REPULSIVE: Madeleine Albright "A Special Place In Hell"

[liberalnarb]

[Thinkingabout]

1. How about listening to the video you provided, she did not say there

Was a special place in hell for women who don't help Clinton. Why would this smear get started? Please correct this post and give the truth.

[shawn703]

2. Is Bernie a woman? When did this happen?

Nice try at spin, but a fail nonetheless.

[Thinkingabout]

3. You did not listen to the video, Albright did not say

There is a special place in hell for women who do not help Clinton. This is a untruth, it should be retracted. Just because Albright and Clinton are women does not open the door to this type of smear.

[earthside]

7. Now that I've actually seen and heard it -- it is repulsive.

Yes, she said it.

She said women need to support Hillary and then as part of the same paragraph/phrasing gave the special place in hell line.

Just because Albright didn't say it exactly as you are telling us she had to say it, doesn't mean that the content wasn't awful.

And then the rest of the video show Hillary going right into the Identity Politics rhetoric that is equally disgusting.

Really, I'm surprised that Hillary, Inc. has felt it necessary to go into the pandering so early in the nomination process ... things must not be going very well.

[Thinkingabout]

10. You did not hear her say helping Clinton, she said "women", listen to it again.

You can't spin it differently, yes the caption gives the spin, the video does not match.

[liberalnarb]

12. We all know what she meant. She said "Theres a special place in hell for women who dont help each

other." WHILE she was talking about young women supporting Sanders. Nice try but, sorry, your spin doctor move isn't working this time.

[liberalnarb]

31. You're grasping at straws. We all know what she meant

[Thinkingabout]

34. It is called spin, RT put the spin.

[Jim Lane]

28. She did not say those exact verbatim words. What do you think she MEANT?

We lawyers have a way of dealing with witnesses who split hairs the way you're trying to do. A standard way of asking a question is along the lines of "Did Secretary Albright say, in words or substance, that women who did not support Clinton would go to Hell?" That italicized phrase is routinely used so that an evasive witness can't hide beyond a lawyer's failure to get the exact words, when the paraphrase is accurate.

So let's turn to this case. I'll concede that Albright did not say, in haec verba (lawyer-Latin for "in these exact words&quot , "There is a special place in Hell for women who do not support Hillary Clinton in the 2016 Presidential race." Will you, in return, concede:
* that Albright was speaking at a rally the purpose of which was to urge people to support Hillary Clinton in the 2016 Presidential race?
* that Albright said, "...and you have to help, Hillary Clinton will always be there for you, and just remember, there's a special place in Hell for women who don't help each other"?
* that the most natural interpretation of her remarks (taken in toto and in context) is that there's a special place in Hell for women who do not support Hillary Clinton in the 2016 Presidential race?

If you deny that last point, what do you consider the most natural interpretation? Was she suddenly, in the middle of a Clinton-for-President rally, digressing to urge women to help other women learn origami?

[kristopher]

37. +1

[Thinkingabout]

39. Why can't women be promoted and praised? What is the problem

With saying women promotes women? Just like those who say women votes for Hillary because she is a woman.

[Jim Lane]

40. I'll answer your questions and hope you'll then answer mine.

"Why can't women be promoted and praised?" IMO women can be promoted and praised. In fact, women can be promoted and praised by other women and by men. I've done it myself on occasion. Your question about why they can't be should be posed to someone who thinks they can't be.

"What is the problem {w}ith saying women promotes women?" The first problem I see is the grammatical one that the subject and verb don't agree. As to the substance, most women choose to promote or oppose women based on characteristics other than gender. Most of the progressive women supported Elizabeth Warren and the men who ran against Michele Bachmann. Most of the conservative women supported Warren's opponent (Scott Brown) and Bachmann.

"Just like those who say women votes for Hillary because she is a woman." See grammar note above. You use "those who say" as if to cast doubt on the statement. There are women, including some right here on DU, who've said expressly that Clinton's gender is one reason they support her. (I think there are some men in that camp, too.) AFAIK, though, no one has said that he or she supports Clinton solely because Clinton is a woman. The majority of those people would vote for Sanders over Fiorina. This is precisely the problem with Albright's statement, however -- it implies that women should support another woman (in this case, Clinton) solely on the basis of gender. If Albright had been invited to speak at a rally for Bachmann or Fiorina or Nikki Haley, would Albright have attended and made the same statement, or is her theology about that special place in Hell subject to some nuances that she didn't share with her New Hampshire audience?

[Thinkingabout]

41. I answered your question, women can promote women,

Obliviously you are not a woman and was not told over years you can't do jobs simply because you are female so maybe you just don't understand. Here is another occasion where we are being told "you can't support other women".

[Jim Lane]

42. You did not answer a single one of my questions.

No one is telling you "you can't support other women". You find it easier to attack straw men (or straw persons if you insist that idioms be rewritten). You are quite free to support Clinton or Fiorina or any other woman, or any man for that matter.

There is obviously no point in my trying to discuss this with you any further. I will leave the conversation in the capable hands of the many women (some of whom have presumably faced sex discrimination) who've blasted Albright's ridiculous statement.

[MariaS]

44. Perfect

You are right on the money sir

[thereismore]

4. You are more legalistic than your candidate. FAIL. nt

[Thinkingabout]

5. You did not listen to the video either.

[thereismore]

6. Some crystal ball you have. Of course I did. But...did you? nt

[Thinkingabout]

11. Yes, that is why I know the caption is wrong.

[liberalnarb]

13. The caption is wrong?

The caption reads "REPULSIVE: Madeleine Albright "A Special Place In Hell"" And she did say "A special place in hell."

[Thinkingabout]

22. Let's get it right, look at the top of the video link it definitely has Clinton

Albright did not say help Clinton, don't worry Sarah Palin got it wrong also.

Here is a link with the words in print and without the caption on the video.

http://quadrangleonline.com/2016/02/07/albright-special-place-in-hell-for-women-who-dont-help-each/

[liberalnarb]

29. I realize what the caption on the video said

That's RT's title not mine. That's why I didn't title the OP the same.

[Thinkingabout]

32. Okay, perhaps the link is a bad source, the spin RT placed is very wrong.

But as you notice some repeats the spin incorrectly.

[dana_b]

19. oh please... it was COMPLETELY inferred and we know it.

no - you don't get that one back. This is some horrible, nasty stuff and we HEAR what is actually being said.

[Thinkingabout]

20. It sure is horrible for the spin on this one, just caption the photo

With what you want Albright to say and no one listens so it it is good for them. Rovian attacks.

[Fawke Em]

21. But that is what she said in a speech talking about how women

should always support women - at a Clinton rally.

I think we can easily infer her meaning.

[H2O Man]

8. It was an unfortunate

statement. It's definitely not the type of thing we need to hear now. Or ever.

[roguevalley]

16. Actually, it appears to be more of a type with her. Check this out:

Sanctions against Iraq

On May 12, 1996, Albright defended UN sanctions against Iraq on a 60 Minutes segment in which Lesley Stahl asked her "We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?" and Albright replied "we think the price is worth it."

Albright later criticized Stahl's segment as "amount[ing] to Iraqi propaganda"; said that her question was a loaded question; wrote "I had fallen into a trap and said something I did not mean"; and regretted coming "across as cold-blooded and cruel". (How can it be a loaded question? It was relevant and she answered it with the truth)

Sanctions critics took Albright's failure to reframe the question as confirmation of the statistic. The segment won an Emmy Award.

Art ownership controversy

Following the Washington Post's profile of Albright by Michael Dobbs, an Austrian man, Philipp Harmer, launched legal action against Albright, claiming her father, Josef Korbel, had illegally taken possession of artwork which belonged to his great-grandfather, Karl Nebrich. Nebrich, a German-speaking Prague industrialist, was forced to abandon some of his possessions when ethnic Germans were expelled from the country after World War II under the Beneš decrees. His apartment, at 11 Hradčanská Street in Prague, was subsequently given to Korbel and his family, which they occupied before also being forced to flee to America. Harmer felt Korbel stole his great-grandfather's artwork, which was left in the apartment. The matter was handled by Albright's brother, John Korbel.


She sits on a lot of corporate boards drawing the fat paychecks. Given that she does, how may companies have promoted women into top tier jobs? Hmmm. I wonder.

[Art_from_Ark]

36. I wonder if there's a special place in the afterlife for someone who thinks

that the deaths of a half million kids for some political points was "worth it".

[farleftlib]

9. Hell is going to need a super dooper extra-large mega-ton delivery of coal

when Madeleine gets down there. Q: Are half a million dead babies worth it? A: You betcha!

[asuhornets]

14. Grasping 4 straws..n/t

[smiley]

18. it happened....

It was for real. It was disgusting.

[AzDar]

15. Shameful. Hillary defending this shit was just as bad...

http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meet-press-february-7-2016-n513266

[dana_b]

17. that was worse than what Steinem said, imo

just - really?! Because we prefer Bernie we don't support women and we're going to hell??

Sure, okay. Fine. But you're doing your friend a great DISSERVICE, Madame Secretary!

[840high]

24. What really irks me is that

Hillary supporters defend this.

[AtomicKitten]

23. Albright and Steinem alienated a generation of young women in one day.

Emblematic of the kamikaze Clinton campaign.

[Betty Karlson]

38. Something tells me they weren't on board for Clinton anyway.

Not since Debbie's vituperitive pronouncements of their "millennial complacency".

[sadoldgirl]

25. What irks me is HRC's laughter about it.

[stage left]

26. Well.

I guess then it's a good thing I don't believe in hell.

[CoffeeCat]

27. Albright does have a point about hell

...after all, most of us are FEELING THE BERN!!!

[gollygee]

30. She said there's a special place in hell for women who don't help women

And as both Bernie or Hillary will help women if elected to the presidency, it isn't a slam against either of them.

[liberalnarb]

33. I agree voting for either Democrat will help women.

BUT, she said the "special place in hell" line after speaking about young women who support Sanders. That's who it was directed at... Almost blatantly.

[Betty Karlson]

35. Hey Maddie: the 20th century is over. Try not to get too stuck in the past! eom

[JRLeft]

43. She's to provide proof of a hell.