The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: dutch508 on April 22, 2008, 05:09:01 PM
-
BlooInBloo (1000+ posts) Tue Apr-22-08 05:49 PM
Original message http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5624150
"Hillary didn't mean she'd nuke Iran when she said we'd give them "a nuclear response""...
Advertisements [?]Edited on Tue Apr-22-08 06:01 PM by BlooInBloo
http://www.americablog.com/2008/04/3rd-hillary-staffer-...
"Well, we now have a third denial from the senior levels of the Clinton campaign that Hillary did not mean nuclear weapons when she referred to giving Iran a "nuclear response from the United States" should they nuke Israel. Then what did she mean by "a nuclear response"? Here is what Hillary said just last night on Keith Olbermann's show:
"heir use of nuclear weapons against Israel would provoke a nuclear response from the United States."
Two senior Hillary aides denied last night that Hillary meant nukes when she repeatedly implied over the past weekthat she'd nuke Iran, and when she explicitly said just that last night. And today I find out that Clinton campaign senior adviser Ann Lewis also said last night that Hillary didn't mean "nuclear weapons" when said we'd give Iran a "nuclear response.
Then what did she mean? We'd sprinkle them with nuclear fairy dust? This story is now a total mess. I wrote more extensively about this earlier, but it sure is pretty peculiar having Hillary running around suggesting that we start nuking the Middle East, only for her staff to turn around and say she never said it. What are our enemies to think? What are our friends?"
I suppose it all depends on what the meaning of "nuclear" is.
LIARS!
EDIT: The typo hunt begins...
small fire, but let's look to the linky:
http://www.americablog.com/2008/04/3rd-hillary-staffer-hillary-didnt-mean.html
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
3rd Hillary staffer: Hillary didn't mean she'd nuke Iran when she said we'd give them "a nuclear response"
by John Aravosis (DC) · 4/22/2008 05:30:00 PM ET · Link
Discuss this post here: 8 Comments · reddit · FARK ·· Digg It!
Well, we now have a third denial from the senior levels of the Clinton campaign that Hillary did not mean nuclear weapons when she referred to giving Iran a "nuclear response from the United States" should they nuke Israel. Then what did she mean by "a nuclear response"? Here is what Hillary said just last night on Keith Olbermann's show:
"[T]heir use of nuclear weapons against Israel would provoke a nuclear response from the United States."
Two senior Hillary aides denied last night that Hillary meant nukes when she repeatedly implied over the past weekthat she'd nuke Iran, and when she explicitly said just that last night. And today I find out that Clinton campaign senior adviser Ann Lewis also said last night that Hillary didn't mean "nuclear weapons" when said we'd give Iran a "nuclear response."
Then what did she mean? We'd sprinkle them with nuclear fairy dust? This story is now a total mess. I wrote more extensively about this earlier, but it sure is pretty peculiar having Hillary running around suggesting that we start nuking the Middle East, only for her staff to turn around and say she never said it. What are our enemies to think? What are our friends?
comments from the nutz:
I don't think I could stomach another 4 years with a president that can't tell their own lies from the truth anymore. I think she could easily be declared insane or delusional at this point. Someone needs to sit down with her, hold her hand, and walk her through the very simple math to show her that unless she takes all remaining primaries by no less than 60% and gets 60% of the superdelegates she's not going to be the nominee - then slam her head into the wall, repeat until it takes.
hillery is toast!
John forget what our enemies think ...what about our friends ? Israel already is set up to respond to a Nuclear attack on its own ...Ho[w] nice of Hillary to support Israel after a genocide ...shes got class
not really sure what you are saying...
-
WARMONGER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! oh OK that only applies to conservatives and the Military.
-
To Hillary, "going nuclear" is throwing an ashtray at Bill.
Talk is cheap. Lets see her introduce legislation to say an attack on Israel is an attack on the US. Clintons lie with disturbing ease.
-
Iran nukes Israel and we do what Hillary? we respond in kind, and yes in the adult world it means nuclear weapons.
-
How about we just nuke Hillary and call it even....
-
Well DU, what should the response be to such a scenario? Send Saint Jimmuh over and hold a few more "talks"?
-
Well DU, what should the response be to such a scenario? Send Saint Jimmuh over and hold a few more "talks"?
Exactly! /DU
-
I don't think I could stomach another 4 years with a president that can't tell their own lies from the truth anymore. I think she could easily be declared insane or delusional at this point. Someone needs to sit down with her, hold her hand, and walk her through the very simple math to show her that unless she takes all remaining primaries by no less than 60% and gets 60% of the superdelegates she's not going to be the nominee - then slam her head into the wall, repeat until it takes.
:rotf: :rotf: :lmao: :lmao:
Hey, I really like that person! The mental picture of that is well worth the wading through the DUmp Monkey Insanity to find it.
There are some true gems over there.