Tag: Hillary Clinton

Member Post

 

Yahoo news is really on the cutting edge. They’re not just reporting who won last night, but who will win in 2016. Because you may think it was a good night for Republicans, but you’d be wrong. The real winner last night was Mrs. Bill…I mean Hillary R. Clinton. It all has to do with […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Madam Secretary… Liberal Fantasies and the Reshaping of American Perception

 

Truth, they say, is often stranger than fiction. In the case of CBS’ new political drama they are also complete strangers.

In what is an almost too transparent attempt to create a false image of Hillary Clinton in the form of Téa Leoni, the main character of Madam Secretary is everything that Hillary Clinton is not: engaging, charismatic, insightful, creative, attractive, and experienced. These, however, are simply the surface attributes that completely separate the truth from the fiction. Even in the construction of the background and temperament of the character, CBS diverges from reality in a manner sure to please every liberal grandstander while he projects Elizabeth Faulkner McCord — how that name just roll on the tongue! — fictional bona fides onto Hillary Rodham Clinton.

The Clintons of 2016 Will Not Be The Clintons of 1992

 

In 1992, Bill Clinton ran as a “new kind of Democrat,” one who would “end welfare as we know it” and craft a society that would reward those who “work hard and play by the rules.” Clinton knew that he could not win as a traditional liberal, so he crafted the now-famous “Third Way” approach, and campaigned and governed under a Third Way banner.

Of course, the Third Way was reinforced by the disastrous (from the Democrats’ perspective) 1994 Midterm Elections. Clinton accepted a Republican welfare reform bill (after two vetoes), balanced the budget (after much Republican prodding) and expanded free trade. At the same time, he proposed a bevy of micro-reforms that won bipartisan approval, in part because they were cleverly crafted so that Republicans could not vote against them. Through a combination of circumstance, accident, and design, Clinton became the Third Way president he had promised.

Other Straws in the Wind

 

shutterstock_158954213Earlier this week, I drew attention to the dearth of panels at the 2014 American Political Science Association (APSA) conference that were devoted to an assessment of the achievements in domestic and foreign affairs of the administration of Barack Obama. As I pointed out, the APSA has fifty-three “divisions” and sixty “related groups”that sponsor more than one thousand panels at these meetings with something on the order of four thousand scholars making presentations of one sort or another. Given those numbers, the profession’s silence with regard to Obama’s accomplishments are so striking as to suggest that the political science profession now regards “the One” as an embarrassment.

Today, I returned to the program of the APSA, which is available online and can be downloaded and searched. This I did with an eye to studying it more closely. Here and there, I found that someone had given a paper on some aspect of Barack Obama’s career — usually, with a focus on race — but that no one had bothered to ask whether he had been successful on the whole at home or abroad.

I found other omissions no less striking. There was, for example, not a single paper given at the convention in which the name Clinton appeared in the title, and there was not a single paper delivered in which the title referred to anyone named Hillary. You would think –given her front-runner status for the Democratic presidential nomination — someone would have addressed her achievements as Secretary of State or as a United States senator. But no one even bothered to discuss her future prospects, and no one looked back to the administration of her husband.

A Better Reset

 

Remember Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s infamous “Reset Button” photo-op with her Russian counterpart? It’s probably the most laughably inept and self-aggrandizing event in recent American foreign policy. It’s less laughable now — unless you’re Sergey Lavrov, who’s still in office and has outlasted three of his American counterparts — but it was pretty good back then and may yet save us from a second Clinton Administration.

America’s reputation was in bad shape when President Obama assumed office. He and Clinton did everything in their power to exaggerate and contribute to that perception and present themselves as the harbingers of a new day. And the world basically seemed to hold itself together for the first five years of his presidency. Sure, there was that bit of unpleasantness in Iran; true, the Arab Spring veered off in ugly directions; conceded, the “red line” in Syria was a mistake; and yes, our an ambassador was murdered, but that was just background noise to the general level of wonderfulness, right? After all, Osama bin Laden was dead and General Motors was alive.

The Risk of Crist

 

Tonight as the sun sets in Pensacola, Charlie Crist will be the Democratic nominee for Governor of Florida. Yes, there’s a kind of pro-forma primary going on between Charlie and the hapless State Senator Nan Rich, a grating South Florida liberal of the Bella Abzug stripe, but everyone knows it isn’t serious. Crist has been the de facto nominee for over a year, plodding along in his faux-shucks way.

In essence, it isn’t about Crist the candidate. It’s about the Democratic Party. It’s a window into the deep, desperate soul of a state party looking for a foothold back into power. They know Crist is lying to them, and they love it. They know he’s playing them for patsies, and they’re lined up around the block to kiss his manorexic backside.

Do Democrats Secretly Believe Hillary Clinton Will Implode?

 

Is Hillary Clinton’s candidacy viable? I am not asking about her position on big issues and the like. I am looking at small things. Do the questions below, from my recent post elsewhere, say to you what they say me: that the odds are against Clinton candidacy making it even through the primaries. That the answer is “no” and that her likely opponents know it?

We have been hearing for months that former senator and secretary of State Hillary Clinton is a shoo-in for the 2016 Democratic Party presidential nomination. She has the resume. She has the money. And solidly behind her, she has the second biggest draw in the Democratic Party, her husband Bill.

Not a Good Week for Hillary Clinton

 

HillFirst, there was this. Then, there was the fact that Diane Sawyer of all people laid into Clinton over Benghazi (which, lest you forget, is not a scandal, so don’t worry your pretty little heads about it, darlings). And then, there is the fact that her book . . . well . . . isn’t so good:

Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton’s new memoir “Hard Choices” officially launches Tuesday morning, but it’s already being savaged by critics for being overly cautious and, as a result, uninteresting.

“TRUTH BOMB 1: ‘Hard Choices’ is a newsless snore,” Politico’s Mike Allen wrote in his Monday-morning newsletter. He went on to describe the book “written so carefully not to offend that it will fuel the notion that politics infuses every part of her life.”

The “47%” Comment of 2014

 

shutterstock_13713790Behold:

Hillary Rodham Clinton says her family was “dead broke” after her husband Bill’s presidency.

In an interview with ABC News airing Monday, the former secretary of state and possible presidential contender said the couple emerged from the White House saddled with legal fees and debt. Clinton said they struggled to finance “mortgages, for houses” and daughter Chelsea’s education.

Member Post

 

I enjoyed (maybe a little too much) listening to our married podcasters defending monogamy.  I thought they’d hurt themselves climbing the moral high ground too fast.  But, our fearless leaders did highlight an important point–the typical MSM have been awash in ‘alternative lifestyles’ and ‘monogamy outdated’ articles.  I wondered why?  I realize it’s coming up […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Hillary’s Big Economic Speech Forgets About Obamanomics

 

052114hillary-600x298There was a weird moment during Hillary Clinton’s big-think economic speech the other day. The former Obama Secretary of State and current middle-class warrior had just finished ticking off a bunch of worrisome stats on income growth, income inequality, and social mobility. She really focused on how Canada’s middle-class is now supposedly richer than America’s in an economy with both more equality and a stronger safety net. Then Clinton continued:

That’s not how it’s supposed to be. We often think that we invented the middle-class. So what can we do about it? Of course, a lot depends on our leadership here in Washington and across our country. The 1990s taught us that even in the face of difficult, long-term economic trends, it’s possible through smart policies and sound investment to enjoy broad-based growth and shared prosperity. My husband gave a lecture at Georgetown recently …

Stop the tape. Wasn’t that the moment she was supposed to start trumpeting the achievements of the Obama administration and how Obamanomics has begun to turn around those bad trends? Shouldn’t that have been the “stay the course with Hillary” moment (assuming a 2016 White House run)? Instead, she skipped right back to Bill Clinton’s presidency.

Member Post

 

Jim Geraghty, whose “Morning Jolt” is something I find myself reading every day now, put a piece out this morning on a “Truth Squad” being placed outside of Trey Gowdy’s Benghazi hearings (never mind that the Truth Squad hasn’t asked for the truth from Hillary Clinton herself), headed by Lanny Davis. The kicker:  Said Squad […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

How Much Are We Entitled to Know About a Presidential Candidate’s Health?

 

Karl Rove is coming under fire — more than usual — for remarks that he made at a public forum in Los Angeles last week calling into question the nature of Hillary Clinton’s injury when she suffered a concussion in late 2012. As reported in the New York Post:

The official diagnosis was a blood clot. Rove told the conference near LA Thursday, “Thirty days in the hospital? And when she reappears, she’s wearing glasses that are only for people who have traumatic brain injury? We need to know what’s up with that.”

Member Post

 

Writing today in The Hill, former Democratic congressional aide, Brent Budowsky, does his best to scare Republicans from pursuing Benghazi, running against Obamacare, or saying naughty things about Hillary.  He says that if the Republicans do these vile things, the results will be a clean sweep in 2016 for the Democrats.  His conclusion: Preview Open

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Member Post

 

Would you vote against someone just because their parent/spouse/sibling/third cousin is also a politician? Quin Hillyer argues that, all other things being equal, Americans should do just that. Of course all other things are never quite equal, so to some degree it’s a theoretical argument. But — their own individual merit or lack thereof aside, […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

That Old Clintonian Dysfunction

 

As Hillary Clinton is gearing up for another possible run at the presidency, Politico has written an in-depth story regarding Clinton’s love-hate relationship with the media. And it is mostly hate, as one of Clinton’s advisers is more than happy to admit: “Look, she hates you. Period. That’s never going to change.” I am more than willing to believe those words, and they point to why Hillary Clinton should never be president of the United States.

We are still being governed by an administration that claims to have been the most transparent in history, even though the record is clear that it is anything but. And this is an administration with relatively good relations with the media, featuring a president who has basically been a media darling ever since he burst on the national and international stage. If an administration with this many advantages when it comes to being able to charm the media still sees fit to make a mockery of transparency, what makes anyone think that in a future (Hillary) Clinton administration, there will be anything resembling more transparency, especially when one considers Clinton’s often-difficult history with the press?