Hillary Clinton's Reagan AIDS Revisionism is Shocking, Insulting and Utterly Inexplicable!

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2016 7:28 AM GMT
    In an interview conducted at Nancy Reagan’s funeral today, Hillary Clinton recounted a version of history that didn’t happen, lauding the former first lady’s “low key advocacy” for the cause of HIV/AIDS awareness. “Low key” is one way of putting it. In fact, the Reagan White House is infamous for its lengthy, deadly silence on the epidemic.

    “It may be hard for your viewers to remember how difficult it was for people to talk about HIV/AIDS in the 1980s. And because of both President and Mrs. Reagan, in particular, Mrs. Reagan, we started national conversation when before no one would talk about it, no one wanted to do anything about it, and that too is something that really appreciated, with her very effective, low-key advocacy, but it penetrated the public conscience and people began to say ‘Hey, we have to do something about this too.’”

    http://gawker.com/hillary-clintons-reagan-aids-revisionism-is-shocking-i-1764346878
  • AMoonHawk

    Posts: 11406

    Mar 12, 2016 8:32 AM GMT
    bon_pan saidIn an interview conducted at Nancy Reagan’s funeral today, Hillary Clinton recounted a version of history that didn’t happen, lauding the former first lady’s “low key advocacy” for the cause of HIV/AIDS awareness. “Low key” is one way of putting it. In fact, the Reagan White House is infamous for its lengthy, deadly silence on the epidemic.

    “It may be hard for your viewers to remember how difficult it was for people to talk about HIV/AIDS in the 1980s. And because of both President and Mrs. Reagan, in particular, Mrs. Reagan, we started national conversation when before no one would talk about it, no one wanted to do anything about it, and that too is something that really appreciated, with her very effective, low-key advocacy, but it penetrated the public conscience and people began to say ‘Hey, we have to do something about this too.’”

    http://gawker.com/hillary-clintons-reagan-aids-revisionism-is-shocking-i-1764346878

    What a load of crap. The only reason they started talking about AIDs was because of the protests going on all over the country and being reported in the news ... not to mention the fear that the country's blood supply could all be infected. They didn't talk about it until they were forced to talk about it.

    UPDATE:
    "low-key advocacy"???? try complete silence!

    This kind of angered me at first, but thinking it over, I wonder if Hillary was really bringing into light, in a very diplomatic way, that the AIDS epidemic was due in part to the silence of the Reagan Administration, by choosing the words "low-key advocacy"?
  • AMoonHawk

    Posts: 11406

    Mar 12, 2016 9:52 AM GMT
    Hillary apologized on twitter for her comments:

    CdTA8gBWIAAWcY6.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2016 9:54 AM GMT
    Goes to show you this beotch will say anything that comes to mind whether or not it has any basis in truth.

    P.S. Not to mention her total disregard for the AIDS crisis.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2016 11:43 AM GMT
    Inexplicable? How about she's a lying politician who's been lying her entire career and wouldn't know the truth if it smacked her in the face.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2016 2:52 PM GMT
    More liberal lies and distortions.

    If President Reagan was "so bad" on AIDS, why was it never brought up by the Democrats who CONTROLLED CONGRESS and could have APPROPRIATED MONEY FOR AIDS RESEARCH on their own....or their 1984 Democratic presidential candidate WALTER MONDALE or even his running mate GERALDINE FERRARO? Nor am I aware of any of the Democratic primary candidates making an issue of AIDS either - which included JESSE JACKSON, whose own black community was being affected by AIDS. Where were all your "gay friendly" democrats in your darkest days? Hmmmm????

    Democrats: rewriting history. Democrats caught LYING again.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2016 5:09 PM GMT
    UndercoverMan saidInexplicable? How about she's a lying politician who's been lying her entire career...

    how naive
    hate to say this but ALL politicians lie and the American people like it that way.


    fact:
    Clinton is almost 80years old, is she loosing grip?
  • bro4bro

    Posts: 1037

    Mar 12, 2016 5:14 PM GMT
    This whole thing completely perplexes me. Hillary is presumably on the opposite end of the political spectrum from Nancy, so she has no real motivation to make the Reagans look good by inventing falsehoods (although the Clinton and Bush families famously hang out together and have close personal ties - hmmmm...).

    What she said about the Reagans' response to AIDS, "...And because of both President and Mrs. Reagan, in particular, Mrs. Reagan, we started national conversation when before no one would talk about it, no one wanted to do anything about it..." doesn't really fit at all with her retraction. She "misspoke"? Was she somehow cut off from all contact with the outside world during the 1980s? HOW CAN SHE NOT REMEMBER WHAT IT WAS LIKE?

    Oh, wait... didn't her husband institute "Don't Ask Don't Tell", and didn't he sign the Defense of Marriage Act?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2016 5:58 PM GMT
    AMoonHawk saidHillary apologized on twitter for her comments:
    CdTA8gBWIAAWcY6.jpg

    So, once again, the Arch Cunt tries to have it both ways. And no, I'm not at all surprised that she had the gall to show up at Mrs. Reagan's funeral. But then, remember Bill yukking it up on the steps of the National Cathedral at President Reagan's? Low life opportunists, the both of 'em!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2016 7:17 PM GMT
    UndercoverMan saidInexplicable? How about she's a lying politician who's been lying her entire career and wouldn't know the truth if it smacked her in the face.

    Well, you know the old joke:

    Q: How can you tell when a lawyer is lying?

    A: His lips are moving.

    Replace lawyer with politician and it still applies.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2016 7:41 PM GMT
    At least she apologized in fairly short order. Note the false indignation of some of the Trump trash above - while their hero continues to lie through his teeth with impunity.

    All Pants on Fire! statements involving Donald Trump

    rulings%2Ftom-pantsonfire.gif

    http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/statements/byruling/pants-fire/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2016 8:17 PM GMT
    I think this was an honest mistake. I think when someone dies you try to say nice things about them and I believe that she was trying to say something nice where maybe she had a fuzzy memory on.

    HOWEVER, this is totally different than her "misremembering" the plane she was on taking sniper attacks in Bosnia. I just don't trust this lady.
  • cemego

    Posts: 7

    Mar 12, 2016 8:36 PM GMT
    The clintons have always been out of touch with LBGT issues. They only mention them now and pretend to care because it benefits their pocket and their votes.

    I think Hillary is a huge hypocritical shill. I really dont think the Clintons really have done ANYTHING for the gay world. It really frustrates me when I see gay people so in the Hillary camp.

    She (and her husband) are pandering opportunists.

    And I am saying this as a lifelong democrat.

    BERNIE 2016 !!!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2016 8:59 PM GMT
    AMoonHawk saidHillary apologized on twitter for her comments:

    CdTA8gBWIAAWcY6.jpg


    Ha, ha, she misspeaks about everything after reviews come in the next day . I can't believe gays are stupid enuf to support her .
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2016 9:12 PM GMT
    I am going to think there is a Millennial in Washington looking for a new job. It must suck to be the speechwriter that has to say nice things about Nancy Reagan. If you were there, there wasn't a whole lot of nice about her. No wonder things got creative.

    Now, a word to the Hillary haters on here: A lie requires intent. Trump's lies, Rubio's lies, Cruz's lies all have one thing in common: the attempt to portray others as worse than they are or oneself as better.

    What intent could Hillary Clinton possibly have to lie about the Reagan's record on gay rights? She clearly misspoke, she clearly wasn't gaining anything from the mistake, so why wouldn't we accept her explanation that it was just an error?

    Also, for anyone that likes to forget Hillary Clinton's record, please look for her speech on gay rights at the United Nations in 2011 (I believe). It was quite a sensation at the time and fit well with her support for the LGBT community during her tenure as Secretary of State.

    It takes a real partisan hack to make this into proof that Hillary Clinton is a liar.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2016 9:18 PM GMT
    I believe it was Act Up that brought attention to the crisis. Its the only illness, in pandemic form, that the US government, in charge, did nothing about. I have a arm scar from the small pox vaccine in the 60's. Most people have 'figured out' by now, that Hiv-Aids was created to rid society of the 'undesirables', eventually, the epidemic got out of control and infected more than it was intended to kill.
    To point the finger, the seriously demented christian right wing nut jobs icon_neutral.gif

    anigif_optimized-7142-1435794806-3.gif



    "We pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of America, and to the Republicans for which we cant stand, one nation, under investigation, with the lack of liberties and injustices for y'all"



  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Mar 12, 2016 9:54 PM GMT
    S2Ki saidMore liberal lies and distortions.

    If President Reagan was "so bad" on AIDS, why was it never brought up by the Democrats who CONTROLLED CONGRESS and could have APPROPRIATED MONEY FOR AIDS RESEARCH on their own....


    AIDS funding skyrocketed in the 1980s, almost doubling each year from 1983 - when the media started blaring headlines - from $44 million to $103 million, $205 million, $508 million, $922 million, and then $1.6 billion in 1988.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2016 9:57 PM GMT
    This is bloody hilarious!
    Obviously one of Clinton's campaign staffers gave her wrong information. icon_rolleyes.gif (Albeit she should have known better.)
    Hopefully said staffer was terminated.

    I'm actually pissed that Clinton had said anything about this piece of shit Reagan. Good riddance! icon_cool.gif
    Let's not forget to whom she was married! She was married to the same senile repuke douche, who "got into bed with" the ultimate hypocritical repuke...Jerry Falwell.
    Allowing his homophobic philosophy, (The Moral Majority), to infect the feeble minded Ronnie Reagan, and all the other weak minded repukes/religious sheeple out there and influence policy. These prejudices still haunt us today.

    So we can "thank" all the repuke douchbag trolls on this site for helping establish the Reagan regime. They are all old enough to have voted for that pc of shit.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2016 10:05 PM GMT
    Hillary has a way of making shit up. This is just the latest example.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Mar 12, 2016 10:10 PM GMT
    I don't see anything wrong with what Hillary Clinton said. She was paying respect to Nancy Reagan who was a wonderful First Lady who represented the USA with dignity and class always.

    I also do not hold any grudges over President Reagan -- one of the finest American Presidents EVER -- for his slow response to the AIDS epidemic. It was a different time in the early 80's -- the crisis caught everyone by surprise, no one knew what it was or where it came from, and it didn't help that it was dubbed "The Gay Plague". I don't think there was anything deliberately done by President Reagan at all, and I don't blame him for anything. He could have responded much faster and yet I don't think it would have really changed the outcome.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2016 10:22 PM GMT
    She immediately and unequivocally apologized for screwing up. She was trying to be gracious and say something nice about a deceased person at a funeral. I was equally shocked and confused initially but I remember the time well enough to know that attitudes towards AIDS started evolving and I suspect Clinton was alluding to that in some way. In any event she apologized contritely so case closed. We all are guilty of mispeaking at one time or another.
  • wellwell

    Posts: 2265

    Mar 12, 2016 10:50 PM GMT
    bon_pan saidGoes to show you this beotch will say anything that comes to mind whether or not it has any basis in truth.

    P.S. Not to mention her total disregard for the AIDS crisis.



    ...WORTH RE-READING!
  • wellwell

    Posts: 2265

    Mar 12, 2016 10:51 PM GMT
    S2Ki saidMore liberal lies and distortions.

    If President Reagan was "so bad" on AIDS, why was it never brought up by the Democrats who CONTROLLED CONGRESS and could have APPROPRIATED MONEY FOR AIDS RESEARCH on their own....or their 1984 Democratic presidential candidate WALTER MONDALE or even his running mate GERALDINE FERRARO? Nor am I aware of any of the Democratic primary candidates making an issue of AIDS either - which included JESSE JACKSON, whose own black community was being affected by AIDS. Where were all your "gay friendly" democrats in your darkest days? Hmmmm????

    Democrats: rewriting history. Democrats caught LYING again.




    YUP !
  • wellwell

    Posts: 2265

    Mar 12, 2016 10:53 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    S2Ki saidMore liberal lies and distortions.

    If President Reagan was "so bad" on AIDS, why was it never brought up by the Democrats who CONTROLLED CONGRESS and could have APPROPRIATED MONEY FOR AIDS RESEARCH on their own....or their 1984 Democratic presidential candidate WALTER MONDALE or even his running mate GERALDINE FERRARO? Nor am I aware of any of the Democratic primary candidates making an issue of AIDS either - which included JESSE JACKSON, whose own black community was being affected by AIDS. Where were all your "gay friendly" democrats in your darkest days? Hmmmm????

    Democrats: rewriting history. Democrats caught LYING again.


    Well.... why should we bring that up? icon_redface.gif

    Anyway.... all the American RJ libs WILL be voting for Hillary come November. They're so morally corrupt that it doesn't matter that Hillary is a LIAR who has committed TREASON and MULTIPLE FELONIES.
  • wellwell

    Posts: 2265

    Mar 12, 2016 10:57 PM GMT
    coolarmydude said
    S2Ki saidMore liberal lies and distortions.

    If President Reagan was "so bad" on AIDS, why was it never brought up by the Democrats who CONTROLLED CONGRESS and could have APPROPRIATED MONEY FOR AIDS RESEARCH on their own....


    AIDS funding skyrocketed in the 1980s, almost doubling each year from 1983 - when the media started blaring headlines - from $44 million to $103 million, $205 million, $508 million, $922 million, and then $1.6 billion in 1988.




    QUITE SO !

    AND IT WAS ALL THE FAULT OF GAYS, GAY POLITICIANS, & GAY DOCTORS ! ! !