Why did she lie about Nancy Reagan's involvement with the AIDS crisis? Why THAT lie?

[Merryland]

Why a lie that would upset so many, so personally, so strongly. Why? It occurred to me: maybe she did it deliberately, just to upset people. Because she could. Because she's so angry & hostile & feeling her world falling apart? This Bernie situation must be just killing her.

[SylviaD]

1. Oh stop it. nt

[TM99]

5. No, we will not 'stop it'.

She lied about the Reagans and AIDS. Then she offered a non-apology by saying she 'misspoke'. This is why so many do not trust her!

[roguevalley]

9. this is agregious. Is this what we're supposed to expect from her 'leadership'?

this was horrendous and a lot of people will feel it. Reagans, both of them let 40K people die before they uttered a word. HRC is a disaster.

[SylviaD]

63. HRC will be an outstanding president. Your spelling is a disaster. nt

[roguevalley]

67. no she won't and I'm on a phone. sue me.

[LiberalElite]

68. One word is misspelled and that's a "disaster" to you

YOU can "stop it."

[SylviaD]

69. Sorry, but calling HRC a disaster crosses the line imo. nt

[Jitter65]

65. Maybe because things are more complicated than pure?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/06/01/ronald_reagan_and_aids_correcting_the_record_122806.html

[TM99]

66. No it is not complicated.

It if fucking sickening the amount of rationalizing and spinning Clinton supporter are doing in order to support their lying candidate.

This man's 'facts' are in stark contrast to the reality of countless others who were there and documented this dark time in our recent history.

But thanks for letting me know I need to add yet another sycophant to my Ignore list.

[Fawke Em]

41. Isn't it supposed to be, "Cut that out!"? eom

[PonyUp]

55. You beat me! nt

[PonyUp]

54. Didn't you mean 'Cut it out' ? nt

[NurseJackie]

2. GMAFB!

This is silly. (But, I'm sure it will generate at least a week's worth of lukewarm outrage.)

Enjoy!

[Cavallo]

17. Do you dispute what the Regans are being accused of - turning their back on Aids victims?

And, do you dispute Nancy Regan denying Rock Hudson changing hospitals as he lay dying to one he felt would give him better care?

[MADem]

21. The Reagans DID start a "national conversation" on the topic.

Nancy was helpful on AIDS ... by Reagan administration standards
What does seem to be true is that when the Reagan administration eventually did decide to respond to the AIDS crisis, Nancy Reagan was among the influential administration figures pushing for that decision.

"I think that she deserves credit for opening up the AIDS money," historian Allida Black told PBS in 2011, saying that along with Koop the first lady pressed the president and the secretary of health and human services to allocate research funding to HIV/AIDS issues.

"But," Black continued, "I could never say that without saying they never would have waited this long" if not for the perception that the disease was a problem for gay men.

In the same PBS segment, Nancy's son, Ron Reagan, likewise portrays his mother as an important progressive force on AIDS issues inside the Reagan administration.

http://www.vox.com/2016/3/11/11208192/hillary-clinton-nancy-reagan-aids

[SylviaD]

70. Exactly. HRC said nothing wrong. Perhaps she overstated things.

Yet the Bernie supporters want to bring out the crucifixes? Who are the real hypocrites here?

[libtodeath]

40. As a presumed nurse you laughing about this is so sad.

[ellennelle]

44. holy cow

you do realize you just made merry land's point, don't you? your crass, demeaning, belittling, insensitive, and dismissive response to a highly tender and deeply real history mirror's hillary's.

i've often admired your comments here, nurse jackie, but your blind support of hillary, replete with the notion that the hurt caused by hillary's comments is silly? your ROFLMAO emoticon is what is silly.

worse, it's shameful. and it's beneath you.

oddly enough, that is intended as a compliment to your character; please check your behavior, as this is truly beneath you.

[SylviaD]

71. Bingo. nt

[Agschmid]

3. ... Unrec.

[BillZBubb]

4. Because the nancy reagan lovers wanted to hear something good about her.

So, never one to disappoint an audience, Hillary made up a winning story.

When you're a chameleon like Hillary, the lies and distortions become second nature.

[kath]

8. The lies just roll right off her tongue.

how anyone can support such a person is just utterly beyond me (unless they are EXTREMELY low-information and aren't aware of all the lies and flip-flops.)

[ibegurpard]

45. That's it exactly

No better than if she had just lied. It displays gross and cavalier ignorance on her part.

[Metric System]

6. This is ridiculous.

[thereismore]

7. This will have deep reverberations inside the gay community, I guarantee you. nt

[MADem]

15. You do guarantee that? nt

[yardwork]

23. No it won't.

[enigmatic]

33. What happened to you?

I remember in 2009 you were one of the leading voices here on DU regarding the McClurkin and Rick Warren fiascos by Obama, and you were also one of the few that stood up to Skinner and those who slamming LGBT's for being disloyal top the President. Then the Gay Purge Happened here.

What happened to you?

[yardwork]

34. I was banned in the Gay Purge and not reinstated for years.

Thanks for remembering. People weren't even allowed to say my name on DU, so as you say, I have some street cred when it comes to speaking my mind and standing up to site owners.

I'm still speaking my mind. I don't know what bothers you so much about what I just said. Hillary fucked up in this instance but it's not going to cause the gay folks who support her to abandon her. I don't expect perfection in any politician. I'd be a very disappointed person if I did.

[litlbilly]

43. yes, but she lies so often if it suits her, you cant be comfortable with that can you?

[ellennelle]

50. regardless of the political fallout

(about which i guarantee you are wrong), what i find so startling is the cavalier and dismissive tone both you and nurse jackie have taken here. it reads like, oh well, shrug, not that big a deal, we've got the gay vote locked up, move along, nothing to see here.

really? seriously?

you seem to miss how much this attitude reflects hillary's. it is not flattering.

you may not demand perfection, but at least demand sensitivity. it is not hillary's strong suit, sadly (i'm thinking 'super predators...brought to heel' and the SC protester and BLM discussion and her 'we came we saw he died' video', just for starters), but the pattern has long since passed the 'imperfection' mark and veered steeply into a character flaw.

continue to defend/ignore that all you want, but this is the same pattern we all watched unfold 8 years ago. i'd so hoped she'd learned something, but it appears to be more about that character thing.

[yardwork]

51. Are you gay? If not, how dare you tell me how to respond to this?

Back. Off.

[ellennelle]

57. wow, you keep making our points here

perhaps you might considering backing off.

my point was not your attitude about gays, or even being gay, it was your cavalier attitude about a highly sensitive issue. it could have been any highly sensitive issue. rape, for instance. or abortion.

dismissing hillary's insensitive remarks on the grounds that they won't hurt her with the LGBT community frames that entire issue in terms of its political import instead of the humanity it deserves.

if you fail to see that distinction, then your responses here are entirely consistent, and begin to make sad sense.

and whether or not i'm gay is frankly none of your business, or anyone else's but by my choice and discretion. but i'm not sure you own the right to dictate my opinions and perspectives if they offend you, regardless of your gender or orientation. i'm speaking here about human sensitivities, and you're prioritizing political points.

that simply does not earn you the high road.

[Cavallo]

46. I'm sorry, what is this gay purge?

Is this site against gays? I am not gay but I cannot be on a site that is against them.

Please explain.

[4139]

10. have to wonder what her views were back in the 1980s

[Cavallo]

47. She supported the Defense of Marriage act in the 90's, so I doubt she was pro gay in the 80's.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/10/28/hillary-clintons-claim-that-doma-had-to-be-enacted-to-stop-an-anti-gay-marriage-amendment-to-the-u-s-constitution/

[ellennelle]

52. mm, don't think so

she voted neither for nor against anything in the 90s; she was first lady.

but, in your defense, she defended marriage as 'between a man and a woman' thru the 90s, supported DOMA, and as recently as 2 years ago was saying states should make that decision.

of course, bernie was supporting gay rights as early as 1983, voted against DOMA and before that, 'don't ask don't tell'.

the difference for me is the vision and moral courage he exhibited here, and in so many other arenas. such as chaining himself to a black woman to protest housing segregation in chicago while hillary was a goldwater girl.

it's his solid character i cannot ignore.

[Cavallo]

53. Excuse me, you are correct. She supported it. She didn't vote for it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/10/28/hillary-clintons-claim-that-doma-had-to-be-enacted-to-stop-an-anti-gay-marriage-amendment-to-the-u-s-constitution/

[Cavallo]

56. I didn't know that about Bernie!

Thank you for telling me that. And correcting me.

[ellennelle]

58. oh hey no problem!

i appreciate your making the the point, just wanted to clarify. i assumed your intent, and hope you did not interpret my 'correction' as offense.

and yeah; bernie has been on these moral issues very early on, numbers of them. he not only thinks very deeply about these issues (traveling to nicauragua when he was mayor, for example), he invests in what he makes of them.

he's just such a good man. who knew he'd strike such a cord!



ps. no pressure, but if you're around, i highly suspect the H ladies will be sliming me soon. could you review my comments here and give me feedback? i don't mean to be harsh to them, but i don't understand their thin skin or their tactics.

[ScreamingMeemie]

11. Confusion. As I recall, major names connected to AIDS in the 80s

I was in my teens at the time:

The Reagans (for their blatant, well-recorded distaste and disregard
Princess Diana (for being the first major public figure to wrap her arms around an AIDS patient without being swaddled in a mask, gloves and gown)
Elizabeth Taylor (may she FOREVER be remembered for this) for being the first to speak out
Ryan White (for making it okay --after he was tormented viciously by his school district, neighborhood and half of America-- because you could "get it" other ways). My heart still hurts when I think of Ryan White.


I think she wasn't thinking. Reagans===80s====AIDS!!111!!!----> of course, they must have cared.

The fact that she told us that perhaps we don't remember it is really just something.

[MADem]

14. I think you're right.

One more name: Elizabeth Glaser.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Glaser

[yardwork]

36. Hillary has apologized today, saying that her comments were wrong.

She was wrong. In an effort to say nice things at Nancy Reagan's funeral, Hillary grossly misstated the Reagans' record on HIV/AIDS. I'm glad that she apologized.

[ellennelle]

61. peace

hey, there is no reason for us to quarrel over this stuff. i appreciate your noting her apology here, and that you're glad she did.

i do hope you understand the import of my points. i don't intend to shame you or anyone, but it's hard to be silent when hurtful things occur and are not acknowledged, for whatever reason.

hey, i yelled and cursed at the young woman who sideswiped me on a rotary this morning, and it freaked me out so bad, i ended up practically crying and then hugging her! i think we're gonna be friends; how weird is that? she made a mess of my door, yet i'm plotting to take her for coffee, what else?

i've been completely freaked out by the tone on these forums (i have only recently been commenting and will likely stop soon; demands etc.), from both sides. and it's easy to get swept up in it. everyone gets defensive and then offensive and takes offense, and so it goes. and we just forget ...we're all in this together.

we're all so invested, which is basically a good thing, but we truly have to keep our eyes on the prize, as the man said. treasuring that prize means kindness, so please know that was my intent, but however i may have failed in execution, i truly apologize.

i hope we can move forward more constructively. and more lovingly.

metta.

[MADem]

12. The Reagans DID put the spotlight on AIDS--both funding and research.

Anyone who was alive during that time remembers the "AIDS issue" in the context of Ronald W. Reagan.

Stage plays and movies (Angels in America, Dallas Buyers Club, And The Band Played On, Philadelphia, etc.) have been created that artfully memorialize that era, and the Reagan backdrop that made possible all the drama and agony.

You can't think about the early days of the HIV epidemic, back when everyone in the English speaking world used "AIDS" as the shorthand for everything from infection to "full-blown;" and not think of the Reagan administration.

He DID advance the conversation, and the fundraising, and the research, but not by being supportive, but by being a total asshole.

I certainly wouldn't call it a "lie." It's a matter of perspective and sense-memory. The Reagans DID advance that conversation, make no mistake. And I do believe that Nancy caused RR to soften his objections, if only grudgingly.

Anyone who makes hay out of this comment for the purposes of trying to gain political advantage is exposing themselves in an unflattering way, to put it kindly.

[karynnj]

19. That is desperation - they demonized the disease

Imagine that as soon as scientists had a glimmer what was happening, if they would have LED the effort to both treat those afflicted with respect and kindness and committed the resources needed a decade earlier. Even though the problem was is Africa, look at how quickly the Obama administration led on the effort to contain and then - as much as possible - eliminate the ebola threat.

In fact, had Clinton been the President (or even still the SoS) then, you would be writing things as if she single handedly led the effort - an angel of mercy.

Obama acted with the seriousness of purpose that Reagan lacked.

I know that everyone edits out the bad and emphasizes the good, but this was ridiculous as ALL those plays etc have the correct story - the Reagans did not lead on this.

It is easy to find things you can praise - looking at others, they praised her devotion to Ronnie as he slipped into dementia, her willingness to ignore Republican orthodoxy to support stem cell research - even praising her (I would say ) lame effort to get kids to say no to drugs. In any time, there were some things that were bipartisan -- I would bet that there had to be things that HRC did as First Lady of AR when Reagan was President. Not to mention, being in the small club of people who lived and raised kids in the WH.

[MADem]

29. Who is saying that the Reagans did any "leading?"

I don't think they were "leaders."

Why not look at what was actually said, shall we? "Starting a national conversation" can happen in a lot of ways.

Trayvon Martin didn't set out to start a "national conversation" about gun violence against black children--he set out for some candy and iced tea. He ended up being a poster child for the issue, though.


Some people do it by truculent inaction--as is the case with Ronald Reagan, who clearly had a problem with gay men, and often commented that he thought their chickens were coming home to roost as a consequence of their conduct. He was an idiot, but he DID create an environment where he became a foil for some serious activism and pushback that might not have happened had he been less poutraged and moralistic.

And, as his and Nancy's son says, his wife DID influence change within the administration--and that was probably because she felt guilty about abandoning her good buddy Rock Hudson.

In any event, I think I'll take young Ron Reagan's word when it comes to what his mother did and didn't do on this issue, and not the proclamations of people who take issue with HRC for political reasons. I think you need to actually READ what I write, too--the context of those plays/films IS "the agony." Without that agony those opuses would not have been created.

Had there been benign neglect, or even underfunding, there would have been no activism, no pushback--at least not at the level that Liz Taylor, et.al., managed to create.

[Merryland]

13. AIDS is trending high in D.C. / NYC Twitter

Many people blasting Hillary.

[winter is coming]

16. Maybe she's thinking it will help her with so-called Reagan Democrats?

I don't know. Seems chock full o' stupid to me.

[alcibiades_mystery]

18. What a nasty little post

You can do politics without being cruel, you know?

[MADem]

30. Not everyone can, and that's a shame, I guess. nt

[Cavallo]

20. Speaking of killing, I'm worried about Bernie's life while he is running against the plutocracy.

I worried about Barack's too when he was running but I didn't understand at the time, that he was in with the plutocracy. (that was evident as soon as he took office and skipped his campaign promises and wouldn't try Bush for war crimes.) I don't think Bernie is in with the putocrats.

[ellennelle]

62. ah, yes; all that

he had to play by the plutocracy rules because he had just had the demise of the world economy dumped in his lap, and that is not his area of expertise. plus, better to have your enemies inside the tent pissing out than on the outside pissing in, as LBJ so graciously pointed out.

still, yeah, obama proved to have 'debts' to pay, as it were. sad.

as for trying W et al, i cannot imagine how that would have fit in with the rest of what had to happen. i've come to at least entertain a wisdom in leaving that for a future more suitable, tho i hypocritically still rage about ford letting nixon off the hook, and reagan's similarly treasonous acts, etc.

hey, at this point, i can be at least temporarily satisfied that none of those cretins can leave the country without threat of arrest, and that W has been reduced to art therapy to deal with his many demons.

sick folks, those. i'll give obama major kudos for grace under pressure, even if he has not made all the decisions i thought he should've made. but then, i cannot even begin to grasp the calculus he has had to face. not least of which has been the treats against his own life, and likely his lovely ladies.

like you, i also fear for bernie in that regard. the only thing holding those thugs back will be a memory of how it makes a martyr of your victim. but i worry they just won't care.

[senz]

22. I don't think she understands "lie."

There's a disconnect.

[ibegurpard]

24. shit...what did she say now?

[winter is coming]

25. Maybe she thinks that anyone stupid enough to believe her deserves to be lied to. n/t

[Fumesucker]

26. She loathes the left by now and will stop at nothing to punish them for insufficient fealty

This is outrageous! The second time that Hillary has had her rightful throne purloined from under her very nose by an unworthy interloper from the left.

HRH is not amused by this despicable treachery on the part of the lumpenproletariat.

[haikugal]

59. I think you're probably right!

I welcome her hatred!

[HooptieWagon]

27. I don't think she can help lying.

She lies even when there's no reason to, like coming under fire in Bosnia. Some people are just pathological liars.

[Kelvin Mace]

28. Nah, just pandering to the Cult of Reagan

who she thinks will vote for her.

[NCTraveler]

31. The kitchen sink approach since SC hasn't been working.

Unrec.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

32. Yes, it's protocol to say nice things about someone who died,

but for the life of me I can't understand why Hillary would have said that thing, which is demonstrably, flagrantly false? Nancy R. did support stem cell research, but during her dullard husband's administration nothing at all was done about AIDS despite scientists' desperate requests for government funds for research. And Nancy herself turned down a request from her old friend Rock Hudson, who was dying of it, for help to me moved to a French hospital where he could get additional treatment. http://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/nancy-reagan-turned-down-rock-hudsons-plea-for-help-seven-we#.gvREApew6

Anybody who was paying the slightest attention to the AIDS situation during the '80s would have known how the Reagans were reacting. Hillary's statement is just baffling.

[BernieforPres2016]

35. I was just watching Chuck Todd and a panel on MSNBC

They played the clip of Hillary's comments, then showed one rebuttal that went out shortly after, then Hillary's statement withdrawing the comment and saying that she "misspoke".

Chuck Todd stammered a bit as he said "Molly, aaaiiihhhh, they call it mispeak, I mean they're trying to play cleanup quickly, aaaiiiihhhh, you know, that's not my definition of a mispeak."

The panelist, Molly Ball of The Atlantic: "Right, she went on at quite some length about something that was clearly just incorrect. And I think, you know, the LGBT community has been some of the Clinton's staunchest supporters, Hillary in particular."

Chuck Todd, interrupting: "Why she had to do this so fast."

Molly Ball: "And you can apologize for something like this, but it suggests she really misunderstands a really key part of gay history at the time when HIV and AIDS were becoming an issue in the 1980's, that is just not what happened, and it suggests, it's going to suggest to that community that she's just not in touch with them."

[HeartoftheMidwest]

39. DING DING DING.

"Molly Ball: 'And you can apologize for something like this, but it suggests she really misunderstands a really key part of gay history at the time when HIV and AIDS were becoming an issue in the 1980's, that is just not what happened, and it suggests, it's going to suggest to that community that she's just not in touch with them.' "

[TalkingDog]

37. Courting the Moderate Republicans and Reagan Democrats

and hoping that people have poor memories.

[jalan48]

38. Maybe an uninformed underling wrote it for her and she simply repeated it.

[zentrum]

42. THAT lie is because...

…she's courting the LGBT vote.

She knows that being late to marriage equality makes her unpopular with that community. She's hoping that by changing this history her sad history on universal civil rights won't be as glaring.

She is desperate. Can you imagine how this kind of panic would effect her judgement and behavior if she ever becomes the Presidency?

She should have just stayed a Republican years ago and be done with this pretense.

[Ken Burch]

48. Maybe she thought it would get GOP votes for her program in Congress.

If so, a delusional belief on her part.

[Ferd Berfel]

49. So deep in teh bubble she can't tell any longer?

maybe pandering to Reagan "dems" ?

Maybe it's a requitement now to be PResident.

Remember which president Obama said inspired him? I guess he proved that with TPP

[WillyT]

60. Another 'Unforced Error'... That's What They Call It In Tennis...

Does she even WANT the job ???

[Vote2016]

64. That lie was chosen to try to buy peace with Republicans who might not vote for Trump. She will say

anything for a vote.