Your friend Jim George thinks you'd be a great addition to Ricochet, so we'd like to offer you a special deal: You can become a member for no initial charge for one month!
Ricochet is a community of like-minded people who enjoy writing about and discussing politics (usually of the center-right nature), culture, sports, history, and just about every other topic under the sun in a fully moderated environment. We’re so sure you’ll like Ricochet, we’ll let you join and get your first month for free. Kick the tires: read the always eclectic member feed, write some posts, join discussions, participate in a live chat or two, and listen to a few of our over 50 (free) podcasts on every conceivable topic, hosted by some of the biggest names on the right, for 30 days on us. We’re confident you’re gonna love it.
That was brilliant!
But the broken clock and blind squirrel disclaimer applies.
Of course, but as a man of the Left himself, Piers’s criticism is especially poignant.
Thank for relieving me of any doubt as to the content of her book. I have no doubt we owe a great to the author, and you providing this glimpse of a review (further distancing us from the source), for saving us the abject horror and brain rot.
Hmm, I am going to take the middle road on this, not that I am a betting man. I don’t think she will make the splash (like a dive, only a pantsuit flop) in 2020. However, she also won’t go quietly into the night. She will pretend people still care about her opinion just like Obama. Isn’t he still running something in DC?
BTW, the humor of her trying in 2020 would have to be well worth the cost of a round of drinks. Here’s to hoping you are right :)
Are there any female reviewers pointing out how lame and cringe-inducing it is to have the first “credible female candidate” for president and leader of the free world cluelessly whining like this Yapping about her eMOtions and FEElings and chardonnay and Xanax? Any man who did this would be…well, it simply wouldn’t happen. She’s a misogynist’s poster girl: Let’s ban women from high office and maybe the franchise too.
Now that’s a keeper.
I could imagine her doing what Romney and Biden did for 2016: make lots of noises early on about how she’s considering jumping in again, give a few speeches, form an exploratory committee, then pull back sometime in September, and then spend the next year complaining to anyone in earshot that she should have run after all.
And while we’re on this topic…
Joe Biden’s daughter says ex-VP considering 2020 run
Run, Joe, run!
Okay, so who is Piers Morgan’s ghost writer??!! I keep seeing evidence that he’s actually coming around to the truth. Hillary is an embarrassment to women, the Democrats and humanity. I wouldn’t put it past her to run again. Oh please, no.
Yes, I thought exactly this when she was whining a couple of weeks ago on TV about how “creepy” and awful it was that Trump was standing too close to her in the debates. She wants to go eye-to-eye with Putin and that lunatic NoKo shrimp with the funny hairdo, and she’s weirded out because Trump is standing next to her on a stage, live in front of thousands of actual people, and tens of millions of TV viewers?
Good grief.
Still think Mark Steyn wins the prize for the most pithy summation, though: “If I follow Mr Espuelas correctly, he’s saying that America is getting round to its “historic vote” so late that “gender” is now such an advantage that any old female candidate can be dragged across the finish line, no matter how shopworn, wooden, charmless, tin-eared and corrupt.” (emphasis added)
This really started my day off right!
Silence, Morgan you idiot. I’m not through gloating yet.
I was about to say something similar. I am perfectly happy for her to take the party down with her.
Of course, I still think Morgan is a complete jackwagon. That he still believes the victory over Trump was an otherwise foregone conclusion shows that he hasn’t really learned anything, either. I don’t think Hillary is quite so much to blame as he suggests, and I don’t think Trump is quite so much responsible for his own victory as his supporters suggest. I think it was a perfect storm. And honestly, a great deal of this is directly the result of Obama’s presidency. That gets overlooked, but it is an important factor, and probably more so than either of those two candidates.
Oh please, yes! I’d even donate a dollar to her campaign.
The more I think it over, I would actually enjoy seeing Hillary run again, assuming that Elizabeth Warren (or another female Democrat of equal stature) also runs.
The reason is this: I probably agree with Warren even less than Hillary on most issues. But Elizabeth Warren, for all her faults, is much better than Hillary Clinton at actual politics: she seems to actually hold heartfelt opinions, she knows how to give a speech, she can think for herself, and she can connect with a group of voters.
It would be so gratifying to see another Democrat woman run laps around Hillary on the primary debate stage, if for no other reason than to rid Hillary of her last line of defense (“I only lose because society hates women!”), and finally force her to confront the obvious fact that she just plain sucks as a candidate.
Some of my favorite Prime Ministers have been women: Maggie and Golda come to mind. So I wouldn’t agree as a principal. But then Hillary is no Maggie or Golda.
Not gonna happen. She could come in dead last in a field of twelve female candidates, all lackluster, and not recognize the obvious fact.
Hahahahaha!
I’m totally stealing that.
Presidents and presidential candidates should take their cues from the likes of George Bush (either one) and Michael Dukakis.
If you are a former president, do good works in your retirement, don’t bash your successors, and avoid partisan politics. (Are you listening, Barack Obama?)
If you are a former presidential candidate who lost in a humiliating fashion, don’t write books about it. Just go away. (Are you listening, Hillary Rodham?)
As Secretary of State, Rodham set up a private email server, thereby avoiding scrutiny of her communications and defeating government control over such communications, demonstrating a reckless disregard for the country’s interest in keeping her communications secure, thereby reinforcing in the public mind that she considered herself above the rules and the law.
Remember when Leona Helmsley said, speaking of her husband and herself, “We don’t pay taxes; only the little people pay taxes”? Rodham and her husband believe that only the little people follow the rules, obey the law, avoid conflicts of interest, etc., etc.
But what does she blame for her election loss? Not the misdeeds themselves…no, no. It was the temporary reopening of the investigation into her misdeeds!
Steal away, I’m pretty sure I stole it from someone else over some different issue.
I will be stealing it in an upcoming podcast.
I’d say “give credit”, but I can’t take the credit myself and don’t know where I first heard it myself.
“a vituperative and blistering evisceration of the Pant-Suited Horror…” Skip, that’s just beautiful prose.
Having suffered through too many audio clips on Hugh Hewitt’s radio show of the Pant-Suited Horror’s interview with Anderson Cooper this week, I am re-living the joy I felt last November for many reasons, not the least of which is hardly ever having to hear her voice. The drone of her condescension. (shudder)