Up on a giant screen came Hillary Clinton, talking about how we'd all fought such a good fight together.

February 1, 2008 11:10 PM

But when I launched into a carefully-prepared spiel, the Senator stopped me: "You don't need to do the presentation," she said. "The plant is a terrible idea. Just tell me how I can help." .... She called in her chief environmental policy advisor, and gave detailed instructions: Get a memo on her desk right away... and she'd get right to work on it. Her performance was smart and convincing, and her celebrity backer and I practically floated down the Capitol steps on the way out.... The rest was silence.... But there was one more damning chapter in our Clinton saga.... She didn't deliver on her promises, and then she took credit for a victory achieved without her help.

A single-link blog post about one activist's experience with Hillary Rodham Clinton. posted by orthogonality (8 comments total)

My shock at this development cannot be expressed in words.
posted by spiderwire at 11:13 PM on February 1, 2008

It's a sobering preview of what to expect from a second Clinton Administration, whether your concern is DOMA, Iraq, health care, or just a coal plant on the Hudson River. Before you complain about it being a DailyKos link, just read it. Because it's one of those "wow, just wow" stories.
posted by orthogonality at 11:14 PM on February 1, 2008

Try harder.
posted by hermitosis at 11:14 PM on February 1, 2008

My shock at this development cannot be expressed in words.

Try harder.

I think the problem may be that I am not even remotely shocked.
posted by spiderwire at 11:17 PM on February 1, 2008

... it is a good story, though, ortho, thanks.

Contrasts pretty sharply with the '95 Chicago Reader story about Obama's history.
posted by spiderwire at 11:22 PM on February 1, 2008

gosh dang it, that is not a good story or a good post. there is not even close to enough detail or verification to prove a gosh darn thing.

i personally have a very bad impression of hilary clinton but my opinion is that this is not the place for this sort of thing. how do we know whether any of it is true rather than just sour grapes? i challenge you to point to a single piece of it that links up to anything outside of itself, or provides any reason besides self-generated outrage to give it credence.

a one-link to a piece of investigative journalism is one thing, but this ain't no sy hersh.
posted by facetious at 11:33 PM on February 1, 2008

So here we have a liberal site slagging Hillary (and not, it would seem, without good reason), and over on MetaChat there's currently a thread going about how much the arch-conservatives hate McCain.

I feel like I got off the train in Bizarro America.
posted by Kadin2048 at 11:36 PM on February 1, 2008

facetious writes "gosh dang it, that is not a good story or a good post. there is not even close to enough detail or verification to prove a gosh darn thing."

Yes, it's one person's anecdote. An eyewitness account, like what Sy Hersh bases his articles on. Without the filtering and verification of a Sy Hersh.

You'll have to use your own judgment to evaluate it. But there are no standards of evidence on the web, except what each reader brings to it. If you think it doesn;t ring true, please point out where. If you a simply objecting that it's one person's personal aqccount, objection noted.

But ultimately, anything that's not a peer-reviewed study comes do to the readers' evaluation of the veracity of eyewitness accounts. And even a peer-reviewed study comes down to ether one's own informed evaluation, or one's trust in the the expertise of the reviewers.
posted by orthogonality at 11:41 PM on February 1, 2008