Admin
Verse of the Day
The Newsroom
Recent Posts
- Those Wonderful Church Bulletin Bloopers
- Be Careful With Those Pardons Mr. President….Updated
- Living With Caylee
- Malia and Sasha Obama Get The First Look At What Will Be Their Bedrooms At The White House
- Elephants Have Musical Preferences Too
Recent Comments
- ~J~ on Is Obama the anti-christ? I Don’t Think So
- Sue on Those Wonderful Church Bulletin Bloopers
- newton on Is Obama the anti-christ? I Don’t Think So
- newton on Is Obama the anti-christ? I Don’t Think So
- ~J~ on Be Careful With Those Pardons Mr. President….Updated
- ~J~ on Is Obama the anti-christ? I Don’t Think So
- Jonathan on Is Obama the anti-christ? I Don’t Think So
- Jonathan on Is Obama the anti-christ? I Don’t Think So
- Jonathan on Is Obama the anti-christ? I Don’t Think So
- Sue on Changes
Blogroll
Newspaper Rack
Categories
I don’t know how many different ways I can give it to you. She didn’t say what you said she did. You’ve got to read the whole paragraph and not pick out what displeases you. It’s called taking things in context. Democrats and Republicans have a different way of looking at things. Get over it.
Written by GussOn the July 1 edition of Fox News’ Hannity’s America, host Sean Hannity played a clip from a May 29 speech by Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) — in which Clinton said it is time for America “to reject the idea of an on-your-own society and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity” — and added, “This isn’t the first time Hillary has made her socialist views and intentions so apparent.” Hannity also characterized the speech as Clinton “blast[ing] the free market.” In fact, Clinton said in the same speech that “there is no greater force for economic growth than free markets.” As Media Matters for America has documented, other conservative commentators have similarly selectively quoted from Clinton’s speech in order to paint her as a “socialist.”
Hannity began the segment with a discussion of Clinton’s senior thesis at Wellesley College on community activist Saul Alinsky, and then went on to discuss Clinton’s May 29 speech outlining her economic vision for America, which he erroneously described as occurring on June 4. Hannity said that Clinton “blasted the free market, campaigned for redistribution of wealth for the common good, and compared the last six years in America to the era of the robber barons.” Hannity played a series of clips from the speech Clinton gave May 29 at a high school in Manchester, New Hampshire, which the Associated Press described as “outlin[ing] a broad economic vision” in its May 29 report. From Hannity’s America:
CLINTON: It’s time for a new beginning … time to reject the idea of an on-your-own society and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity. … The genius of the American economy in the 20th century was that it helped to counter that tendency for people to push as far as their own interests would take them.
But in accusing Clinton of embracing socialism, Hannity ignored that immediately after Clinton stated that it was “time to reject the idea of an on-your-own society and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity,” Clinton praised the free market system when it includes “rules that promote our values, protect our workers and give all people a chance to succeed.” Clinton asserted:
CLINTON: It’s time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few and for the few, time to reject the idea of an on-you-own society and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity. I prefer a “we’re all in it together” society.
Now, there is no greater force for economic growth than free markets, but markets work best with rules that promote our values, protect our workers and give all people a chance to succeed. When we get our priorities in order and make the smart investments we need, the markets work well.
Instead of airing that statement, Hannity followed it with a statement from 17 paragraphs earlier in the speech:
CLINTON: The genius of the American economy in the 20th century was that it helped to counter that tendency for people to push as far as their own interests would take them so that we created a leveler playing field that benefited everyone.
In addition, Hannity truncated remarks Clinton made in San Francisco at a June 28, 2004, fundraiser for Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) as further evidence of Clinton’s “socialist views and intentions.” According to Hannity, at that fundraiser Clinton told the audience of wealthy donors:
CLINTON: We’re not coming to you, many of whom are well enough off that actually the tax cuts may have helped you … we’re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We are going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.
In fact, according to a July 2, 2004, correction to a June 29, 2004, AP report, Clinton said that “cut[ting] short” the tax cuts was probably necessary “for America to get back on track and be fiscally responsible,” implying that the tax cut reductions would be necessary to reduce the federal deficit. According to the AP, Clinton said:
CLINTON: We’re not coming to you, many of whom are well enough off that actually the tax cuts may have helped you, and say “we’re going to give you more.” We’re saying, “You know what, for America to get back on track and be fiscally responsible, we’re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.“




~J~ Says:
August 7th, 2007 at 10:51 amVisit ~J~
What is that if not socialism? Had she left that statemtent out it wouldn’t have caused the stink it did. There are some of us who want less government and not more.
The only thing I want from the government is my tax refund in the spring. Nothing more and nothing less, and if I owe I’ll pay it.
FDR and LBJ can be thanked for this cradle to grave mentality, and how many poor people have pulled themselves out of the ghettos because of it? Where is the incentive when everything is provided?
As I have stated many times, if someone needs it they should get it but everyone doesn’t need it.
Our doctor needs a new doctor in his practice. He said by the next election we will have socialized medicine and no medical student is going to pay all that money to become a specialist so the government can regulate his pay. So where will we get this wonderful medical care we are promised?