New York senator said, ‘He ran a gas station down in St. Louis’
ST. LOUIS — Sen.
Hillary Rodham Clinton apologized for joking that Mahatma Gandhi used
to run a gas station in St. Louis, saying it was “a lame attempt at
humor."
After laughter from many in the crowd of at least 200 subsided, the former first lady continued, “No, Mahatma Gandhi was a great leader of the 20th century.” In a nod to Farmer’s underdog status against Republican Sen. Kit Bond, Clinton quoted the Indian independence leader as saying: “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”
Mahatma Gandhi addresses guests to help resolve a congressional dispute in Calcutta, India, in August 1934.
After being approached by The Associated Press to clarify the remarks, Clinton suggested in a statement late Monday that she never meant to fuel the stereotype — often used as a comedic punch line — that certain ethnic groups run America’s gas stations.
“I have admired the work and life of Mahatma Gandhi and have spoken publicly about that many times,” Clinton said. “I truly regret if a lame attempt at humor suggested otherwise.”
Michelle Naef, administrator of the M.K. Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence, a Memphis, Tenn.-based organization founded in 1991 by a Gandhi grandson, credited Clinton and her husband, former President Clinton, with long having “supported the Gandhi message.” But she said Saturday’s remarks “could be incredibly harmful.”
“I don’t think she was, in any way, trying to demean Mahatma Gandhi,” Naef said. “To be generous to her, I would say it was a poor attempt at humor. Perhaps I’m overly sensitive, but I find it offensive when people use stereotypes in that way.”
© 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
 | |
| http://theartof12.blogspot.com/2013/03/sniggering-shrew.html AND | http://theartof12.blogspot.com/2013/02/a-hysterical-shrew-sniggering.html |
Wednesday, January 01, 2014
by JPG
(Yes We Can morphs into Make It Hurt.)
‘Hillary killed my son’ (Sean Smith's Mother Responds to NYT Article on Benghazi)
World ^ | Dec. 31, 2013 | J.C. Derrick Posted on Wednesday, January 01, 2014 by xzins
World ^ | Dec. 31, 2013 | J.C. Derrick Posted on Wednesday, January 01, 2014 by xzins
WASHINGTON—The mother of a victim in the 2012 Benghazi, Libya,
terrorist attack blasted former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in an
interview with WORLD, saying a recent article in The New York Times is
only trying to protect Clinton’s 2016 presidential aspirations.
“They’re just covering up for Hillary,” Pat Smith, mother of slain foreign-service officer Sean Smith, told me by phone. “Hillary killed my son. … As far as I can tell from all my sources, she was responsible—directly.”
Lawmakers, media outlets, and analysts have all criticized a front-page story in Saturday’s edition of The New York Times, in which reporter David Kirkpatrick, after “months of investigation,” concluded neither al-Qaeda nor other international terrorist groups were involved in the 9/11 anniversary attack that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens. Kirkpatrick, whose story is part of his forthcoming book, also wrote that “contrary to claims by some members of Congress, [the attack] was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.”
Smith told me that conclusion doesn’t jive with reports from her sources, many of whom have reached out to give her information since she testified before Congress in September. She said she’s “very upset” about the Times article, which doesn’t mention Clinton and offers no explanation for why security was porous or why reinforcements were told not to go help during the all-night attack.
“All the [U.S. Navy] SEALs and everybody I’ve talked to recently, they say they would never, ever, ever leave someone to be sacrificed. And that’s what happened—they were sacrificed,” she said.
The Times story contradicted the sworn testimony of Gregory Hicks, then the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Libya, who in May told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform that the YouTube video was a non-event for Libyans. Hicks—who spoke by phone with Stevens during the attack, the last known conversation the ambassador had—said he talked with Clinton at 2 a.m. local time, and the video was never discussed as even a possible reason for the attack. Hicks said he was stunned when he heard the administration blaming the film: “My jaw dropped. And I was embarrassed.”
“They’re just covering up for Hillary,” Pat Smith, mother of slain foreign-service officer Sean Smith, told me by phone. “Hillary killed my son. … As far as I can tell from all my sources, she was responsible—directly.”
Lawmakers, media outlets, and analysts have all criticized a front-page story in Saturday’s edition of The New York Times, in which reporter David Kirkpatrick, after “months of investigation,” concluded neither al-Qaeda nor other international terrorist groups were involved in the 9/11 anniversary attack that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens. Kirkpatrick, whose story is part of his forthcoming book, also wrote that “contrary to claims by some members of Congress, [the attack] was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.”
Smith told me that conclusion doesn’t jive with reports from her sources, many of whom have reached out to give her information since she testified before Congress in September. She said she’s “very upset” about the Times article, which doesn’t mention Clinton and offers no explanation for why security was porous or why reinforcements were told not to go help during the all-night attack.
“All the [U.S. Navy] SEALs and everybody I’ve talked to recently, they say they would never, ever, ever leave someone to be sacrificed. And that’s what happened—they were sacrificed,” she said.
The Times story contradicted the sworn testimony of Gregory Hicks, then the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Libya, who in May told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform that the YouTube video was a non-event for Libyans. Hicks—who spoke by phone with Stevens during the attack, the last known conversation the ambassador had—said he talked with Clinton at 2 a.m. local time, and the video was never discussed as even a possible reason for the attack. Hicks said he was stunned when he heard the administration blaming the film: “My jaw dropped. And I was embarrassed.”
Clinton wants to be pardoned, Bill. Hillary wants to be President. Neither have any chance whatsoever (that is, should Americans get to be fully informed and the HILLBILLIES vetted as ONE again). In the event we've got to have more of the 'same', we're doomed for absolute certainty. Rockefellers aren't the best choice to lead in the 21C not has the UN or Clinton dressing up as political Global Initiative IE GotRocks Fed-IMF-Biz-BIS - super-apartheid-genocide-homicidal-maniacal-mass-murdering-pirate-cannibal-criminally insane.
ReplyDelete