redblueamerica.com

Otherwise known as, "if the media's giving Hillary a raw deal, she deserves it."

Talking with a friend who worked in the Clinton administration the other day, I learned a fun little tidbit - Hillary Clinton did not have a security clearance high enough to warrant her presence in diplomatic or national security capacities during either of President Clinton's terms in office.

Whaaaat?

This is the same woman who is claiming that her time in the White House was spent as more than a figurehead's wife? Hmmm. So, like any curious voter, I checked it out.

And you should, too:
http://www.slate.com/id/2182073/
Oh, and then there's this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/26/us/pol...

Enough is enough - not only is the experience argument not working, it's bs anyway! But of course, the NYT story didn't get much play, because by and large we don't really care whether the things candidates say are true or not. If it sounds good, we'll buy it. At least, that's the same criticism I've been hearing about Obama voters for months now, that we swallow pretty rhetoric unexamined. There are times when I can't help but agree with that statement on the whole, but Hillaryites are going to have to stop pretending it's just the Obama people. Information is power, but only if you take it. And the plagiarism nonsense will cease immediately, if her camp has any sense - because she just pulled an ad and a speech straight from Walter Mondale.

See:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0...