No it is not being misspoken.

[libtodeath]

Misspoken is when you call someone by the wrong name or you think it was a different year then it was when something happened.

To give any positive credit to the monstrosity of the rayguns AIDS response is either such obtuse ignorance as to be shocking or a play towards right leaning independents imo.

It was not a misspeak as far as I am concerned and the so called apology doubles the offensiveness of it.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

1. It was pandering. Sad but true. Now, what scares me even more is

what President Ted Cruz thinks of gay people and HIV.

[imagine2015]

2. Exactly!

[tk2kewl]

3. Maybe she meant to say Scalia not Reagan?

[Indepatriot]

4. She can no longer tell truth from fiction. She's done too much lying to know the difference...

[libtodeath]

7. I think this describes it at this point.

[MissDeeds]

9. Lying and "evolving"

A person could get whiplash trying to keep up.

[Ferd Berfel]

5. SO deep in the bubble

SHe can't tell any more

[H2O Man]

6. Recommended.

In my opinion, the correct word to describe it is "Lie." It is not simply a lie -- it is an insult.

[tularetom]

10. Coincidentally, I don't believe I ever heard the euphemism "to misspeak"

until the Clintons arrived on the scene and the journalistic fraternity needed a polite way to call the first couple liars without actually using the word.

Even today, the term makes me cringe.

[bigwillq]

8. I agree, she did not misspeak

Either her or her campaign EFFed up BIG TIME.

Or maybe Hillary believes what she said. Well, she apologized so I guess she doesn't even believe the words that come out of her mouth.

I wish Hillary would just go away.

[democrattotheend]

11. What would she have hoped to gain from the statement?

Besides being historically inaccurate and making her look stupid, she had to know that such a statement would alienate GLBT voters, who are an important in the Democratic primaries. And I don't really see the upside, as any homophobic voters she could have hoped to appeal to would likely be more put off that she was talking about AIDS than happy that she was rewriting history. The fact that there was no political upside to the comment and that she retracted it so quickly makes me think it was a gaffe.