About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Media figures claimed Clinton's emotional moment in NH was "pretend[]," not "genuine"

January 09, 2008 1:23 pm ET
image

SUMMARY: Discussing a recent campaign event during which Sen. Hillary Clinton's voice broke while answering a question from the audience, several media figures have baselessly claimed that Clinton's actions were not "genuine" or were "pretend[]," including Glenn Beck, who said of the incident, "Hillary Clinton isn't just running for president, but she's also making a run for the best actress nomination." Michelle Malkin wrote that "[a]nyone who believes Hillary spontaneously teared up and got emotional on the campaign trail has been in a coma the last three decades."

84 Comments

While discussing a recent campaign event in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, during which Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's (D-NY) voice broke as she talked about why she is seeking the presidency, several media figures have baselessly claimed that Clinton's actions were not "genuine" or were "pretend[]." For example, CNN Headline News host Glenn Beck said of the incident, "Hillary Clinton isn't just running for president, but she's also making a run for the best actress nomination," while New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd, in her January 9 column, quoted an anonymous Times reporter's assertion: "That crying really seemed genuine. I'll bet she spent hours thinking about it beforehand." Further, right-wing pundit Michelle Malkin wrote: "Anyone who believes Hillary spontaneously teared up and got emotional on the campaign trail has been in a coma the last three decades."

As Media Matters for America documented, Weekly Standard editor and New York Times columnist William Kristol similarly claimed on Fox News that "[s]he pretended to cry, the women liked it," adding, "The women were sorry for her, and she won." Other media figures have also accused Clinton of insincerity in the incident, invoking a common characterization in the media of Clinton as calculating.

During the January 8 edition of CNN Headline News' Glenn Beck, Beck opened the program by asserting that the "[b]ig news from New Hampshire tonight is: It cries." During his recurring "The Point" segment, Beck asserted:

BECK: I don't buy the hype of the tears. I don't think you should, either. Apparently, Hillary Clinton isn't just running for president, but she's also making a run for the best actress nomination. And here's how I got there.

Believe me, I know what it's like to get caught off guard and break down occasionally. I mean, I cry on this freaking show like every 10 minutes, so don't get me wrong here. I get it. And I appreciate somebody who can cry. But I'm a big sissy in a purple shirt, and I'm not running for the leader of the free world. You know what I'm saying?

After airing a clip of Clinton saying, "You know, I have so many opportunities from this country. I just don't want to see us fall backwards," Beck said, "Is it just me? Maybe because I just don't buy any of her bullcrap anyway." Later in the segment, Beck added:

BECK: Hillary, we see what's happening here. You're losing, and this is some sort of bizarre, last-ditch strategy to ingratiate you with women, maybe? Or make you seem less like the Terminator? I mean, I've -- I wouldn't put it past you to have your eye fall out and this little red light coming out of your eye socket. I'm just saying.

For those -- for those of you who thought those tears were for our country, I think you're mistaken there. Maybe, I think, if the tears were real, they were just because of the grind that she is under right now.

In her Times column, Dowd wrote: "When I walked into the office Monday, people were clustering around a computer to watch what they thought they would never see: Hillary Clinton with the unmistakable look of tears in her eyes." Dowd added that one "reporter joked: 'That crying really seemed genuine. I'll bet she spent hours thinking about it beforehand.' He added dryly: 'Crying doesn't usually work in campaigns. Only in relationships.' "

In her January 9 syndicated column, Malkin wrote of the incident: "So long, feminist hero. Hello, weeping willow. Anyone who believes Hillary spontaneously teared up and got emotional on the campaign trail has been in a coma the last three decades." Malkin later added that Clinton "can't tolerate someone else out-politically-correct-ing her. This was supposed to be her year. Her triumph. Her her-story. Maybe a few of those tears welling up in her eyes were real after all. Expect more as this contested race -- a race she thought would be a cakewalk -- continues."

From the January 8 edition of CNN Headline News' Glenn Beck:

BECK: Well, hello, America. Big news from New Hampshire tonight is: It cries.

After spending decades stripping away all trace of emotion, femininity, and humanity, Hillary Clinton actually broke down and actually cried yesterday on the campaign trail. So, I guess, here's "The Point" tonight.

I don't buy the hype of the tears. I don't think you should, either. Apparently, Hillary Clinton isn't just running for president, but she's also making a run for the best actress nomination. And here's how I got there.

Believe me, I know what it's like to get caught off guard and break down occasionally. I mean, I cry on this freaking show like every 10 minutes, so don't get me wrong here. I get it. And I appreciate somebody who can cry. But I'm a big sissy in a purple shirt, and I'm not running for the leader of the free world. You know what I'm saying?

Let's a take minute here just to look at the Hillary episode where she was responding to the question, "How do you do it?"

CLINTON [video clip]: You know, I have so many opportunities from this country. I just don't want to see us fall backwards.

BECK: Is it just me? Maybe because I just don't buy any of her bullcrap anyway. I just -- wow. You might want to go grab the tissue if you need one, because the waterworks is just beginning. The tough-as-nails attorney and political animal tried to choke back the tears and dig deep for the words, and she offered this.

CLINTON [video clip]: This is very personal for me. It's not just political, it's not just public. I see what's happening. And we have to reverse it.

BECK: OK, that part I was OK with. But then she went into, and you know, some people just aren't prepared. And it just seemed like more of the same old-same old.

Hillary, we see what's happening here. You're losing, and this is some sort of bizarre, last-ditch strategy to ingratiate you with women, maybe? Or make you seem less like the Terminator? I mean, I've -- I wouldn't put it past you to have your eye fall out and this little red light coming out of your eye socket. I'm just saying.

For those -- for those of you that thought those tears were for our country, I think you're mistaken there. Maybe, I think, if the tears were real, they were just because of the grind that she is under right now.

From Dowd's January 9 New York Times column:

When I walked into the office Monday, people were clustering around a computer to watch what they thought they would never see: Hillary Clinton with the unmistakable look of tears in her eyes.

A woman gazing at the screen was grimacing, saying it was bad. Three guys watched it over and over, drawn to the "humanized" Hillary. One reporter who covers security issues cringed. "We are at war," he said. "Is this how she'll talk to [North Korean leader] Kim Jong-il?"

Another reporter joked: "That crying really seemed genuine. I'll bet she spent hours thinking about it beforehand." He added dryly: "Crying doesn't usually work in campaigns. Only in relationships."

Bill Clinton was known for biting his lip, but here was Hillary doing the Muskie. Certainly it was impressive that she could choke up and stay on message.

She won her Senate seat after being embarrassed by a man. She pulled out New Hampshire and saved her presidential campaign after being embarrassed by another man. She was seen as so controlling when she ran for the Senate that she had to be seen as losing control, as she did during the Monica scandal, before she seemed soft enough to attract many New York voters.

From Malkin's January 9 syndicated column, as published in The New York Post:

Many will point to Hillary's watery-eyed performance at a Portsmouth rally on Monday as a watershed moment. Down in the polls and facing imminent defeat, the erstwhile anti-Tammy Wynette turned on the spigot and played damsel in distress: "It's not easy, and I couldn't do it if I didn't passionately believe it was the right thing to do. You know, I have so many opportunities from this country. I just don't want to see us fall backward, you know?"

The steely voice -- infamous for uttering profanities at staffers, state troopers and her Secret Service detail, bellowing at the Bush administration and Rush Limbaugh, and imitating a fiery Southern drawl -- turned drippy: "You know, this is very personal for me. It's not just political; it's not just public. I see what's happening, and we have to reverse it." Insert heartfelt pauses and choke-ups as directed.

So long, feminist hero. Hello, weeping willow. Anyone who believes Hillary spontaneously teared up and got emotional on the campaign trail has been in a coma the last three decades.

Bill Clinton's diarrhea of the mouth didn't help. He flailed at reporters for putting his poor, poor wife at a "breathtaking disadvantage" (never mind the countless regal magazine covers of his wife and softball coverage over the years); lamented that he can't turn her into something "younger, taller, male," and whined that "the wealthier have more right to free speech than the rest of us" (never mind their $100 million war chest).

[...]

You can't fake a core. You can't fake charm. And you can't fake humility. Mannequin Hillary tried during the ABC News debate in New Hampshire over the weekend when questioned about her likeability. "Well, that hurts my feelings," she coyly purred in attempted mock self-effacement.

One problem: The Clintons are too steeped in the politics of self-entitlement to pull off credible self-effacement. Seated next to a rival who has stolen her liberal thunder and who might make history as the nation's first black president, Hillary couldn't help declaring: "I am an agent of change, I embody change. I think having the first woman president is a huge change."

She can't tolerate someone else out-politically-correct-ing her. This was supposed to be her year. Her triumph. Her her-story.

Maybe a few of those tears welling up in her eyes were real after all. Expect more as this contested race -- a race she thought would be a cakewalk -- continues.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by atheist (January 09, 2008 1:38 pm ET)
         

      I cannot believe that the wingnut media is SO desperate that they are turning this non-event into a huge scandal !  Tear-gate !

      Report Abuse
      • Author by RABBITLUVR (January 09, 2008 1:54 pm ET)
           

        Expect plenty more of this in the coming months. Already, Rush and Mark are becoming unhinged over this and their side's pathetic lineup. 

        Report Abuse
        • Author by atheist (January 09, 2008 2:04 pm ET)
             

          I don't know how she has put up with all that she has had to endure already.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by Clevenative (January 09, 2008 2:09 pm ET)
             

          I can’t bring myself to listen to either of these wingnuts anymore, but I can only imagine what their shows are like today. I think I’ll just rely on MM for a synopsis, thank you.

          I think I’ll wait until after the day after the general election in November, get myself totally stoned, tune in to Rush, sit back and listen to him and his listener’s sobbing - and have the laugh of my life.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by RABBITLUVR (January 09, 2008 2:16 pm ET)
               

            Honestly, for me, this is highly entertaining.

            I know... I am a glutton for punishment though as they and their 'ideas' are highly toxic 'specimens'... but there is a certain sense of pleasure hearing 'the sheep' going against their Masters. Rush hasn't had a good week with the Huck supporters calling in and basically telling Rush that he's full of it.

            That makes me feel good inside. Really.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by rtwmd1230 (January 09, 2008 2:32 pm ET)
                 

              Rush was barely controlling his meltdown this past Friday trying to deal with Iowa results.  He keept explaining to his devotees the difference between a progressive and a conservative, and a lot of them weren't buying it

              Huckabee is a sleazoid, but I think at least a few of his fundie followers are starting to realize the economic screw they've received from their Republican masters.  

              Report Abuse
              • Author by RABBITLUVR (January 09, 2008 2:47 pm ET)
                   

                A Huck nomination would sit quite well for me. Not only would the Hard Right most likely stay home on Election Day out of protest Huck would be destroyed by the Dem candidate. If McCain gets it then the Dems have valid reason to be scared but they could still win. The results would be much closer.

                I think the Right will find itself fighting a losing battle... and they will not have a true conservative at the helm. The only chance they had for a true conservative was Fred Thompson - do not kid yourselves... he was the one Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin wanted - and he is basically toast. Sure, he MAY do passably okay in the South but that's it. Same thing with Giuliani... expect him to be out by Feb. 7.

                Report Abuse
          • Author by tex (January 10, 2008 9:07 am ET)
               
            PJ: You already KNOW what Rush will say: He's tired of carrying the water for Republicans who are losers, who are not as plutocratically "conservative" as Rush wants them to be. Rush will tell his listeners he has been, in effect, LYING to them for months by propping up and defending GOP candidates that he personally cannot stand. HE was under no illusions, you see, but it was his JOB to try to fool his listeners, and keep them "on board" with Republicans. After all, he's a highly paid propagandist. He has a JOB to do, and it demands a constant flow of MISINFORMATION to his audience, the better to mislead and deceive them. We know all this NOW; He announced it to us, after the GOP's latest big loss, when the Democratic Party seized control of the House and Senate. He confessed to his disingenuousness, he admitted his role as dishonest manipulator of weak minds. Anyone who listens to and BELIEVES Limbaugh today is a FOOL and an IDIOT ... by Rush's own evaluation. Obviously, Rush has NO RESPECT for his audience, seeing them as mindless sheep easily persuaded to believe whatever they are told by someone highly paid to USE them. They LIKE being used, DEMAND to be used. So he uses them, telling them sweet partisan lies and no doubt marveling that there are some who still buy into his world view (even after he's TOLD them it's all bullcrap!). Wonder what he will say no more: He's said it before, and nothing has changed.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by qwerty (January 09, 2008 3:48 pm ET)
           

        It doesn't bode well for the Hillary campaign to have to play the "woman as victim" gender card this early in the primary.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by qwerty (January 09, 2008 3:50 pm ET)
           

        It doesn't bode well for the Hillary campaign to have to play the "woman as victim" gender card this early in the primary

        Report Abuse
    • Author by RABBITLUVR (January 09, 2008 1:39 pm ET)
         

      Well, this one is no surprise, of course. Anyone who is against Hillary apparently has incredible powers to know EXACTLY what she is feeling and thinking AND whether it is 'genuine' or not. I must say that I am highly impressed with their 'talents'.

      However, I am one who frankly doesn't give a damn about all of this superficial drama and the inevitable guessing games that accompany it. Nice try, superficial 'analysts', but I'll take my sandwich with plenty of 'substance' and no 'dressing', thank you.

      In other words... to those who don't 'get it'... your 'analyses' are a real waste of your time but, even more importantly, a waste of mine.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by mr. l (January 09, 2008 1:41 pm ET)
         

      Uggh..., seriously, what is wrong with these people?  Are these carnivours even remotely interested in what the democrats are trying to get across to people?  I'm so friggin' sick of these 'I'll deconstruct her every motion and emotion, and just for kicks I'll read her mind and tell you all why she did it this way...' 'reporters'... 

      Report Abuse
      • Author by The Stranger (January 09, 2008 8:45 pm ET)
           

        Of course it was an act. I don't think anyone seriously believes it wasn't, though there are those that will continue to pretend that it was a real moment simply for partisan purposes.

        Remember when Bubba had his own fake teary moment?

        He was caught on camera yukking it up until he saw he was being filmed, then he actually faked like he was wiping tears from his eyes.

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnQ0g4BhHss

        It's the Clintons, there is nothing honest about them.

        As an aside, I wonder how Hill is keeping Bubba from embarassing her during the campaign with yet another sex scandal.

        Is she spirinkling saltpeter on his oatmeal ?

        Report Abuse
    • Author by Sueelldd (January 09, 2008 1:45 pm ET)
         

      Keith Olbermann was attacking Hillary Monday night , saying she was playin the "al-qeida " card. Where was the thread about this? Is it fair? He also compared her to Karl Rove, imagine if Oreilly said this? The outrage on these threads.?

       

      http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22558135/

       

      On a day in which she‘d already tear up at one moment and then attacked Barack Obama the next, on a day on which she had already invoked Martin Luther King and President Johnson in a dubious analogy to herself and Senator Obama.  Senator Hillary Clinton this afternoon played the al Qaeda card.  As a “USA Today”/Gallup poll finding the one-time front-runner once again lagging behind Senator Barack Obama, the latest lead 13.  They were tied in this survey just three weeks ago, Senator Edwards in third at 13 percent.  Senator Clinton not crying about that this morning in a conversation with reportedly undecided voters in Portsmouth.  Not crying at all but close enough.  In response to a question about how does it, how does she keep so upbeat and so wonderful, Mrs. Clinton turning from upbeat to emotional.

      (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

      CLINTON:  This is very personal for me.  It‘s not just political. 

      It‘s not just public.  I see what‘s happening.  And we have to reverse it.  And some people think elections are a game.  They think it is like who‘s up or who‘s down.  It‘s about our country.  It‘s about our kids‘ futures.  It‘s really about all of us together.  Some of us put ourselves out there and do this against some pretty difficult odds.

      (END VIDEO CLIP)

      OLBERMANN:  Sounds great, doesn‘t it, about it not being just political but also personal?  Perhaps by personal, Senator Clinton meant personal attacks on her other candidates because in the very next sentence, instead of reversing it, she started to attack some rivals who sounded an awful lot like Senator Barack Obama.  We rejoin the senator already in progress.

      (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

      CLINTON:  Against some pretty difficult odds.  And we do it, each one of us, because we care about our country.  Some of us are right and some of us are wrong.  Some of us are ready, some of us are not.  Some of us know what we will do on day one and some of us haven‘t really thought that through enough.

      (END VIDEO CLIP)

      OLBERMANN:  It gets worse.  As we mentioned, later this afternoon, at event in Dover, Senator Clinton playing the fear card by pointing out that one day after Gordon Brown took office as a prime minister of Great Britain there was failed attempt to double bombings in Glasgow in London.

      (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

      CLINTON:  I don‘t think it was by accident that al Qaeda decided to test the new prime minister immediately.  They watch our elections as closely as we do, maybe more than some of our fellow citizens do.  They play our, you know, allies.  They do everything they can to undermine security in the world.  So, let‘s not forget you are hiring a president not just to do what a candidate says he or she wants to do in an election.  You‘re hiring a president to be there when the chips are down.

      (END VIDEO CLIP)

      OLBERMANN:  Alas, wait, there‘s more, as if having drawn inspiration from the Karl Rove playbook were not bad enough, Senator Clinton making an another analogy in which she appears to be President Lyndon Johnson and Senator Obama seems to be Dr. Martin Luther King in not a good way quoting her, “Doctor King‘s dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act.  It took a president to get it done.”  Senator Clinton had been hoping to bait Senator Obama into responding in kind to any of her comments today.  She failed.  The new frontrunner is sticking with the positivity that seems to be fueling his success.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by RABBITLUVR (January 09, 2008 1:51 pm ET)
           

        Are you EVER gonna let your obsession of Olby go down the toilet? Ever?

        Seriously, why do you have such a hardon for him?

        Report Abuse
        • Author by Sueelldd (January 09, 2008 1:53 pm ET)
             

          It is not an obsession, unless you compare it to Olbermann talking about BO all the time? it is a legitmate question, why was this criticsm not discussed on MMFA , when if it were OReilly or Matthews or someone else it would. Why the double standard? Beck did not say Hillary was playing the "al -qeida card".

          Report Abuse
          • Author by RABBITLUVR (January 09, 2008 1:56 pm ET)
               

            Once again... this site is here to expose CONSERVATIVE misinformation. If you want to see Olby get 'the treatment' then this isn't the site for you. Head over to Newsbusters for that.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by JLyons (January 09, 2008 1:59 pm ET)
                 

              Sorry , but how is saying that Senator Clinton is playing the "al Qeida" card and is using personal attacks not advancing Conservative misinformation about the Senators character?

              Report Abuse
              • Author by RABBITLUVR (January 09, 2008 2:13 pm ET)
                   

                On this particular issue, yes, you are correct. Sounds like management may have called Olby into The Office for a 'chat' and gave him 'instructions'. Face it, NBC hates Hillary, and Olby needed to get with the program.

                My point is that Sueeld's obsession is ridiculous and he/she seems to be playing dumb on why MM doesn't call out Keith. 99% of the time Keith goes against the conservative BS. This time, however, he went along the con path with the al-Qaeda card crap. Not a good moment for Keith.

                 

                Report Abuse
                • Author by jeter2 (January 09, 2008 2:21 pm ET)
                     

                  Sorry Rabbit that ain't how it works here...at least for everyone else BUT Brock's boy Keith.

                  Doesn't matter if someone is Liberal or not, if they spew Conservative MIS-information MMFA calls them out on it.

                  So SueEld was 100% correct here in asking WHY Keith got a pass.

                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by DorisRussell (January 09, 2008 3:18 pm ET)
                       

                    I agree with you Jeter, it is suspect as to why this is not been covered. MMFA i am sure watches the Olbermann show nightly.

                    Report Abuse
      • Author by pete592 (January 09, 2008 1:53 pm ET)
           

        Did you do your civic duty and send MMFA a tip?

        mm-tips@mediamatters.org 

        Report Abuse
        • Author by Sueelldd (January 09, 2008 1:54 pm ET)
             

          Yes i did, thanks. I use it alot. It is a great tool.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by atheist (January 09, 2008 2:02 pm ET)
               

            I normally hate your posts but I have to say I appreciate that one.  I was watching Olbermann and Matthews doing their NH Primary analysis and Olbermann was pretty low-key about Hillary, at least what I heard, but the transcript you posted is really disgusting and disappointing, he too has turned into a Hillary attack dog tearing her down at every opportunity, employing wingnut tactics to focus on every tiny action to make it appear she is disingenuous ...

            I think that's enough to make me give up on watching Olbermann forever.  Very very disappointing.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by atheist (January 09, 2008 2:07 pm ET)
                 

              Oh hell, look at the main Countdown page !  There's a link titled "Clinton cries, then attacks Obama".  WTF ???

              Now I'm mad.  No more Olbermann for me.  He's turning into Matthews.  They're spending too much time together, probably hung out in the bathroom during their primary coverage breaks.

              Report Abuse
              • Author by JLyons (January 09, 2008 2:09 pm ET)
                   

                Atheist, I kind of felt Olbermann was like the other "pundits" and thought the Senator was going to lose so while she was weak he attacked. It is disturbing that MMFA did not post this as a thread. I do agree if Beck or Hannity or Matthews said this it would be on here in a heartbeat.

                Report Abuse
                • Author by atheist (January 09, 2008 3:33 pm ET)
                     

                  He's trying to change the outcome of the election, just like the wingnuts are, just like Matthews is, etc.  It's disgusting.  I expected better of Olbermann, now I see he's no better than the rest.

                  Report Abuse
              • Author by RABBITLUVR (January 09, 2008 2:17 pm ET)
                   

                Management obviously got to Keith... sad.

                Report Abuse
          • Author by Sams Computer (January 09, 2008 2:28 pm ET)
               

            Hi Peggy SUE...

            What did you report to Media Matter that was false information by Keith?

            Report Abuse
            • Author by atheist (January 09, 2008 2:44 pm ET)
                 

              Olbermann's Hillary-hating editorial comments comprise the misinformation.  He is promoting the wingnut agenda by employing the same tactics as the wingnuts employ.  I have never defended Sue in the past, but this time I have to.

              Report Abuse
            • Author by JLyons (January 09, 2008 2:51 pm ET)
                 

              Sam

              Are you saying it is ok for Olbermann to say Hillary was playing the "Al Qeida" card?  Does it matter if Sueeld was the one who brought this up? Misinformation is misinformation if it comes from Oreilly, Dowd or Olbermann.

              Report Abuse
      • Author by johnny_nyc8351 (January 09, 2008 4:40 pm ET)
           

        Perhaps its as simple as MMFA agreeing with Olbermann.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by JLyons (January 09, 2008 5:01 pm ET)
             

          I find that hard to believe , if Matthews said this or Sean Hannity we would be reading about it.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by anotheramerican (January 09, 2008 1:57 pm ET)
         

      It kind of reminded me of when Bill had a tear in his eye at Ron Brown's funeral.

      For a good cry..oops laugh.. no wait... it was a cry... go look at:

      http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/CRASH/BROWN/TEARS/tears.html

      Report Abuse
      • Author by JLyons (January 09, 2008 2:00 pm ET)
           

        AA, that is not nice, Ron Brown was a patriot who died in an accident. 

        Report Abuse
        • Author by anotheramerican (January 09, 2008 2:50 pm ET)
             

          The not nice was on Clinton.  Did you view the video?

          Report Abuse
          • Author by friedbergboy1422 (January 09, 2008 2:59 pm ET)
               

            AA,

            Tears, shmears, what did you think of Boehner's breakdown on the Senate floor?  Why isn't his reaction broadcast 24-7 and scrutinized?

            Report Abuse
            • Author by atheist (January 09, 2008 3:35 pm ET)
                 

              Right !  He is obviously incompetent to lead because of his delicate emotional makeup.

              Report Abuse
            • Author by anotheramerican (January 09, 2008 4:21 pm ET)
                 

              Sorry. I haven't seen it. 

              I could care less if Hillary cries, shrieks, grates, howls at the moon, or has hot flashes.  If almost crying  brought her votes, we're in big trouble. 

              As far as her emotional statement, I heard Linda Rontadt sing it years ago... 

              Poor poor pitiful me Poor poor pitiful me Oh these boys won't let me be Lord have mercy on me Woe woe is me

               

              Report Abuse
              • Author by atheist (January 09, 2008 4:30 pm ET)
                   

                If almost crying  brought her votes, we're in big trouble.

                And if it didn't ? 

                Report Abuse
    • Author by Clevenative (January 09, 2008 2:00 pm ET)
         

      BECK: “…And here's how I got there.”

      This is my question exactly. How DID you get there? How can a guy who, even with the help of a dictionary, wouldn’t understand the meaning of the word “logic” - yet somehow can sell books and spout nonsense based on his irrational views of the world?

      Everything about this guy is just plain dopey – yet he can apparently still get people to drink his Kool-Aid. Maybe I should just cancel my cable TV subscription and take a vacation from MMFA before it all just drives me mad.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by dexteritas0071418 (January 09, 2008 2:01 pm ET)
         

      Well Michelle I haven't even been alive over the extent of the last 3 decades, so I guess that disqualifies me from being able to have an opinion on HRC's "tearing up."

      What a ridiculous story. Blame the media in general for even noting it. The fact of the matter is, Obama didn't quite get the same number of youth and first-time voter votes out in NH this time, and too many independents went for McCain instead of him. Easy. No tears analysis necessary.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by worrierking (January 09, 2008 2:20 pm ET)
         

      Wasn't the Beav squirting a few tears earlier in the week when he was doing his You Tube Promo for his upcoming show about how screwed up the health care system is in this country.

      Oh, I forgot, it's OK to cry as long as you're a card carrying bedwetter like Beck.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Goodfella57 (January 09, 2008 2:43 pm ET)
         

      Where is the actual "conservative misinformation here"? It appears to me that Beck and Malkin are simply voicing their opinion and commenting on the situation.

      Dear MMfA, At least stick to your mission.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by atheist (January 09, 2008 4:29 pm ET)
           

        Launched in May 2004, Media Matters for America put in place, for the first time, the means to systematically monitor a cross section of print, broadcast, cable, radio, and Internet media outlets for conservative misinformation — news or commentary that is not accurate, reliable, or credible and that forwards the conservative agenda — every day, in real time.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by Goodfella57 (January 09, 2008 5:49 pm ET)
             

          " ...news or commentary that is not accurate, reliable, or credible and that forwards the conservative agenda"

          So what's not "accurate, reliable or credible" about this story?

          Report Abuse
    • Author by right-winger (January 09, 2008 3:14 pm ET)
         

      I LOVE IT !!! I SEE MSNBC, CNN, AND FOXNEWS ARE BACK TO ATTACKING HILLAY AGAIN.  HEY DEMS REPUBLICAN WILL BE BACK IN THE WHITEHOUSE IN 08, WHY BECAUSE THE MEDIA DON'T WANT HILLARY OR OBAMA, MCCAIN IS THERE MAN NOW. LOOK FOR THE KISSUP JOB AGAIN IF HILLAY BEGINS TO LOSE AGAIN.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by RABBITLUVR (January 09, 2008 3:56 pm ET)
           

        Ah, go 'kissup' to Limbaugh and his clones... that's all you and your side have now. You guys don't even have a frontrunner among the four real candidates... so much for Mark Levin's assertion that the Dems will be fighting a long bloody battle. Nope, YOUR side will be doing that! 

        The way things are going now... the media ain't deciding this election... they just got their yaps shut by Hillary's win last night.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by eweston8542983 (January 09, 2008 3:21 pm ET)
         

       There is nothing simple about these folk voicing their opinions and comenting on the situation GF. It even has a name, The Tweety Effect. If they'd made similar statements about their opinions on why a GOP candidate should be tanking and is phoney, in their opinion, you might have a case.

      The extent of criticism to the Goppers in the media is on whether or not some of them might be running a negative campaign. Consensis has not emerged on this in the media. But they are somehow able to detect fake tears from 200 yards, or 200 miles, no problem. Especialty if its a Democratic candidate. If its Hillary they show symtoms of despiratly needing a good mental health practicioner. Their insanity becomes more evident with every statement that they broadcast on their opinions of her.

      Its actually becoming visible to everyday voters. It should be visible to you as you actually know where to get the information about media missinformation. Most people don't. Yet they are starting to see, however imperfectly, as you remain blind and deaf to anything contrary to your deeply cherished idiology.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Goodfella57 (January 09, 2008 8:33 pm ET)
           

        "Its actually becoming visible to everyday voters. It should be visible to you as you actually know where to get the information about media missinformation. Most people don't. Yet they are starting to see, however imperfectly, as you remain blind and deaf to anything contrary to your deeply cherished idiology."- eweston8542983

        Well...you don't know me well enough to know what my ideology is. I do look at both sides. How often do you browse NewsBusters or LittleGreenFootballs? Misinformation is one thing; and conservatives and liberals should be busted on it. But this item about Hillary tearing up is not about misinformation...it is more speculation and opinion (and some would say entertainment).   

        Report Abuse
        • Author by eweston8542983 (January 09, 2008 9:26 pm ET)
             

          I went to little green apples once, that was enough. I've occasionally visited other conservative sites. I can't think of anything I've seen there that made me go, "Dats da bunny!". Firedoglake, Glenn Greenwald, The Daily Howler are my usual. I think their good, thats were I go.

          As in all of your posts I see snark and snide directed at the site and most of the posters. I don't see the driving force that continually brings you here to insult us as being other than idealogical.

          You show some intelligence. Show me up, prove me wrong. Or retreat back to sniping range.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by YellowDogDemocrat (January 09, 2008 3:32 pm ET)
         

      As a woman whoh as worked in an executive field all her life, I was disgusted by the crying.  It sets us all back.  Even though, in my bleeding liberal little heart, I don't want to believe it I have to be honest enough to say that it fuels those who claim women can't cope with the tough stuff.  What I found most repugnant, however, and this is a lifelong Democrat speaking, was what she said.  To paraphrase, "I just can't believe I might lose when I am the only person who can run this country the right way."  I never intended to vote for her in the primary election, but now I will boycott the presidential election if she is the party's nominee.  I won't stoop to vote for a Republican, but I won't vote for her, either.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by atheist (January 09, 2008 3:37 pm ET)
           

        Why do you use the term "crying" ??  Did she have tears streaming down her face ?  Or did she just get a bit teary, like some guys do ?

        I'm sorry you feel the need to be a man.  I'm a woman and I'm not disgusted by tearing up or even crying.  Women are biologically different from men, our hormone balance is totally different !  We cry, men punch things.  That's reality.  I'm sorry you don't like it but stop expecting everyone else to conform to your self-gender-hatred.

         

         

        Report Abuse
        • Author by atheist (January 09, 2008 3:42 pm ET)
             

          I want to add too that Hillary has been forced to deal with 1000 times more and worse stuff than any of the other candidates.  Don't forget, she was accused of MURDER.  You know them all, I'm not going to repeat them here.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by YellowDogDemocrat (January 09, 2008 6:20 pm ET)
               

            "1000 times and worse stuff" -- Is that an actual figure or should we all just excuse your hyperbole because you are proud to be a woman and, after all, women are too emotional to handle precision? 

            Report Abuse
        • Author by Clevenative (January 09, 2008 6:03 pm ET)
             

          ATHIEST: I am a man but admit that I must have an abundance of such hormones myself. I am easilly riled emotionally and tear up at the least little thing – like both speeches from Obama and Hillary Tuesday night. I was lying in bed blowing my nose and thinking, “thank God no one is here to see me”. I used to be quite embarrassed about it, as it’s something I can remember having trouble controlling since I was in my teens. I am also gay, so the fear of being called a “sissy” only added to my worries of being called a “f*g”. At the same time I know for a fact that I have stood tall and strong in some of the darkest hours for family and friends and have done “manly” things that most men probably will never encounter or would have pushed off onto someone else.  

          All we can hope for is that as time goes on more and more of these silly stereotypes will be forgotten and people will realize that we are all human and not everything can be divided into black or white, especially when it comes to sexuality and human emotions.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by YellowDogDemocrat (January 09, 2008 6:12 pm ET)
             

          How dare you accuse me of hating my own gender?!  Must I like everything women do simply because I am one?  Then must males like everything men do?  Your reasoning is absurd.  To say that there is an emotional difference between males and females is not scientific.  We don't know what is socialization and what is genetic.  Women may cry more, but in the big people's world of work, (whether you like it or not), if you cry you are looked upon as weak.  Moreover, Hillary was not crying because she was moved by something; she was "tearing up" because she felt sorry for herself that she might lose.  I love being female and am quite happily heterosexual if that's going to be your next slur.  Nonetheless, I have no respect for the manipulation of tears in the workplace.  She's a politician; she was in the workplace.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by Clevenative (January 09, 2008 7:58 pm ET)
               

            YellowDogDemocrat: I was thinking, “you go girl” until I got to the “Hillary was not crying because she was moved by something; she was "tearing up" because she felt sorry for herself that she might lose.” part.

            Have you had this psychic mindreading capability all your life or is there a school somewhere that I can go to learn also?

            Report Abuse
      • Author by RABBITLUVR (January 09, 2008 3:44 pm ET)
           

        You might as well just pull the 'R' lever on Nov. 4 because sitting out this election if Hillary gets the nomination is just as good as voting for The Dark Side.

        Congratulations for playing right into the hands of Limbaugh and Co. - that is exactly what they want.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by atheist (January 09, 2008 4:09 pm ET)
             

          Precisely !!  They can claim another victim.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by YellowDogDemocrat (January 09, 2008 6:17 pm ET)
             

          It won't matter if I pull the lever or not because electing Hillary is just electing the same old stuff, different day. 

          Oh, but I forgot -- she's "experienced".  Right -- she spent eight years as First Lady.  That's why so many people wanted to draft Mamie Eisenhower to run for her party's nomination back in the day.

          Seriously, does it not bother any of you that if she is elected the same two families will have been running this country from 1988 until at least 2012?  I didn't hear that from a Republican, either; I thought it up in my own little Donkey brain.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by eweston8542983 (January 09, 2008 7:27 pm ET)
               

            Yes that has been brought up by both progressive and conservative sides, several times.

             Surprisingly nobody seems to notice is that she is her own person, with her own genetic code. The number of genes that she has that could be tagged as of Clinton origin are what?

            Also surprisingly no one has detailed the tragedies to which this will lead. Which I find suspicious. Is it one of those, its so obvious that any rational being doesn't have to be reminded of things.

            There are good arguments against Ms. Clinton's stance on such things as Corporate Culture, campaign financing, media ownership, and, well. Your pasionate enough. Use that energy to research. Make an original complaint. Don't just repeat talking points.

             

            Report Abuse
            • Author by YellowDogDemocrat (January 09, 2008 8:58 pm ET)
                 

              I could not have been repeating talking points because those words in the previous posts were my own.  But since you are interested, I disagree with Senator Clinton because...

              1.  ...she seems to be against raising the Social Security cap (although she won't be definite enough for me to tell) because she has classed those $200K a year as "middle class".  Not where I come from, dear!

              2. ..she refuses to acknowledge that her vote empowering George Bush to go to war in Iraq was a mistake.  Why?

              3.  ...she voted to urge the Bush administration to label the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization.  My husband has served two tours of duty in Iraq.  Our hands are full enough already.  If she thinks Iran is a threat perhaps Chelsea would like to sign up?

              4...she talks a good game about health care reform, yet takes money from insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies.  (Before anyone tells me that all candidates do that, remember I am only explaining why I do not want her to be president.)

              5....she has high negative ratings at a time when this country needs to be experience healing and not partisanship.  Is that her fault?  Probably not, but it's fact.

              6....she's basically okay with NAFTA.  The parts she doesn't like she blames on George Bush, Sr. who, even though he's not my favorite guy, has not been in charge since 1992 last time I looked.

              7...she seems to avoid the media unless the event is quite scripted.  Certainly she may have her reasons for this and they may be quite compelling for her, but it's not good for the nation to have the President act as if the press is an enemy.

              Do I need to go on, or have I earned my right to an opinion now?

              Report Abuse
              • Author by eweston8542983 (January 09, 2008 9:40 pm ET)
                   

                We all earn the right to be here, post by post. Obscenity and extreme trolling seem to be how most here get deleted, or banned.

                Other than that post as you like. Most long termers are good hearted, intelligent, and ok, weird.

                I'd like to give your latest a good look. You make some points with a fast scan, but its time to shut down for the day. I'm sure someone will pick up the slack, or I'll have time tomorrow.

                I've enjoyed being here, I hope you can enjoy it also.

                 

                Report Abuse
        • Author by YellowDogDemocrat (January 09, 2008 7:03 pm ET)
             

          Oh, c'mon!  Wake up to reality!  45% of Americans says they won't vote for her under any circumstances.  Nominating her will be just another instance of the Democratic Party snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory.  If we can't manage to nominate someone who can win this election after eight years of W, then we should just disband and start over again from scratch.

          Report Abuse
      • Author by anotheramerican (January 09, 2008 4:27 pm ET)
           

        Your voting plan aside, I had a similar reaction upon watching her. I thought she was so self centered as to be almost comical. 

         

        Report Abuse
        • Author by RABBITLUVR (January 09, 2008 4:34 pm ET)
             

          So that's the definition of being 'self-centered' - tearing up and being just the teensiest emotional. Oh, that's brilliant, AA! Your Master is teaching you well, I must say.

          Was GWB being 'self-centered' when he teared up on a number of occassions or do you apply a differing set of standards to him? Was he being 'self-centered' when he 'tearfully vowed to whip terrorism' right after 9/11? How about ANY politician for that matter?

          Just like clockwork for Hillary... damned if you do, damned if you don't.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by billie789 (January 09, 2008 3:36 pm ET)
         

      I listened to Glen Beck on the way home a couple of days ago and he was crying so hard about his recent "butt surgery, as he called it, that there were huge chunks of the dreaded "dead air" in his monologue. Longer than his normnal fake attempt at dramatic timing when he's blabbering about little children and Christ and America and Freedom, ad nauseum.

       

      What was really creepy is that he would start to cry, voice cracking, sobs, etc., he would stop and speak clearly and with zero emotion. I remember thinking, "Wow, this guy is good! From tears to straight talk in 3 seconds...then back to crying.

       So, in typical chicken hawk, neo-con hypocrisy, Beck's saying someone cried and used it to manipulate an audience.

       

      Cracker, puleeze!

       

       

      Report Abuse
      • Author by RABBITLUVR (January 09, 2008 3:48 pm ET)
           

        Yeah, I knew it. His brain is in his ass and they botched the surgery. Ah well... nothing changes.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by atheist (January 09, 2008 4:11 pm ET)
             

          Didn't Rush have something up his butt that needed to be extracted ?  What's with these wingnuts and their butts ?  Too much an........ naaah, better not say it.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by anotheramerican (January 09, 2008 4:30 pm ET)
               

            Way to button up.

            Report Abuse
          • Author by HuntingtonBeachLefty (January 09, 2008 4:30 pm ET)
               

            Thanks, Atheist. Only a no-class low-life would have pointed out all of the friction and wear & tear put on that area by the sticking in of heads and pulling out of facts.

            I'm glad we're better than that.

            Report Abuse
      • Author by Clevenative (January 09, 2008 4:50 pm ET)
           

        I pleasured in hearing his sob story. The more these sheltered neocons are personally exposed to the ills of the world - most notably health care in America – the more likely they will be able to see through their rose colored glasses. Maybe now he might even stop claiming the nonsense that “America has the best health care in the world”.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by frenchfries (January 10, 2008 8:06 am ET)
         
      Glenn, she won. You lost. And speeking of crying: you'll lose in November, too. I'm soo looking forward to these tears..
      Report Abuse
    • Author by swift (January 10, 2008 12:39 pm ET)
         
      I think the Obama and Edwards supporters ought to quit it with disparagement too. Here's the thing: it didn't mean much. I have no doubt that the tears just came, as they always do, unless you subscribe to the idea that she's a robot or whatever, and okay, get off it. She has ideas, or a style, that don't hook you in. Don't get involved in the "briar patch" that involves calling Hillary names if you're a democrat, okay? I think it's very clear what happened. Her campaign realized that people were identifying with Obama (because they thought they knew him), and that the negative portrait of her was winning. So they decided to have long question-and-answer sessions, not tightly-controlled speeches with rope lines afterwards. That was why she's started being more available to the press; why she showed up with bagels and coffee, and why she's finally having press availabilities -- and Obama is now acting like the frontrunner, and getting harder to approach. So Hillary teared up. So what? I bet every candidate has done that at some point in this grueling year of campaigning. But this was the day before the primary, and all the cameras were turning. Obama supporters have to beware of the tendency to treat Hillary and her supporters with contempt, like this Beck freak and Chris Matthews and so on. What happened was an adjustment of tactics. She might have made a joke, or handled a heckler. (Which was another incident, by the way. That "iron my shirt" heckler should be hired by the Hillary campaign.) Because of all the hatred going her way, all she has to do is establish the fact that she's a human female, and she wins.
      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.