hillary's loan: illusion finally changed into something real?

this is probably the shortest, most awful diary i've ever done. in fact, it's almost entirely made up of a previously posted comment.

and look, i can't even be bothered to capitalize!

but it's late and an interesting topic of discussion, so i'm going ahead with it. if there are objections to the slapdash nature of this diary -- or it's generally unimportant topic -- i'll delete it.

first let me say that any hillary voters that simply want to donate to hillary so she can keep going and stay competitive have the right idea.

this diary concerns not y'all but denial, rationalization, and bizarre spin.

hillary voters at taylor marsh and mydd are crowing about how hillary tricked the media into helping their post-feb 5th fundraising drive by putting out the loan story.

but wait.

that means the hillary campaign tricked the media into tricking hillary voters into donating.

they don't seem to realize that the end result of the "trick" wouldn't be the media looking dumb, it would be the clintons lying or scheming to get more money. from THEM.

to pay back HILLARY'S LOAN!

oh the stupidity.

do people think that hillary's disclosure of the unpaid staffers and the $5 million loan (and the timing of the loan at the end of jan. instead of feb. 1 that apparently forced the disclosure) is a ploy to get more money by pretending they're in dire straits?

is this sort of like an advanced nigerian 419 scam untouched by mccain-feingold?

or was the information about the loan something the clinton camp didn't want to get out, and the subsequent fundraising drive an attempt to get it out of the news cycle?

i would guess that it's a ploy, except it seems to play very badly and it's not really worth it considering she could fundraise very successfully without it. i'm sure many hillary voters here gave her money without ever hearing about the (alleged) funding shortfall. so why risk it?

i have used a slightly modified natalie imbruglia song lyric in my title.

sorry.