BG45 Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 So I was watching the news earlier on how Clinton staffers are supposedly circulating an e-mail of Obama in traditional African garb (but not her husband in it), when I hit an article that shows her character I think. [url="http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/ny-usark245589997feb24,0,2934440,print.stor"]For Clinton, her time in Arkansas is a key component of the argument that her three decades of public service have prepared her to be president on Day One. As the first woman with a serious chance to lead the nation, it's a way for her to demonstrate how she fought to improve the lives of families and children. Hillary Rodham Clinton often invokes her "35 years of experience making change" on the campaign trail, recounting her work in the 1970s on behalf of battered and neglected children and impoverished legal-aid clients. But there is a little-known episode Clinton doesn't mention in her standard campaign speech in which those two principles collided. In 1975, a 27-year-old Hillary Rodham, acting as a court-appointed attorney, attacked the credibility of a 12-year-old girl in mounting an aggressive defense for an indigent client accused of rape in Arkansas - using her child development background to help the defendant.[/url] Way to go Hillary, defending rapists who attack pre-teen girls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin86 Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Lawyers. Lincoln defended slave owners as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash Wednesday Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 She is seriously losing it. She's disintegrating from typical political banter to bizarre maniacal behavior. Her recent howling and "celestial" mockery reminds me of Bush Sr. (41)'s desperate situation in 92 where he told someone at a POW rally to "please shut up and sit down" and also said his "dog Millie knew more about foreign policy than those bozos (Clinton-Gore)." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IcePrincessKRS Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 [quote name='Ash Wednesday' post='1468554' date='Feb 25 2008, 11:13 AM']She is seriously losing it. She's disintegrating from typical political banter to bizarre maniacal behavior. Her recent howling and "celestial" mockery reminds me of Bush Sr. (41)'s desperate situation in 92 where he told someone at a POW rally to "please shut up and sit down" and also said his "dog Millie knew more about foreign policy than those bozos (Clinton-Gore)."[/quote] Yeah... although to be fair he was probably right about Millie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deb Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Everyone in this society deserves a defense, as horrible as they may be. That is what our system is based on. Because our system really isn't just, innocent people are treated badly. That is how it works in our courts. We all know that he who has the best lawyer or the most money wins. That is what we call justice here. We have legal aid attorneys who spend their lives representing the poor, the innocent and the guilty. We have rich attorneys who only represent the rich, innocent or guilty. So, bringing up Hillary doing her job is really pointless. Lawyers make up so many of our politicians that you are going to find everyone with a case they worked that had some crappy element in it. Means nothing. I do think that Bush Sr.'s dog Millie certainly was more intelligient than his son, W. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 [quote name='Deb' post='1468582' date='Feb 25 2008, 12:29 PM']Everyone in this society deserves a defense, as horrible as they may be. That is what our system is based on. Because our system really isn't just, innocent people are treated badly. That is how it works in our courts. We all know that he who has the best lawyer or the most money wins. That is what we call justice here. We have legal aid attorneys who spend their lives representing the poor, the innocent and the guilty. We have rich attorneys who only represent the rich, innocent or guilty. So, bringing up Hillary doing her job is really pointless. Lawyers make up so many of our politicians that you are going to find everyone with a case they worked that had some crappy element in it. Means nothing.[/quote] Really, so they fact that Hillary worked as a suit for Walmart helping bust unions, means nothing? Ought to mean a lot to anyone belonging to a union. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deb Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 If you want to read the entire article, here it is..... [url="http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/ny-usark245589997feb24,0,2934440,print.stor"]http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/ny...440,print.story[/url] Picking out little bits to inflame is such a conservative method. Put it all in context and let people make up their own minds. To start with, she was given this case by a Judge. She did not want it but, she did her job as was required under the law and she did it well. I can't find fault with her for that at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fides quarens intellectum Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 (edited) double post Edited February 25, 2008 by fides quarens intellectum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fides quarens intellectum Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 sorry, but digging up something from 1975 is the best this article can do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deb Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 [quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1468583' date='Feb 25 2008, 11:34 AM']Really, so they fact that Hillary worked as a suit for Walmart helping bust unions, means nothing? Ought to mean a lot to anyone belonging to a union.[/quote] Again, remarks used just to inflame. "suit for Walmart helping bust unions." Please, I have been a union member since 1978, starting as a Teamster and the union busting started way before Hillary, with Reagan and the ATC's. The republican "me" decade he ushered in did more to hurt unions than Hillary did at WalMart. I will be dead and gone before the younger generation of workers realize how important the unions really are. They have no clue the history of the union, how many people died for it and the things it gave you right now, like benefits, an eight hour work day etc. Blaming union busting on Hillary is just a joke. First, it was over 20 years ago, second, here is a bit more of that story, again, the part you forgot... [b]Bob Ortega, author of ''In Sam We Trust," a history of Wal-Mart, said Clinton used her position to urge the company to improve its gender and racial diversity. Because of Clinton's prodding, Walton agreed to hire an outside firm to track the company's progress in hiring women and minorities, Ortega said.[/b] [b]Clinton proved to be such a thorn in Walton's side that at Wal-Mart's annual meeting in 1987, when shareholders challenged Walton on the company's lack of female managers, he assured them the record was improving ''now that we have a strong-willed young lady on the board."[/b] [b]Clinton was particularly vocal on environmental matters, pressing the company to boost its sale and use of recycled materials and other ''green" products. [/b]I will say that I believe NAFTA was the worst thing that Pres Clinton ever allowed to go through. Fought and pushed for by REPUBLICANS. It is destroying our economy, our jobs and our wages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deb Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 [quote name='fides quarens intellectum' post='1468595' date='Feb 25 2008, 11:50 AM']sorry, but digging up something from 1975 is the best this article can do?[/quote] Thank you!! Remember though, it is only the past that matters when discussing a democrat, if it discussing a republican, it is totally irrelevent and not allowed. Example: Big furor over Clinton stating he tried pot but, did not inhale. You would have thought he admitted to killing a cat. Bush, known to be an alcholic cocaine head gets a pass because, hey, he saw the light and accepted Jesus so therefore, his massive drug and alcohol use were not relevent. I myself did not think they were relevent either. I was more concerned about his low I.Q. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fides quarens intellectum Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 No, i think mud-slinging happens on both sides of the aisle. My comment was because the title of this thread is an attention-grabber, as though Hillary recently attacked the credibility of a 12-year-old. Pulling up something she did in 1975 to counter her self-promoting campaign claims is just a little weak to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash Wednesday Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 [quote name='Deb' post='1468587' date='Feb 25 2008, 12:38 PM']Picking out little bits to inflame is such a conservative method.[/quote] And liberals never do that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-Bone _ Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 [quote name='Ash Wednesday' post='1468630' date='Feb 25 2008, 11:30 AM']And liberals never do that? [/quote] No, they don't. All liberals are kind and sweet and would never do anything wrong, unlike those nasty conservatives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash Wednesday Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 Sorry man. My bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now