Hillary claims she was named after mountain climber who hadnt scaled Everest yet

[Flopper]

Hillary never made that claimed. This was concocted by the media. What Hillary actually said was her mother, Dorothy Rodham, "had read an article about the intrepid Edmund Hillary, a one-time beekeeper who had taken to mountain climbing, when she was pregnant in 1947 and liked the name.". She was simply repeating what her mother told her, a sweet family story her mother shared to inspire her.

This thread should win a prize as the silliest attack on Clinton yet.

She certainly did make the claim what are you reading?

She never made the claim in writing because that is how she does it, lies by mouth but tells the truth in her bio.

Snopes rates her claim as FALSE;

From Snopes: For more than a decade, one piece of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's informal biography has been that she was named for Sir Edmund Hillary, the conqueror of Mount Everest. The story was even recounted in Bill Clinton's autobiography.

But yesterday, Mrs. Clinton's campaign said she was not named for Sir Edmund after all.

"It was a sweet family story her mother shared to inspire greatness in her daughter, to great results I might add," said Jennifer Hanley, a spokeswoman for the campaign. 3

Hillary vs. Hillary

She only said that is what she was told by her mother. Whether her mother actually named her after the mountain climber or not is irrelevant.

So her mother is a liar, seems logical.

Notice there is never any quote from the people who supposedly said it.

Could be it was a cute little lie her mother told her, but by 1995 she should have known it wasn't true, and that is why it appears in none of her books.

From Snopes:

news stories about the First Lady written prior to her 1995 south Asian tour, and every appearance of it in news articles after that referred to referenced that one occasion. If Hillary Clinton thought an anecdote about the origins of her name was entertaining enough to repeat to the press when she met Sir Edmund Hillary in 1995, how come she had never mentioned it before in any of her numerous prior interviews and profiles?

Moreover, none of the many Hillary Clinton biographies so much as mentioned the story, not evenLiving History, her 2003 autobiography. A staggering amount of information has been published about Hillary Rodham Clinton in her lifetime (going all the way back to her days as a Wellesley College graduate in 1969, when she was featured in Life magazine); that she disclosed a basic fact such as how she got her name only once in all that time was rather incredible. (The only other mention of Hillary Clinton's putative connection to Edmund Hillary was made by her husband, former president Bill Clinton, in his 2004 autobiography.)

How does the question of whether Hillary's mother lied to her or not have any relevance? Whether her mother lied or not, Hillary statement is still true because she is repeating what her mother told her.

Go with that, that makes her look even more stupid. She never even learned anything about the guy she was named after. If your theory is true she is to stupid to be president. She can't do basic math.

Opinion is not fact.

 

[jknowgood]

She certainly did make the claim what are you reading?

She never made the claim in writing because that is how she does it, lies by mouth but tells the truth in her bio.

Snopes rates her claim as FALSE;

From Snopes: For more than a decade, one piece of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's informal biography has been that she was named for Sir Edmund Hillary, the conqueror of Mount Everest. The story was even recounted in Bill Clinton's autobiography.

But yesterday, Mrs. Clinton's campaign said she was not named for Sir Edmund after all.

"It was a sweet family story her mother shared to inspire greatness in her daughter, to great results I might add," said Jennifer Hanley, a spokeswoman for the campaign. 3

Hillary vs. Hillary

She only said that is what she was told by her mother. Whether her mother actually named her after the mountain climber or not is irrelevant.

So her mother is a liar, seems logical.

Notice there is never any quote from the people who supposedly said it.

Could be it was a cute little lie her mother told her, but by 1995 she should have known it wasn't true, and that is why it appears in none of her books.

From Snopes:

news stories about the First Lady written prior to her 1995 south Asian tour, and every appearance of it in news articles after that referred to referenced that one occasion. If Hillary Clinton thought an anecdote about the origins of her name was entertaining enough to repeat to the press when she met Sir Edmund Hillary in 1995, how come she had never mentioned it before in any of her numerous prior interviews and profiles?

Moreover, none of the many Hillary Clinton biographies so much as mentioned the story, not evenLiving History, her 2003 autobiography. A staggering amount of information has been published about Hillary Rodham Clinton in her lifetime (going all the way back to her days as a Wellesley College graduate in 1969, when she was featured in Life magazine); that she disclosed a basic fact such as how she got her name only once in all that time was rather incredible. (The only other mention of Hillary Clinton's putative connection to Edmund Hillary was made by her husband, former president Bill Clinton, in his 2004 autobiography.)

How does the question of whether Hillary's mother lied to her or not have any relevance? Whether her mother lied or not, Hillary statement is still true because she is repeating what her mother told her.

Go with that, that makes her look even more stupid. She never even learned anything about the guy she was named after. If your theory is true she is to stupid to be president. She can't do basic math.

Opinion is not fact.

I truly believe if Hillary said Bill has been faithful for our entire marriage. You would believe it.

 

[Freewill]

She only said that is what she was told by her mother. Whether her mother actually named her after the mountain climber or not is irrelevant.

So her mother is a liar, seems logical.

Notice there is never any quote from the people who supposedly said it.

Could be it was a cute little lie her mother told her, but by 1995 she should have known it wasn't true, and that is why it appears in none of her books.

From Snopes:

news stories about the First Lady written prior to her 1995 south Asian tour, and every appearance of it in news articles after that referred to referenced that one occasion. If Hillary Clinton thought an anecdote about the origins of her name was entertaining enough to repeat to the press when she met Sir Edmund Hillary in 1995, how come she had never mentioned it before in any of her numerous prior interviews and profiles?

Moreover, none of the many Hillary Clinton biographies so much as mentioned the story, not evenLiving History, her 2003 autobiography. A staggering amount of information has been published about Hillary Rodham Clinton in her lifetime (going all the way back to her days as a Wellesley College graduate in 1969, when she was featured in Life magazine); that she disclosed a basic fact such as how she got her name only once in all that time was rather incredible. (The only other mention of Hillary Clinton's putative connection to Edmund Hillary was made by her husband, former president Bill Clinton, in his 2004 autobiography.)

How does the question of whether Hillary's mother lied to her or not have any relevance? Whether her mother lied or not, Hillary statement is still true because she is repeating what her mother told her.

Go with that, that makes her look even more stupid. She never even learned anything about the guy she was named after. If your theory is true she is to stupid to be president. She can't do basic math.

Opinion is not fact.

I truly believe if Hillary said Bill has been faithful for our entire marriage. You would believe it.

Nope, they wouldn't believe it but would say they did.