Mt.Laurel says:

          This actually was with regard to smaller community oriented religious schools where the families are of more modest means. They argue that vouchers, over time, inherently cause changes to the curriculum and discipline.

          On the other hand it would be fun if the students at the likes of Friends and St. Albans were withdraw and set back to public schools because of an influx of typical people’s children. However, BO has worked very hard [much harder than understanding those pesky things like the constitution] to make sure that vouchers are no longer a threat to his children or those of his inner circle and patrons.

      • 1539days says:

        Colleges had to face this. Now that college costs are going up, government tuition programs are spending more money. At this point, few colleges can operate without students using government grants or loans. If a school takes any government money, they are subject to being beaten over the head with Title IX and any other regulations Congress comes up with.

        So the feds increase the supply of students with free money, which causes a price increase in the limited supply of education. Then it becomes so expensive that they can leverage everyone into accepting their demands. I could see the same thing happening to voucher programs.

  22. HELENK3 says:

    it is getting nuttier by the day.

    can you image the birth announcement

    IT has arrived. We have not yet picked a name for IT. It is beautiful and healthy weighing in at 8 lbs 7ozs

  23. Myiq2xu says:

  24. HELENK3 says:

    examining the transpacific partnership

  25. HELENK3 says:

    More: Gov. Chris Christie calls for end of Common Core in New Jersey; will ask for group to come up with new state-specific standards to consider – @ABC7NY

  26. Myiq2xu says:

  27. Myiq2xu says:

    Buffoon Juice is comedy gold these days as a pit of hard-core Obot CDS tries to make its peace with supporting Hillary next year.

  28. Myiq2xu says:
  29. Dora says:

    I don’t know why she does this. Does she think it’s funny? She makes herself sound so silly. It could be taken as condescending to her audience too.

    Hillary Clinton’s fake Southern accent gets lost in translation

    Hillary Clinton went down to Dixie this week and tried to pull off a faux Southern accent. Sweet Lord Almighty, folks – it was pitiful.

    Miss Hill’ry was drawling and dropping “g’s” all over the stage during a speech to Democrats in South Carolina – the Palmetto State.

    • leslie says:

      Wasn’t that one of (maybe) Maya Angelou’s poems? I heard her do something like that with Maya Angelou many years ago.
      This is one of the things that makes me crazy(er). Either I don’t know or Fox doesn’t know. But I am certain that if she weren’t quoting a piece of literature/poetry, she wouldn’t be doing that “Southern” dialect. She has appeared multiple times in front of Southern crowds and not spoken like that (unlike bronco who panders to every black group he’s ever appeared before). It was only when quoting that piece that I heard her do that. I listened to Hillary as often as I could in 2008. I’m not supporting her t his time. But I think there are so many substantial things to pick at. This isn’t one of them. imho

      • Dora says:

        I can see your point. I really can. But if Hillary got on stage and began reciting lines from James Joyce in an Irish Brogue, I would think she was making fun and I would not be pleased. Maybe it’s me. I am just too sensitive. 🙂

  30. Myiq2xu says:
  31. DeniseVB says:

    I just realized that while I’m enjoying Carly Fiorina’s fiesty campaigning that’s getting her more media coverage, I don’t remember anything she’s worn. I truly don’t.

  32. Myiq2xu says:
  33. Myiq2xu says:

    • leslie says:

      Hastert has been suspect for years and years and years. One of Illinois’ finest pols. /s

  34. Dora says:

    Again . . . . .

    Breaking: Oologah, OK Police Officer Shot in Head While Driving – Airlifted to Hospital

    • leslie says:

      Thanks for posting this story. (Thanks is probably the wrong word.) I just missed it on the news and can’t stay another hour just to hear it. I actually turned on my computer to find the story myself.

Comments are closed.