It would have been better if her campaign just said; "We are sorry. This was a mistake." But it seems admitting error is not a characteristic the Clintons are capable of manifesting. That's why one wouldn;t be too far off if one refers to her as an outright liar. It has nothing to with attempting to diminish her. It just is what it is. These are bold-faced lies being told deliberately.

she admitted it on SNL.  So give her a fucking break.  She was willing to yuck up the jokes the days before Ohio for any cheap vote she could get.

Email her and tell her to stop making fun of her own laughter, tell her to give you a break!

It's silence-filler while the brain desparately searches about for a way to wriggle out of the questioner's crosshairs.

Hey!  I want to listen to that for the next four years ... how about you?

I love how they have to diminish her.  Laughter.
I'm an Obama Mama, but give me a fucking break.

It's a defensive cackle that she uses when a verbal response doesn't spring to mind immediately.  And if you notice, in this instance, she really doesn't give a response at all.

And, frankly, I believe it's a pretty important issue.

So I'd be happy to give you a break.  But I wouldn't give her one at all.

Clinton has worn out her welcome in the nomination contest, but this sort of smear is unacceptable.  

Can't believe you got a hide rating for this comment. She has actually become uncomfortable to listen to - everything seems phony, false and full of bullshit.

There was nothing wrong with the question.

Husband gets 800K from Colombia, you lend your campaign 5 million - so has Colombia financed your campaign?

Instead of an answer we get this odd, weird  performance which is oh-so condescending while at the same time showing her becoming unhinged. She needs a rest from all this - and she should never, ever be elected President.

and point it at the reporter who looks suspiciously like the late John Candy.

The moose out front shoulda told ya.

because she didn't really cry. Despite the media's attempts to characterize it as such.

I've seen the longer version. She doesn't stop laughing...very strange to watch. This edit is kind to Clinton.

And it's not day 1 yet.
She'll be much, much better on day 1, and her daily schedule will include time to answer difficult questions in the wee hours.

she is already vetted so she again underestimates the MSM.

Conflict of interest over using her own money? That has to be the most incredibly stupid question I've heard outside of a Bush softball press conference.

And not about a vital piece of personal experience, like that sniper story you're still busy whitewashing.

Further, he quickly retracted.  There's no comparison in behavior at all.

instead of laughing them off and not answering questions about them.

See, he does something here she never does...he admits he made an mistake and apoligized.  You might not be used to it because Hillary never does it.  A lot of politicians don't.  Obama does.

posting here.  Clinton's been knowingly lying for years about this.  (The Colombian government gave this money to them 3 YEARS ago.)  Obama got the year wrong that the Kennedy's got involved in bringing Africans to America for education opportunities.

Go post your smear trash somewhere else.

But I don't think these are the same.

This doesn't undermine any pivotal arguments for Obama's candidacy. And it appears he admitted the error. It was a silly mistatement, and his campaign said as much.

Clinton's Bosnia thing goes against her "experience" argument." But it wans't a mistake that she made numerous times, it was a "mistatement" made dude to "sleep deprivation."

She handled the Columbia thing even worse. "That legitimate question you just asked is as silly as some philisophical nonsense. (insert laughter here)"

Obama recited a bit of family history as it had been related to him.  It turns out to have been a family myth. It was wrong and he apologized when the inconsistency with the facts was pointed out.

Clinton described an event she participated in -- and which never happened!  When caught in the lie, she tried to make up another version, and then the video of the arrival was found.  Then, did she admit that she had made this up -- no, she "misstated" the truth.

The problem I have with her story is that it is the exact same crap we have been putting up with for the past 7 years.  It is time to move on from that.

Obama's mistake was of the same type of family myth as Hillary saying she'd been named after Sir Edmund Hillary.

The Bosnia story is in a whole different league. Hillary can't claim to have been misinformed by anyone as she was actually part of the event that she "mispoke" about.

NOBODY CARES!

Where she was so crabby and complained about not getting enough sleep, etc etc etc.?

I remember thinking even then, that if she can't handle the stress of the campaign trail, she'll never be able to handle the stress of being president.

But she can't claim that she has no responsibility for Bill's actions, and then keep demanding that Obama take responsibility for the worst words ever uttered by his pastor.

The point is that this issue completely takes away the Wright issue from the Clintons, if it's played correctly.

 But you do pick your pastor and your spouse!

   I think Bill is trying to throw this thing. Whether it's consciously or unconsciously is hard to say!

Your wife is not running for president (is she?).  If she was, and was running as a progressive, it would be in her interest to request that you refrain from taking money from nefarious governments.
This is especially so when your wife would be taking positions contrary to the interests of those nefarious governments.
While you are correct in asserting that you could espouse whatever opinions you want, as embarrassing as those may be to your potential president spouse, once you take money that is the joint property of marriage, you cross the line into causing an actual, rather than potential, conflict of interest that your wife should have the good JUDGEMENT to call you on.
At that point, you can tell your wife to piss off, but after that point, she has to be able to answer why your greed, which has directly benefited her (and quite possibly her campaign), is not a conflict of interest.  A giggle or a cackle will not suffice.
She can't fire him (of course she can, and probably will, after she concedes), but if she had intentions of running for president (I think she may have) early on, she should have tried to control him (okay, that's admittedly impossible) or, in the alternative, come up with a good reason (lie) why its not a conflict.
From day one!