Interesting the way the press frames the questions.
Hillary is asked of the 1994 Crime Bill, ''Given what's happened since 1994, why should black people trust you to get it right this time?''
Wow! Here is a bill that was passed BEFORE Hillary was elected to the Senate; and she's blamed for it, to the point that NOW there is a question as to whether she should be trusted because of the passage of this bill she supported but did NOT vote for.
Which of the candidates' trustworthiness should be questioned now? The one who was in the congress and who VOTED FOR it in 1994? (Sanders)
Or the one who was NOT in the congress and did NOT vote for it? (Hillary)
Hell, you know the answer to this one; it's easy.
HILLARY should be held responsible for the bill Sanders voted FOR!
__________________________________________
Hillary, noting the double standard, challenged Lemon to ask Sanders the same question he asked of her.
And, no. Lemon did no DARE ask Sanders the same question. Lemon revised the question for Bernie. In Bernie's case, his vote FOR the bill does NOT give rise to a question of his trustworthiness; in Bernie's case, if HE got it wrong, it was just a "mistake." Aw, shucks, Bernie --- if you got it wrong then -- that's okay. We all make mistakes. So we won't impugn YOUR trustworthiness now.
But for that bitch Hillary? Hell no! In HER case it's a matter of trustworthiness; no simple mistake for her; no, this cuts RIGHT to the heart of her character and clearly demonstrates she can't be trusted.
By the way; not only did Lemon softball Bernie on the question, and relieve him of any freighted questions of trust, he also let Bernie get away with not even answering. Unlike Hillary, Sanders would NOT say that his support of the bill was a mistake.
________________________________
Hillary, noting the double standard, challenged Lemon to ask Sanders the same question he asked of her.
Do you think Lemon had the balls to ask it?
Hell no. And blow a perfectly good smear?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/06/the-democrats-debate-in-flint-mich-annotated/
From the Democratic presidential debate last night, there emerged a tale of two candidates and how they are questioned. Or one might say -- a glaring set of double standards:
At issue? - A piece of legislation from the 1990's --- now regarded unfavorably by many.
One candidate is asked if voting for the bill was a "mistake." You know - the tone of the question was sort of "Aw shucks, these things happen; we understand. Don't sweat it."
The OTHER candidate, who did NOT vote for the bill (but supported it), is asked not merely if that support was "a mistake," but rather was asked why should voters " trust you to get it right this time?"
That's right. For the one who actually VOTED FOR the bill, it was perhaps just a "mistake."
The one who did NOT vote for the bill, though, faced an ominously laden question about character and trustworthiness. None of this "Aw shucks" stuff for THIS candidate. No sirree, Bob.
NOW --- your mission -- should you choose to accept it -- is to try to figure out:
WHICH of the candidates is a woman?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/06/the-democrats-debate-in-flint-mich-annotated/
_____________________________
Dino: Did you get a kick out of Hillary challenging Don Lemon to ask Bernie the same question Lemon asked her?
Whether you got a kick out of it or not, did you notice that Lemon didn't DARE ask Bernie what he asked Hillary?
___________________________________
Here's how the ''pro-Hillary MSM'' works.
There is a bill passed in 1994; it's now quite unpopular among many voters.
Bernie voted FOR the bill; Hillary didn't vote for it, but she DID support it.
So, today, the ''pro-Hillary MSM'' attacks Hillary as possibly being untrustworthy for supporting the bill.
But for Bernie, he's asked simply was it a mistake to support the bill.
I've asked several times for an explanation as to why in her case it's a question of trusting her; but with Bernie, it's just maybe a simple ''mistake'' he made.
Most people I ask about this either dodge the question; change the subject; or claim that the question is ''pointless.''
A few have noted the simple truth -- it's the Clinton Rules ---- she's held to a tougher standard than EVERYONE else.
