The utterly unbelievable Mrs. Clinton
Jan 14, 2008 O Mores!, Politics and Poker
Emily Bazelon asks, “Who Was Hillary Kidding on Meet the Press?” when she said she sure as heck didn’t want to see gender or race injected into the Democratic primary campaign. It is to laugh!
Similarly, the ADDeRabbi blogger says, let’s face it, she can’t even tell the truth about the most important issues of the day:
[O]ne thing that Hillary said during her senatorial campaign which just totally summed up why I can’t stomach her. She was asked whether she’s a Yankee fan or a Met fan. . . .
Hillary’s answer: “I like them both”. No. You’re not allowed to say that. You can’t like them both. Clearly, she felt that she didn’t want to alienate the fans of one team by saying she supports the other. See, but that’s the point. She’s a phony. She said what she thought would be politically expedient, not what she believes. I’m not so fickle a person that I wouldn’t vote for Giuliani because he roots for a team I hate. He has his preference, and he doesn’t try to hide it. He wears his Yankee cap everywhere and attends games. Had Hillary said “Gee, y’know, I really don’t follow baseball much”, I’d have understood and respected that. Not everyone’s a baseball fan. But she didn’t say that. She tried to please them all by, for lack of a better term, lying. I understand that politicians often must do this, but when it’s so pervasive that it even extends to fundamentally trivial matters, it becomes abhorrent.
I always thought it was remarkable how hard it is for Hillary Clinton, she of the Wall Street Journal-based investment success and ersatz Southern drawl, to tell the truth about almost anything. The recent death of Sir Edmund Hillary reminded me of how, just for the hell of it, she invented a story that she had been named after the first man to climb Mt. Everest.
I praised Hillary Clinton when she was the only Democratic candidate with the nerve to admit that retreat from Iraq was not a good policy for America, back when the heat was on. Did she mean it then, or was that just what seemed to be the right thing to say, in a contrarian sense? I don’t know. But she is, fundamentally — as she constantly reminds us — a very dishonest person, and hence a perfect match for our disbarred former President… in their way… but not for you and me.
January 14th, 2008 at 5:31 pm
I’m not a big fan of Hillary, but I would give her a pass on this one.
True, feminists tend to play the gender card when it benefits them and tend to discard it when it doesn’t. But, all in all, it is a good thing for our country that women can achieve great things in the public and political square, whereas in previous generations they were hobbled.
HankB
January 14th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
What has she achieved, Hank?
January 14th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
Formally: 2-Term Senator of New York
Informally: De facto head of the largest political party in America.
She’s an icon, Ron. You may not like it, I don’t particularly like it, but there’s no doubt she’s the most powerful woman in America, and has a good shot at becoming the most powerful person on the planet. Them are the facts:)
January 14th, 2008 at 10:52 pm
Hank, there’s little you’re saying that I don’t agree with, except most of it does not answer my question — what has she accomplished, which you answered by saying she was elected senator on a record of being the wife of a popular politician. And none of it goes to the point of my post: Notwithstanding her iconic status, she is a fundamentally dishonest person who should not be President.
January 15th, 2008 at 3:19 am
She is the only Democrat in the race that I could stomach winning the Presidency, and that is a sad state of affairs.
You are right Ron; it is comical to see her make statements like this one on Meet the Press. She practically made it her campaign mantra! She is so fake, and so ludicrous, it says more about the foolishness of her opponents than it does about her authenticity when I put her before them.
May 25th, 2008 at 9:33 am
[...] see now it was not merely a matter of the truth, which never stood in the way of the message. It is simply that she does not care at all about the content of anything she says [...]
May 25th, 2008 at 11:16 am
[...] see now it was not merely a matter of the truth, which never stood in the way of the message. It is simply that she does not care at all about the content of anything she says [...]
December 9th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
[...] I am referring to Hillary Clinton. Fundamentally, as in far beyond a typical politician. The record supports [...]