On this morning's Morning Joe on MSNBC, there was just an infuriating segment in which Time editor Nancy Gibbs had this to say:
Nancy Gibbs: He makes an interesting point that it's okay to lie; you can't temporize. That any number of people have pointed out things that Donald Trump is saying that just aren't true. But when Hillary Clinton changes a position about the Keystone Pipeline or about TPP, it plays into the notion that you don't know what she believes, that politicians will say anything to get elected, all of the arguments about inauthenticity and temporizing that this election season, at least, is putting a very high price.Over at Blue Nation Review, Peter Daou took on the contention that "the way Hillary Clinton talks does not work in her favor," and I took on the double-standard of what constitutes "authenticity," and the associated implication that changing positions is the same thing as "lying."
Co-Host Mika Brzezinski: So his lying is authentic and hers isn't?
Gibbs: I think people—and you obviously have explored this a great deal—whether it's Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump, the candidates who are not talking in the way politicians traditionally have, who are saying things that you, quote/unquote, can't say and survive, and yet they are, is changing the nature of the political dialogue so completely. I don't know whether four years from now or eight years from now any of what we're seeing and learning now will apply, but right now in this atmosphere, the way Hillary Clinton talks does not work in her favor when voters are looking for something that sounds very, very different.
Reminder to the corporate media: Hillary Clinton is winning. For a reason.