hillary’s experience is a lie? (very long, not sorry.)


This Slate article‘s ass is mine, as is the New York Times article from Dec. 26th that this piece relies heavily upon (as if the New York Times is the word of the Truth God.) Both are studies in a well-presented bullshit that in this case is based on a single assumption, taken as an unquestioned, un-argued given, that the technical fact that Hillary Clinton has only served in elective office 8 years represents the singular definition of experience, and therefore she has little or no more qualifying governmental experience to claim as it applies to the job of President than does Barack Obama.

First off, government work and politics are two different things, but the job of being a successful elected official, especially a President, requires a mastery of both. And I would venture to say that political experience and acumen, as long as a person is not an idiot regarding the workings or possibilities and limitations of a governmental position, is by far the most important quality of the two. Political chops will allow an elected official to operate effectively to get what he or she wants or needs. It is the juice by which people on the Hill or around the world are influenced and it is the talent that will allow a president to sell his ideas to the American people.

It’s Fucking Politics, Stupid.

When Obama was a mere 13 years old, doing the same shit I was doing when I was 13, Hillary Clinton was a lawyer in Washington working in the halls of Congress on the impeachment committee that was investigating the President of the United States for high crimes and misdemeanors. That is high heels on the ground, front row and back room room experience in one of the great dramas of presidential politics in the country’s history. What can a president do and what can’t he do and can and will articles of impeachment be presented against him? And ALL the politics in play in all this?

That people are out there making the case that this is not valid experience, EVEN in the face of a direct comparison to Barack Obama, is astounding.

But let’s move on. Hillary hooked up with Bill Clinton while he was making an unsuccessful bid for Congress. No experience there, I guess. Then, after they were married, he ran successfully for Attorney General of Arkansas. Again, no experience for Hillary? (Why don’t you just stop reading this right now if that’s what you believe.)

Let’s look at what she was doing at this time. Because it’s VERY easy to confuse the social work lawyering both Clinton and Obama have done and turn it into a wash. Sorry, this is from Wikipedia, not the New York Times.

Rodham joined the venerable Rose Law Firm, a bastion of Arkansan political and economic influence,[62] in February 1977,[63] specializing in patent infringement and intellectual property law,[30] while also working pro bono in child advocacy;[64] she rarely performed litigation work in court.[65]

In late 1977, President Jimmy Carter (for whom Rodham had done 1976 campaign coordination work in Indiana)[67] appointed her to the board of directors of the Legal Services Corporation,[68] and she served in that capacity from 1978 through the end of 1981.[69] For much of that time[70] she served as the chair of that board, the first woman to do so.[71] During her time as chair, funding for the Corporation was expanded from $90 million to $300 million,[64] and she successfully battled against President Ronald Reagan’s initial attempts to reduce the funding and change the nature of the organization.[64]

In 1978, Barack Obama was in his last year of being a teenager. At that time Hillary was about to become first lady of Arkansas. That’s another political campaign, and a successful one, that Hillary was INTIMATELY involved in. During the next SIXTEEN years, she would go through three more gubernatorial campaigns, two successful and one not, and spend a total of 12 years as… let’s put it this way if the derision of it makes some of you happy… The Governor’s Wife. Before leaving Arkansas, Hillary will have participated in 5 or 6 state wide campaigns as a confidant and, you better believe it, silent political operative and advisor, and a full 14 years as the intimate partner of the attorney general (2 years) and governor (12 years).

Then came two primary and general elections for president. Many states, many ups and down. But again, no experience for Hillary there. It was BILL running for president, jammer. Don’t you GET IT? Hello. Hillary Clinton’s hands are all over Bill Clinton’s political careers and never more so than when he is running for something. The story whispered then was, as it was later on and I’ll get to that, that Hillary had the last word in all major campaign decisions. She managed his runs for the White House in stealth mode. Everybody knows this who knows anything. Hillary’s micro managing of Bill Clinton stories are LEGEND and they’re all over every insider book on the Clinton’s starting with the first by Stephanopoulos.

After leaving the White House (actually before in the first case) Hillary then ran two successful campaigns for the US Senate. For the last 16 years Hillary Clinton has either been the First Lady of the United States, living AT 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, or as a United States Senator, and/OR running or intimately involved as a political operative in the running for any of the above.

From DAY ONE of the first administration, when they rolled out the Gays in the Military Thing, the Clintons have been operating under the most intense bombardment from their political enemies, the sole purpose of which was to keep them off balance and derail what was sure to be an unacceptably ambitious and liberal set of initiatives and programs coming from a Clinton White House. And the press was right there banging away JUST AS THEY ARE NOW. Just two years into the first term the LA Times ran ike a five page feature that revolved around the question and reasons for the fact that the Clinton White House was the most unfavorably scrutinized and pilloried administration in modern times.

This woman was withstood all of that and has been successful in spite of it all. She’s sat under the klieg lights and answered questions about her personal life, her political life and, ALWAYS, to what extent, exactly, was her role behind the scenes in the Clinton White House.

Let’s go there now and, while I’m at it, let me stick it in the ear of the prick at the New York Times, which is something I promise on my life I had been planning to do here on this board since I read his piece the day after Christmas.

Upon moving in to the White House, Bill handed Hillary what would be the biggest and most ambitious single policy initiative of his entire two terms in office, the idea of which was to somewhat nationalize health care in the United States of America. The New York Times says this:

“Mrs. Clinton’s role in her most high-profile assignment as first lady, the failed health care initiative of the early 1990s, has been well documented.”

Is this the newspaper of record? Because dismissing the initiative as “failed” and then curtly claiming that it all “has been well documented” is the kind of creepy informational gloss-over you might see from a Soviet-era state news source.

What “failed” the Clinton’s plan for national health care coverage for everyone was the efforts of the health insurance industry and their Republican friends in Washington, WHERE, you had better believe, the Clintons were most decidedly OUTSIDERS. Specifically, it was a group of TV ads run around the country featuring an attractive and thoughtful couple sitting in their living room ruminating over the potential disaster of a health care system run by the government. Those ads were so effective that on their own they killed this program.

But the ads had help. Because simultaneous to all this, the Clintons, and their plans to nationalize health care, were also being bashed on a totally NEW front, the burgeoning Right Wing Radio Dynasty, led by Rush Limbaugh and people like G. Gordon Liddy, etc.

Now let me ask you. Do you think Hillary Clinton picked up some experience through all this? Maybe? Just a little?

Here is the line in the New York Times’ piece that so pissed me off. And I have to say, this is a supremely well written and documented piece. You’re not going to get the quality of writing or the research of this article from me here today, for crying out loud. I’m in my fucking pajamas. But it is a house of cards that is based on one single premise and that is that if Hillary Clinton served in no OFFICIAL documented capacity during the two Clinton administrations then she has no claim to the benefit of experience that she alleges to have gleaned from her years as First Lady.

Here is the line.

In seeking the Democratic presidential nomination, Mrs. Clinton lays claim to two traits nearly every day: strength and experience. But as the junior senator from New York, she has few significant legislative accomplishments to her name. She has cast herself, instead, as a first lady like no other: a full partner to her husband in his administration, and, she says, all the stronger and more experienced for her “eight years with a front-row seat on history.”

There is a revisionist aspect to this that flies directly in the face of the realities of the era. Word of Hillary Clinton’s unnofficial role behind the scenes was leaking out of the Clinton White House in a steady stream causing the Clinton enemies THEN to deride her as the Co-President.

This is even noted on her Wikipedia profile.

She was also the initial first lady to take up an office in the West Wing of the White House,[45] first ladies usually staying in the East Wing. She is regarded as the most openly empowered presidential wife in American history, save for Eleanor Roosevelt.[106]

Some critics called it inappropriate for the First Lady to play a central role in matters of public policy. Supporters pointed out that Clinton’s role in policy was no different from that of other White House advisers and that voters were well aware that she would play an active role in her husband’s Presidency.[107] Bill Clinton’s campaign promise of “two for the price of one” led opponents to refer derisively to the Clintons as “co-presidents”,[108] or sometimes “Billary”.[109]

Yes, before Bill Clinton was ever elected president he was ALREADY telling the world that this woman was nearly his equal partner. Some marriages are just like that. Intellectual equal partners. Who the FUCK knew? But America was not ready for this and when the usual suspects came after him and her for something the Clintons naively saw as a PLUS, the Clinton spin machine had to from then on downplay her role and influence. It was all pushed under the rug and out of sight. (That is, as much as Hillary’s ego could stand.)

And now… I’m laughing as I type this… and NOW… the press is trying to claim that Hillary was just another ceremonial First Lady and that a senator with just TWO years in Washington DC has as much qualifying experience to recommend HIM as president as she has.

It’s so ludicrous… that it can’t be ANYTHING other than politics.

American Politics 101.

The left hates the Clintons because the left is peopled with idealists and the Clintons have unforgivably cast themselves as centrists. And the right hates the Clintons because they know what beats in the Clintonian heart is a practical liberalism which will rear its ugly head in a Clinton administration in the form of ANYTHING they can manage to squeak by the Republicans.

And the media loves a horse race and would love the excitement of a Obama general election campaign during which time they will contribute mightily in the taking apart of Barack Obama (they’ll politely call it vetting) and then, when they decide that he doesn’t quite measure up, they will then congratulate themselves on the fact that a black man was the nominee of a major party for president and don’t we all live in a great country and what time does the dry cleaner drop off my sequined gown for President McCain’s Inaugural Ball which I have the pleasure of covering tonight.


One Response to “hillary’s experience is a lie? (very long, not sorry.)”

  1. TOO…too…l..o..n..g lah, TO…OLONG ! to-long ( help )!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: