Bo Copley, a West Virginia coal miner who recently lost his job, asked Hillary Clinton how she could say what she had said at a CNN forum in March, an apparent climate change manifesto that included the phrase, “We’re going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business”, and then still “come in here and tell us how you’re going to be our friend.”
“What I said was totally out of context from what I meant because I have been talking about helping coal country for a very long time. And it was a misstatement, because what I was saying is that the way things are going now, we will continue to lose jobs. I didn’t mean that we were going to do it, what I said was, that is going to happen unless we take action to try to and help and prevent it. That’s what I meant to say. “
Oh. Well, that explains…wait, WHAT????
NBC headlined this “Hillary Clinton Apologizes to Coal Country Over ‘Out of Business’ Comments.” I guess that means it must be an apology, because NBC would never be biased toward a Democrat or anything. But it’s funny, I don’t see any of the usual features that distinguish an apology, do you?
Of course, NBC might be putting up a dishonest and misleading headline knowing that many readers read no further, and thus the headline is calculated to spawn a little pro-Hillary army responding, when their non-quite-Hillary-corrupted friends or their Bernie-addled colleagues muse out-loud, “Gee, why would Hillary Clinton be so cruel and impolitic as to vow destruction on hard-working coal miners with mouths to feed and families to support?” with “Oh, she apologized for that! NBC reported it.”
Nah! These are trustworthy journalists. You know…like ESPN.
To abandon the snark for harsh truth, Hillary wasn’t apologizing. She was doing what she always does when confronted:
1. She lied,
2. She blamed everyone else for “misunderstanding her”, and
3. She muddied the water as much as she could.
Here is her whole statement from March:
“I’m the only candidate which has a policy about how to bring economic opportunity using clean renewable energy as the key into coal country. Because we’re going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business, right Tim?
And we’re going to make it clear that we don’t want to forget those people. Those people labored in those mines for generations, losing their health, often losing their lives to turn on our lights and power our factories.
Now we’ve got to move away from coal and all the other fossil fuels, but I don’t want to move away from the people who did the best they could to produce the energy that we relied on.”
It’s not ambiguous and it isn’t a “misstatement.” She said that it wasn’t as if she wasn’t grateful for all of those hard-working, sacrificing coal miners in their day, and they should be “remembered,” but she was going to see that their livelihood is wiped of the map.
Heck, she might as well have been talking about killing them.
Initially, what Hillary was really doing with Bo seems to be engaging in one of her specialties, Authentic Frontier Gibberish (AFG). Let’s see, what she meant to say was that coal miners would continue to lose jobs, which of course is a bad thing, and she wants to prevent “it”—the coal miners losing jobs, now, not the use of fossil fuels that she said have to be replaced and will be under her policies, by…how, exactly?
Here’s a handy Hillary Clinton translation tip: when her spontaneous explanation for what she “really meant” when she’s denying what she said what she said is more convoluted than the original statement, she meant what she said the first time.
Yes, this was AFJ.
But was it even more of a Pazuzu Excuse? This is the Ethics Alarms diagnosis when Mel Gibson or Michael Richards or Helen Thomas says something objectively horrible, and after being roundly condemned they announce that it wasn’t them talking, because what they said wasn’t them, you see, and expressed, for some reason, the opposite of how they really feel.
This is, of course, bull. The only one who had a genuine Pazuzu excuse was Linda Blair in the “The Exorcist,” because when she told Father Damien that, for example, “Your mother sucks cocks in Hell!” it literally wasn’t her, but this guy..
….the demon Pazuzu, interlocuting from somewhere between the possessed girl’s throat and large intestine.
What Hillary said was not “out of context of what she meant,” which is AFJ for “I would never say such a thing,” but exactly when she meant, just like Mel and Helen meant their various anti-Semitic slurs, and Richards (a.k.a “Kramer”) meant to start screaming “Nigger!” at blacks in his audience when he started screaming “Nigger!” at blacks in his audience.
The headline, therefore, is a trick question. They are all correct answers. Hillary was lying, and blaming Pazuzu, and employing Authentic Frontier Jibberish.
Just because all sorts of pathetically and tragically corrupt Hillary Clinton supporters are mocking Republicans because they may be saddled with a spectacularly disgusting and unqualified Presidential candidate doesn’t mean I’m going to stop reminding them how nauseating, cynical and unethical their own party’s candidate is, because she demonstrates this almost daily. Anyone who professes to admire or trust Hillary Clinton is a disgrace, and has nothing to be smug or superior about. They should be ashamed of themselves, every one.
I’m going to keep doing this even though I may have to vote for the woman myself if the GOP doesn’t have the integrity and guts to reject Trump.
Honestly, I might prefer Pazuzu.
To either of them.