Fausta's Blog

American and Latin American Politics, Society, and Culture

November 10, 2007 By Fausta

Hillary’s plants and Margaret’s high heels

Clinton Campaign Confirms Planting Town Hall Question, Says It Won’t Happen Again

The most contrived, planned-ahead political campaign of the last 50 years would do it each and every time if they knew they could get away with it.

But the real issue is how Hillary’s campaign try to play the “poor me” angle (Scrappleface‘s got a great post on that):

“However, Senator Clinton did not know which questioners she was calling on during the event.”

Hillary’s spokesman stops short of saying “the student made me do it”.

It’s always someone else who makes Hillary and her convenient-husband “do it”. Theirs is due all of the credit and none of the blame all-the-time-every-time.

Hillary Clinton wants women to vote for her because she is a woman. At the same time, because she is a woman, Hillary doesn’t want people asking her tough questions.

Well, folks, it can’t work both ways. Either you are tough enough to be President of the United States, or you are not.

In yesterday’s Wall Street Journal, Peggy Noonan:

When Hillary Clinton suggested that debate criticism of her came under the heading of men bullying a defenseless lass, an interesting thing happened. First Kate Michelman, the former head of NARAL and an Edwards supporter, hit her hard. “When unchallenged, in a comfortable, controlled situation, Sen. Clinton embraces her elevation into the ‘boys club.’ ” But when “legitimate questions” are asked, “she is quick to raise the white flag and look for a change in the rules.”

Then Mrs. Clinton changed tack a little and told a group of women in West Burlington, Iowa, that they were going to clean up Washington together: “Bring your vacuum cleaners, bring your brushes, bring your brooms, bring your mops.” It was all so incongruous–can anyone imagine the 20th century New Class professional Hillary Clinton picking up a vacuum cleaner? Isn’t that what downtrodden pink collar workers abused by the patriarchy are for?

But even better, and more startling, people began to giggle. At Mrs. Clinton, a woman who has never inspired much mirth. Suddenly they were remembering the different accents she has spoken with when in different parts of the country, and the weird laugh she has used on talk shows. A few days ago new poll numbers came out–neck and neck with Barack Obama in Iowa,

Iowa, where that inconvenient student asked that planted question.

I have worked with very tough women. Some I despised, and some I admire – because of the same reason: the tough women of purpose gained my respect and admiration. I concur with Peggy Noonan:

A word on toughness. Mrs. Clinton is certainly tough, to the point of hard. But toughness should have a purpose. In Mrs. Thatcher’s case, its purpose was to push through a program she thought would make life better in her country. Mrs. Clinton’s toughness seems to have no purpose beyond the personal accrual of power. What will she do with the power? Still unclear. It happens to be unclear in the case of several candidates, but with Mrs. Clinton there is a unique chasm between the ferocity and the purpose of the ferocity. There is something deeply unattractive in this, and it would be equally so if she were a man.

Character is not something you can put on for show and remove at the end of the day by the door of your house like an old pair of shoes. Character can’t be faked.

And faking it is all Hillary and Bill are all about.

UPDATE
Oops, she did it again

Betsy posts about the “overcome” angle. Gina Cobb‘s looks at a thankful heart.

————————————————————–

As a postcript, Peggy Noonan has a shoe anecdote:

She is still tough. A Reagan aide told me that after she was incapacitated by a stroke she flew to Reagan’s funeral in Washington, went through the ceremony, flew with Mrs. Reagan to California for the burial, and never once on the plane removed her heels. That is tough.

When you are who you really are, those heels never come off.

————————————————————–

Dr. Krauthammer looks the dynasty:

vote for Hillary is a vote for the last entry of a Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton quarter-century.

We’ve had just two father-son presidencies in the 230 years of the republic, and the first (the Adams family) had the son taking over 24 years after the father, and just one year before the father’s death. The Bush succession is more anomalous with only eight years separating the two presidencies, a proximity that has launched a thousand Maureen Dowd ruminations on the hidden furies driving Oedipus Prez.

But the father-son connection is nothing compared to husband-wife. The relationship between a father and an adult son is psychological and abstract; the connection between husband and wife, concrete and quotidian. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife. George Bush, pere, didn’t move back into the White House in January 2001.

Which is why Hillary’s problem goes beyond discomfort with dynastic succession. It’s deep unease about a shared presidency. Forget about Bill, the bad boy. The problem is William Jefferson Clinton, former president of the United States, commander in chief of the Armed Forces, George Washington’s representative on earth.
…
The cloud hovering over a Hillary presidency is not Bill padding around the White House in robe and slippers flipping thongs. It’s President Clinton, in suit and tie, simply present in the White House when any decision is made. The degree of his involvement in that decision will inevitably become an issue. Do Americans really want a historically unique two-headed presidency constantly buffeted by the dynamics of a highly dysfunctional marriage?

I’ll be posting more on the dysfuction of dynasties later on.
Digg!

Share on Facebook

Share

Filed Under: Hillary Clinton, Margaret Thatcher, politics

Comments

  1. Vote For Hillary Online says

    November 10, 2007 at 11:48 am

    This story has definitely been way overblown. So what if she had a planted reporter asking questions? Hillary Clinton is our only hope to take back America and get it under control, and sometimes you have to do whatever it takes to win. The fact that people fail to realize this is simply shocking.

  2. Fausta says

    November 10, 2007 at 7:45 pm

    Oh, we realize it.

    take back America and get it under control, and sometimes you have to do whatever it takes to win.

    That’s what Hillary’s all about.

  3. A Jacksonian says

    November 10, 2007 at 9:43 pm

    Ah, yes, Hillary is all about control… control of others for her own, personal gain. She has triangulated herself into a whirlpool, trying to recapture the 1990’s and learning that they are gone, now.

    To me what is shocking is that no one that has interviewed HRC can tell me exactly what it is she stands for, save for personal power. A drive to ‘win’ at any cost, means that even the Nation gets sacrificed to personal power. How else to explain ties to multiple criminal organizations in the Far East and Russia? How else to explain giving missile guidance technology to China? How else to explain letting PLA members get access to classified data on their Nation? It was all for *cash* to retain power and then try to forward that on to HRC.

    HRC has not run in a real campaign herself: the Republican party of NY State is a joke. I know, I grew up in upstate NY and it is *just* a joke… a few good individuals, but the party is useless… anyone with a D in back of their name would have taken their Senate seat. Of course she and Bill stabbed Peter Paul and a few others in the back to get more money for their political machine… what is a little abuse of government power, so long as you get access to a billionaire?

    By constantly changing position to gain power, we know that power is all HRC seeks… first through Bill and now on her own. But she doesn’t have Bill’s charisma or ability to whitewash things and debate the meaning of the word *is*. Instead we get a faux campaign and the first softball question that gets thrown at her repeatedly so that she can hit it? No good at bat. So put up a throw-away question from someone coached to give it! Such a strong candidate, that – unable to think on her feet and only able to attack others that question her. Answers? Depends who she talks to. What the meaning of *is* actually is. Even those on the Left and Far Left cannot say, for certain, exactly what HRC stands for. If even those that she should be appealing to can’t figure that out, then I have serious problems with a ‘will to win’.

    Sounds an awful lot like 1932-33 in Weimar Germany.

    No good came of that ‘doing whatever it takes to win’ concept. No good, at all.

  4. Fausta says

    November 10, 2007 at 10:47 pm

    what is a little abuse of government power, so long as you get access to a billionaire?
    And the billionaire’s bundlers, too!

  5. GM Cassel, AMH1(AW), USN,RET says

    November 11, 2007 at 12:39 am

    It’s like girls aboard ship. If you really want to be here, then deal with it. Sometimes life is tough, even on a good day. So, to the presumptive president, go pound sand up your a**.
    By the way, The Retired First Class Petty Officer has done MORE for this country in a day than you have in your entire useless communist life.

Tweets by @Fausta
retirees_raise-2015_300x250

Pages

  • About
  • Email

Meta

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Previous Posts

  • Mrs. Maisel goes full Alinsky on Mrs. Schlafly
  • Venezuela: Did the Minister of Defense back out at the last minute?
  • You need to unfriend me
  • Go ahead and Kiss the Girl, if you dare
  • Ashamed

Recent Comments

  • John on Mrs. Maisel goes full Alinsky on Mrs. Schlafly
  • Today’s hot topics: Democrats’ collusion shift, tax-return rift, Venezuela drift, and more! – PoliticalWitchDoctor.com on Venezuela: Did the Minister of Defense back out at the last minute?
  • Today’s hot topics: Democrats’ collusion shift, tax-return rift, Venezuela drift, and more! - AmericanTruthToday on Venezuela: Did the Minister of Defense back out at the last minute?
  • Did Venezuela’s Minister of Defense Back Out At The Last Minute? on Venezuela: Did the Minister of Defense back out at the last minute?
  • Roseanne Not Back, Khan not Invited, Operaman’s back, Jobs back, Fausta’s back (but not here yet) Thoughts under the fedora – Da Tech Guy Blog on Venezuela: Did the Minister of Defense back out at the last minute?

Archives

  • 2019
    • December 2019
    • May 2019
    • January 2019
  • 2018
    • December 2018
    • October 2018
    • July 2018
    • June 2018
    • April 2018
    • March 2018
    • February 2018
    • January 2018
  • 2017
    • December 2017
    • November 2017
    • October 2017
    • September 2017
    • August 2017
    • July 2017
    • June 2017
    • May 2017
    • April 2017
    • March 2017
    • February 2017
    • January 2017
  • 2016
    • December 2016
    • November 2016
    • October 2016
    • September 2016
    • August 2016
    • July 2016
    • June 2016
    • May 2016
    • April 2016
    • March 2016
    • February 2016
    • January 2016
  • 2015
    • December 2015
    • November 2015
    • October 2015
    • September 2015
    • August 2015
    • July 2015
    • June 2015
    • May 2015
    • April 2015
    • March 2015
    • February 2015
    • January 2015
  • 2014
    • December 2014
    • November 2014
    • October 2014
    • September 2014
    • August 2014
    • July 2014
    • June 2014
    • May 2014
    • April 2014
    • March 2014
    • February 2014
    • January 2014
  • 2013
    • December 2013
    • November 2013
    • October 2013
    • September 2013
    • August 2013
    • July 2013
    • June 2013
    • May 2013
    • April 2013
    • March 2013
    • February 2013
    • January 2013
  • 2012
    • December 2012
    • November 2012
    • October 2012
    • September 2012
    • August 2012
    • July 2012
    • June 2012
    • May 2012
    • April 2012
    • March 2012
    • February 2012
    • January 2012
  • 2011
    • December 2011
    • November 2011
    • October 2011
    • September 2011
    • August 2011
    • July 2011
    • June 2011
    • May 2011
    • April 2011
    • March 2011
    • February 2011
    • January 2011
  • 2010
    • December 2010
    • November 2010
    • October 2010
    • September 2010
    • August 2010
    • July 2010
    • June 2010
    • May 2010
    • April 2010
    • March 2010
    • February 2010
    • January 2010
  • 2009
    • December 2009
    • November 2009
    • October 2009
    • September 2009
    • August 2009
    • July 2009
    • June 2009
    • May 2009
    • April 2009
    • March 2009
    • February 2009
    • January 2009
  • 2008
    • December 2008
    • November 2008
    • October 2008
    • September 2008
    • August 2008
    • July 2008
    • June 2008
    • May 2008
    • April 2008
    • March 2008
    • February 2008
    • January 2008
  • 2007
    • December 2007
    • November 2007
    • October 2007
    • September 2007
    • August 2007
    • July 2007
    • June 2007
    • May 2007
    • April 2007
    • March 2007
    • February 2007
    • January 2007
  • 2006
    • December 2006
    • November 2006
    • October 2006
    • September 2006
    • August 2006
    • July 2006
    • June 2006
    • May 2006
    • April 2006
    • March 2006
    • February 2006
    • January 2006
  • 2005
    • December 2005
    • November 2005
    • October 2005
    • September 2005
    • August 2005
    • July 2005
    • June 2005
    • May 2005
    • April 2005
    • March 2005
    • February 2005
    • January 2005
  • 2004
    • December 2004
    • November 2004
    • October 2004
    • September 2004
    • August 2004
    • July 2004
    • June 2004
    • May 2004
    • April 2004
    • March 2004
Content Copyright Fausta's Blog

Site Developed and Managed by 300m.com