commentary breaking news top stories world news politics headlines conservative news liberal news fox news fake news economic news socio political government news updates political blogs editorials illegal immigrant racism terrorism Trump Obama Clinton Mueller investigation dossier Russia China Congress scandal Sessions FBI NSA CIA intelligence science news election news worldwide news sociopolitical journal
theodore M I R A L D I mpa ... editor, publisher, writer
Tuesday, April 24, 2018
HILLARY, the Energizer Bunny of Finger-Pointing
In this June 5, 2017, photo, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speaks at a fundraiser for the Elijah Cummings Youth Program in Israel in Baltimore. Almost 18 months have passed since Hillary Clinton lost the presidency. She holds no position of power in government or in her political party. And she is not expected to run for office ever again. Yet Clinton is starring in the Republican Party’s 2018 midterm strategy. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky, File) Cheryl K. Chumley
Hillary Clinton, in her most recent speech at the Pen America World Voices Festival, suggested the media made her lose.
We’ve already heard from Clinton about all the election-era problems she suffered from her femaleness, her staff, her fellow Dems, her basket of deplorable enemies and so forth and so on — we heard all this from her own mouth, in her own words, in her own book, how all these factors played into her presidential loss. For months upon months now, we’ve heard all this.
But wait, there’s more.
She’s like the energizer bunny of the blame game, going strong even two years after the campaign.
At the Pen festival, Clinton referred to the “false equivalency” of the media’s coverage of the 2016 presidential campaign and suggested such “corrosive” atmosphere actually fueled her loss. It wasn’t her fault; it was an outside entity.
“Now thankfully,” she said, The Hill reported, “in the races since 2016, coverage has been more straightforward and fact-based, perhaps because the races were close and inherently exciting. But I believe it also reflects an effort to avoid the errors that helped Mr. Trump to the White House. And I hope we’ll see more of this in the years to come.”
Once again, sigh. There was no corrosive anti-Clinton media wave. There was, however, a massive anti-Trump movement. And it came from all corners, not just, say, the DNC’s.
Trump wasn’t just called a circus act by the media from the mainstream and left. He was vilified by the so-called GOP-minded media as well. Remember the long-running list of letters from notable conservatives published in National Review, advising readers of all the reasons they shouldn’t vote for Trump?
Remember the anti-Trumpers from the Glenn Beck crowd, the Mark Levin types? The utter scorn from long-standing members of the RNC? The giggles from correspondent Ed Henry and anchor Chris Wallace of the otherwise-mostly-friendly Fox News morning couch?
Clinton had scores of opportunities to exploit the derision of the right toward Trump, and to win points with voters by making a case of why she’d be better for America. But she didn’t do it.
She instead spent her campaign mocking Trump, mocking Trump voters, painting pro-Trump conservatives as “deplorables.”
She jumped aboard the anti-Trump train with the runaway anti-Trump media and anti-Trump elite of the GOP and instead of offering a viable and positive message, announced to voters instead, in essence, “I’m Clinton, I deserve it.”
Her self-aggrandizing strategy failed and now, two years from the loss, she’s still floundering, seeking a mission.
So goes the life of the self-entitled. Without politics, without political power, what’s Clinton, anyway?
Little more than a finger-pointer, apparently.
And on that, sad to say, she’s running on endless energy.