Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Why Do They Hate Hillary Clinton?
“Why do people hate Hillary Clinton so much?” a reporter from the Canadian Broadcasting Company asked me this week.
I responded that the pitiless rancor of American politics today is out of all proportion to our real challenges – but it’s worth recalling how Hillary Clinton earned her miserable reputation. It was the flagrant and prodigious lies. She has arguably abused power, enriched herself and her family with blatant influence selling, and betrayed an arrogant disregard for the normal rules.
In the past few weeks, since she defeated Bernie Sanders, Mrs. Clinton has been impersonating a centrist. Her foreign policy speech was crafted to contrast sharply with Trump’s illiterate eruptions. She praised NATO, upheld the importance of alliances with Japan and South Korea, defended John McCain’s heroism, stressed the centrality of American world leadership, and promised to harness allies in the war to defeat ISIS. The speech was miles to Trump’s right.
A couple of weeks later, she recounted her fond recollection of the letter that President George H. W. Bush left for Bill Clinton on his first day in the Oval Office. It was very gracious and she quoted from it at length, claiming that it “moved [her] to tears.” (Doubtful, but never mind.) This was the peroration:
‘You will be our President when you read this note. I wish you well. I wish your family well. Your success is now our country’s success. And I am rooting hard for you. George.’
That’s the America we love. That is what we cherish and expect.
Who is the target audience for these reflections? Not the Democratic base. No, the message is aimed at troubled Republicans: “Come on over. I’m safe, familiar, and not cracked.”
Many Republicans, appalled at the ranting ignoramus Republicans appear poised to nominate, may be taking another look at Clinton. If they do, their hearts will sink.
That was a moving story about G.H.W. Bush. But remember, it was First Lady Hillary Clinton who fired the White House usher when she learned that he took a few calls from Barbara Bush to give her computer help. Petty much? Vindictive? Paranoid?
Lest we forget, this is the person who, as first lady of Arkansas, turned a $1000 commodity futures investment into $100,000 windfall ten months later. Asked about her extraordinary investment strategy, she explained that she studied the Wall Street Journal. It was revealed later she had the obliging help of James Blair. He was outside counsel to Tysons Foods, one of Arkansas’ biggest businesses. Appearance of corruption?
Mrs. Clinton participated in disparaging the characters of women who accused Bill Clinton of harassment. Feminist icon?
This is the woman who “lost” the Rose Law Firm billing records that were under subpoena for two years. The records proved that she lied when she denied participation in a sham land deal. This is the woman who fired seven White House travel office employees and ruined some of their lives by charging financial improprieties, just in order to give patronage jobs to her friends. Did I mention that she denied involvement in their persecution? A memo surfaced later proving that she lied, and that it was a Hillary show from the start.
Her corrupt approach to power has been further unmasked this year. The email arrangement violated State Department policy and arguably the law, perhaps endangering national security. The Clinton Foundation’s contributions (and Bill’s speaking fees) seem to have blossomed under her tenure at State. She lied about Benghazi – even to grieving family members – because a terror attack was a political liability and had to be spun as a protest gone wrong.
Is Hillary Clinton truly a centrist on foreign policy? She stood by President Obama’s utterly disastrous policies in Syria (though leaks suggest she favored arming the anti-Assad rebels), and toward Russia. She could have resigned. She berated Binyamin Netanyahu and has maintained a close relationship with Israel-basher Sidney Blumenthal, though she has pushed back against the BDS-supporting Sanders delegates to the Democratic Convention. Worst of all, she participated in and continues to defend the Iran deal – surely the worst debacle of the Obama years.
She is whatever she feels the need to be in the moment: pro and anti free trade, anti and pro same sex marriage, anti and pro raising the minimum wage, and pro and anti drivers licenses for illegal immigrants. Where she is consistent, it does her no honor. She warned abortion opponents moved by faith that their “religious beliefs” would “have to change.”
Even her most devoted admirers must wonder how far they can trust a person in whom shreds of integrity cannot be detected with a microscope.
If Joseph de Maistre was right that people “get the governments they deserve,” we have much to answer for in what the Democrats and Republicans have yielded up. It may be fantasy to hope for another alternative – but patriotic fantasy.
Published in General
It’s an awfully big topic, but this is a start.
Hillary is a crook, a liar, and complete scum.
But we should put her in perspective: she is not exactly a heavy hitter. She and Bill embezzled money – but it was in the millions, not the billions (by way of contrast see any tinpot dictator). She is power hungry, but without any grand vision. And I believe that under any administration in present-day America, the bureaucracy will continue to run the country, limiting the damage of any President.
Hillary is also nicely polarizing, making it easier for many Americans to simply want to separate from the Blue State Union.
Related question: “Why does Hillary Clinton despise the people so much?”
To steal some terms from our brave new world of fluid sexuality, I would say that Hillary Clinton is “pan-political” while Trump is “apolitical”.
Clinton has spent her entire life in and around politics, is familiar with policy on every side, and has probably embraced most sides of most issues at some point in her career. While the liberal bent seems to have left both the biggest impression and the most connections with her, I have no doubt that she wouldn’t hesitate to throw both her own convictions and her former allies under the bus in the pursuit of her own power.
On the other hand, Trump just doesn’t have the time to care about politics. He’s so convinced of the superiority of his personal instincts that he doesn’t feel the need to.
That’s why I find the debates over “who is more to the left this year?” quite ridiculous. Both candidates put politics well below personal aggrandization, just for much different reasons.
“A couple of weeks later, she recounted her fond recollection of the letter that President George H. W. Bush left for Bill Clinton on his first day in the Oval Office.” It was very gracious and she quoted from it at length” …
Yes, if you are a Republican. However, if you are a socialist democrat this is how you treat your successor on their first day in the Oval Office:
The General Accounting Office, an investigative arm of Congress, said today that ”damage, theft, vandalism and pranks did occur in the White House complex” in the presidential transition from Bill Clinton to George W. Bush. The agency put the cost at $13,000 to $14,000, including $4,850 to replace computer keyboards, many with damaged or missing W keys.
My Dear Mrs. Charon,
First, I must apologize for the male race. Trump is what we have to work with and he is one of ours (men) unfortunately. Second, I think you are beginning to realize that no matter how irritating Trump is, Hillary is far more dangerous. She is guilty of multiple Federal Felonies, all of a very serious nature, and she bald face blew it all off lying again and again. Her record reveals pure incompetence. She wrecked her opportunity for Health Care reform by her intransigence. She didn’t have the integrity to buck BHO on The Arab Spring, The Russian Reset, Libya, or Syria. She most certainly let our people die in Benghazi.
Sorry, but the Trump obsession needs to end. Those who justify Hillary in any way are guilty of a much greater crime. No matter who they are.
Mitch McConnell Praises Hillary Clinton — Day After Benghazi Report
McConnell should apologize to the Republican Party. For this statement alone he should be replaced as majority leader.
Regards,
Jim
She’s a thief. She steals power.
The reason we hold people “accountable” is because they wield our power. I don’t hold Bill Gates accountable for what he does with his billions, because they’re his billions, not mine. But Hillary has been commanding (commandeering?) public money and power, and because it’s our power, we demand an accounting. And Hillary goes out of her way to make sure the public can’t see what she’s doing with that money and power … which means that she considers it her power, and her money.
She absolutely refuses to be held accountable. Remember our first national encounter with her? It was the HillaryCare meetings behind closed doors. That was just the start. In every episode since then, she’s refused the right of the true power-owners to inspect what she’s doing with our power.
Which means she thinks it’s hers.
And what’s worse is her attitude that we owe her that power.
Mona, I have an idea. Some two months ago I sent a note to the FBI Director on their hot line stating that it was clear that HRC had committed crimes with her email. I have never heard back. Crickets! How about you draft an open letter to Director Comey from the members of Richochet. It is getting more obvious everyday that the fix is in. Yesterday’s news about the meeting of WJC and the Attorney General on her plane is like the last straw. Let’sLet’s let him know there is a large group of conservative Americans watching. This needs to be done officially not by some raving cheese guy.
Hillary Clinton’s nauseating inauthenticity is the result of a lifetime of trying to conceal her contempt for conventional, conservative beliefs and normal people.
She believes that it is not right that she and Bill only have 10’s of millions when other, lesser types have billions.
She resents having to campaign as if the judgment and preferences of rubes should ever be a factor in the acquisition of power.
She has no intellectual curiosity, no original thoughts of any kind, an overwhelming sense of entitlement and she surrounds herself with second-rate yes-man and henchmen who tell her she is exceptionally gifted.
Americans were in Benghazi because no one in the State Dept was courageous enough to tell Madame Secretary her signature policy achievement was in the crapper. Those Americans had no security because assigning the needed security would also suggest failure. Their deaths needed to be covered over with a ridiculous lie for the same reason. Her egoistic style of governance got them killed.
Hillary Clinton not only ALWAYS lies when her false persona is challenged by the truth, she regards any failure to affirm the lie as a personal attack.
The mystery is not why she is hated but why so many people hitch their hopes and fortunes to her forked tail.
Damn peasants. They denied her once and now shall pay.
And silverware. Don’t forget the silverware …
It because she look like she fell out da ugly tree, and hit every branch on the way down!
That is an exquisite point.
I’d like to ask a question that is (only slightly) off-topic:
Earlier in her life, Hillary made it clear that she wanted to be known by her maiden name. Fine, that’s a feminist thing. Furthermore, I’m old enough to remember when we were told that feminism had driven a stake into the heart of “Mrs.” and “Miss” and that women would heretofore be addressed as “Ms.”
Why, then, do people not refer to Hillary as “Ms. Rodham”? That’s the way I refer to her. The Wall Street Journal stylebook seems to be set on calling her “Mrs. Clinton”, which seems inconsistent with the wishes of the feminist movement and Ms. Rodham Herself.
Speaking of names, it’s obvious that Ms. Rodham’s people have decided that she should not refer to Trump as “Mr. Trump”, as that would indicate the sort of deference to The Donald as was seen on The Apprentice. In an attempt to diminish him, she refers to him as “Donald”.
While I’m not a Trump fan, I do love it when he calls her “Crooked Hillary”. I think he would be wise to also call her “Ms. Rodham”, because I suspect that it would get under a lot of people’s skin – Ms. Rodham’s included – but just as I said above, it’s difficult to criticize because it is dictated by Rodham’s beloved feminism.
Your post and every comment here is completely accurate – I used to be a Democrat and back in the 90’s, I could not stand her voice……specifically the pauses, like she is reading from a script and the tone is talking down to you – like she needs to tell me why she knows what’s best, that I cannot possibly with my average brain, process any important information on my own, and I need to be grateful because she will explain everything – it’s never changed…..that’s when I decided I did not like this woman….and it’s not improved…
And I’ll never forget what she said to small business owners who, after they saw what her healthcare plan would do to them, implored her to see that she was in effect putting them out of business: “Well I can’t be expected to be responsible for the fate of every undercapitalized business out there.”
Just wow.
If you have to ask, you really haven’t been paying attention.
The problem is, that would boot him out only once. He needs multiples of this.
Her voice! Like fingernails on a blackboard. The voice of – not America’s Sweetheart, but America’s Ex-Wife. You can imagine that voice firing the White House travel staff, berating Bill, yelling about “bimbo eruptions”, and doing so many other unsavory things. It’s the voice of Elizabeth Taylor in Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? It’s an imperious, condescending, emasculating, entitled, and mendacious voice.
To her article, Mona should have added Bill Clinton and Hillary Rodham’s violation of the spirit of the 22nd Amendment. “Two for the price of one.” They’re trying to sell that idea again. Bill is to be the economy czar. It’s embarrassing, making us look like a banana republic. The husband serves as president, then the wife. But in reality, they serve together, as a power couple.
I find myself quoting Bob Dole: “Where’s the outrage?!”
How about she is an America hating, Constitution shredding socialist with a bloodlust for power?
The first two would be more appropriate for our current POTUS but not her I believe, the last is certainly all her. HRC doesn’t so much hate our nation or Constitution as much as she just doesn’t give a damn.
These are concepts for the plebeians, their only relevance to her is that they interfere with HRC assuming the position which rightfully belongs to her. The common man seeks to deny her through resort to puny rule of law and love of country, how dare he.
Wow.
You disagree? Do you believe I am too harsh, not harsh enough?
The Mafia has a better rep than these two. Hillary is starting to look like Rodney Dangerfield, without the humor.
And No – You get no Respect.
If she is not a constitution-shredding socialist, she is certainly doing a good imitation of one.
Many on that side of the aisle hate the Constitution, but for her I do not believe it to be the case.
Hate requires a certain investment of effort, one has to at least give a damn.
For Ms. Rodham Clinton a piece of paper penned by some long dead men is merely toilet paper. I doubt she hates it, that would require too much effort. After all she has revenge to plan on all those who have snubbed her over the years. Busy woman.
Saw the BBC interview show Hardtalk. A guest host was interviewing Frank Luntz. The British woman could not rap her mind around the fact that Hillary was hated. Luntz listed off some of the reasons that she is hated, the British woman just dismissed them all out of hand. She was basically saying “But Trump is crazy, Trump is bad, those charges have been dismissed, all the good people like her…”
It was pretty amazing to see. I reminded me of an interview they did with a Eurocrat about the Brexit. The interviewer asked the Eurocrat about something Michael Gove had said about the EU, the Eurocrat said, “I can’t be concerned with everything some British backbencher has to say.”
Right then and there I thought Britain would vote to Leave. But then again in my experience nearly all foreigner commentators have no clue how politics in America works or even what the main issues in our politics are.
Finally just a parting word, this article is exactly how all Nevertrumpers need to talk about Hillary Clinton! Good job Mona!
This could be part of it.
Mona,
Please name the only person who can prevent the Supreme Court from reversing the Heller decision – and thus gutting the Second Amendment – sometime between 2017 and 2020.
Please name the only person who can change our current abortion regime which basically allows any abortion to be performed anywhere for any reason.
It is the same person.
Does anyone else find it galling to see the evils some people will facilitate in the name of defending “conservative principles?”