Get PJ Media on your Apple

Works and Days

All Clintoned Out

July 13th, 2014 - 7:41 pm

One Percenters as Populist Poseurs

How then do the Clintons pass as populists, given their exorbitant speaking fees — Bill has probably raked in more post-presidential money than all prior U.S. presidents of the last half-century combined — their mansions, and their elaborate one-percent lifestyles? Was $30 million in book advances over the years for the two of them not enough for progressive populists?

Hillary protested that despite a past multimillion-dollar book advance for her, and multimillion-dollar speaking fees lined up for Bill, they left the presidency “broke” in 2001. When that trope did not work, Hillary turned to the now well-known theory of medieval exemption: they could not possibly be greedy (in the sense of ignoring the Obama rule that a multimillionaire must know when not to profit and at what point she has already made enough money), because they were lifelong liberals who had worked their tails off for social justice.

Like John Kerry (the advocate of higher taxes who avoided them on his yacht, like Al Gore (the proponent of green energy who likes private jets and big SUVs, and like Tom Steyer (whose green cash donations are predicated on cashing in on sooty coal development in third-world countries), the Clintons see no contradiction in charging outrageous rates for speaking and living quite well — while being for “fairness.”

Indeed, under the protocols of contemporary progressivism, in the abstract being loudly for equality means in the concrete having a lot more things than most anyone else. Modern liberalism has descended into the art of rich people blaming the lower middle class for not being generous enough with money they don’t have.

In such a strange world, Chelsea, Hillary assures us, is not so interested in profit-mongering and all such distasteful money-grubbing, but does tolerate a ten-million-dollar New York tony apartment (replete with Italian marble baths), and sort of puts up with a multi-thousand-dollar an hour nepotistic TV contract.

She is even willing to stomach her multimillionaire parents crafting all sorts of family trusts to avoid inheritance taxes so that she will have enough millions not to worry about having to make millions to support a lifestyle she doesn’t much like. Keep all that in mind as Hillary drops her g’s and adopts a black patois when addressing African-Americans, and, to paraphrase Barack Obama, then again becomes Annie Oakley when shooting rifles with the clingers.

What a strange couple the Clintons became: the feminist president who was a serial groper and ace harasser; the feminist secretary of State who chortled in recall about an old sexual battery case in which she got a rapist off easy, and whose advisors reduced Bill’s liaisons to trailer trash or nuts; the two populists who cashed in; the middle-class  defenders who fawned over Wall Street; and on and on.

The second problem with Hillary’s candidacy is Obama. In 2009, the betting was close on whether her secretary of State  (she had no particular foreign affairs experience prior to her appointment) billet was a deft Obama move (keep your enemies closer than your friends) or a Clintonian wise political gambit (keep in the limelight for 2016).

The problem is that her four years as secretary of State coincided with a collapse of U.S. foreign policy unseen since 1979-80. In a fair world, Hillary would be judged as the worst secretary of State since Cyrus Vance. Most of the disasters — Benghazi, the chaos in Libya, the failed reset with Russia, the bogus Syrian red lines, the phony Iranian deadlines to stop enrichment, the yanking of all peacekeepers out of Iraq that led to the ISIS ascendance, the surge and simultaneous withdrawal dates in Afghanistan, the disastrous Middle East pressures that have led to the eve of war, the flip-flop-flip in Egypt, the clumsy spying on allies, the lying about and jailing of a video maker, and on and on — came on her watch.

Top Rated Comments   
All due respect to Dr Hanson but reports of Hillary's demise are greatly exaggerated. Hillary need not run away from Obama, not when 40+% of Americans still support him. Indeed she need do but two things to convince the other 11% needed for election; promote herself as continuing Obama's policies which 'simply need more time' and most importantly, remind everyone that electing her means electing 'The First Woman President'!

In 2008 Barack Obama had no executive experience and a brief record as the most radical leftist Congressman. None of that mattered given the 'opportunity' for America to elect its First Black President. America then doubled down in 2012. Why should it be any different in 2016 with the 'opportunity' to elect THE FIRST WOMAN PRESIDENT?

Dr Hanson's recitation of historical fact regarding Hillary Clinton is preaching to the choir. An inconvenient fact is that 1/2 of America no longer cares about facts, all that matters is advancing the left's ideological agenda toward the utopia they are certain lies before us.
8 weeks ago
8 weeks ago Link To Comment
Dr. Hanson, Hillary Clinton is not running on any policies or agendas, but solely on her gender...that's it, and that is what she is counting on to get elected...that women voters will vote for her because she IS a "she".

God help us, it MIGHT work...with much the same results as we have seen with the Odministration.

The facts about her candidacy,(other than her gender), is that she is an incorrect answer to a question that nobody asked back in the late 1990's.

From a partisan viewpoint, her "Hillaryous" overstaying of her allotted time on the national stage has that happy effect of sucking the sunlight and nutrients,(airtime and campaign donations), away from any other potential DemocRat candidates.

Let's remove Hillary today from the batting order...who are the remaining "sluggers" in the Democrat lineup?

Joe Biden?
Elizabeth Warren?
Martin O' Malley?

All of the Yellow Dog Democrats were wiped out in the Shellacking of 2010, leaving behind the nuts elected from gerrymandered "safe seats", so there's not much of a bullpen for national candidates on the Dem side who are NOT slobbering neoMarxists, is there?
8 weeks ago
8 weeks ago Link To Comment
Hillary is as wooden as Gore, as imperious as Obama, as "enemy conscious" as Nixon, as back door meddling as Carter and as untethered to ethics as Bill.

She has no platform or position that is motivated by principle. Therefore, she is able to be outflanked on her left, who want fealty to the overthrow.

She will abandon centrism the minute it polls weaker than treason in the corrupt propagandist media doctored opinion steerage.

HOWEVER, she "owns" the center left suburban liberal. She is their darling. Because the corrupt media won't actually investigate Democratic Party scandal, her resume void and dirty deal abuses will remain hidden from view.

She is vulnerable to attack from the left, but not without risk of turning off the "useful idiots".

That isn't Clinton weariness, that's the Woodstock Jihad figuring out whether to crown her or crush her.
8 weeks ago
8 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (133)
All Comments   (133)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Luckily the Clinton DNA has only produced one grandchild and is well on the way to extinction.
They were chosen to be rich, but not to bear fruit that lasts, and not to have descendants as numerous as the stars. Thus this is only a temporary issue.
8 weeks ago
8 weeks ago Link To Comment
Oh my God, we have three parasites in the White House now: Barry,
Mooch, Mom.
Can we really sustain another three:Bill, Hillary,Chelsea
8 weeks ago
8 weeks ago Link To Comment
Don't forget Chelsea's husband, child, and inlaws. It's a package.
8 weeks ago
8 weeks ago Link To Comment
Anybody who votes for Hillary because she's a female is a sexist bigot. Pass the word.
8 weeks ago
8 weeks ago Link To Comment
Forty seven deaths not including those who were killed in Benghazi-

http://theblacksphere.net/2013/10/47-bodies-left-in-the-wake-of-hillary-clinton-part-i/
8 weeks ago
8 weeks ago Link To Comment
She seems cheap and obsessed with raking in free stuff.

LOL Remember when Hillary established a gift registry right before they left town so that their friends could furnish and accessorize their two new mansions for them? I guess the White House swag just wasn't enough.
8 weeks ago
8 weeks ago Link To Comment
Absolutely nothing would be more fun than a Clinton vs Palin presidential run.
8 weeks ago
8 weeks ago Link To Comment
I never figured to be correcting Victor Davis Hanson, but the budget was never balanced under Clinton. The national debt increased every year he was in office. The "balanced" budgets and vaunted Clinton surpluses (as far out as the eye can see) were accomplished through intragovernmental borrowing from the trust funds.

Remember when Clinton was being harangued about returning the "surplus" to the taxpayers and he finally said he couldn't do that because he couldn't be sure that we'd spend the right way? Who would say something so stupid and impolitic? Well, someone who knew full well there was no surplus to return. He ended up using the excess borrowed money to pay down the public debt, but the nation's total debt increased. I'll give them this: they came as close to a balanced budget as anyone had in many a year, many a decade, but most of the credit for that should go to House Republicans, not Bill Clinton.

Now that I've gotten that off my chest, I'll go back and read the rest of the piece. Thank you.
8 weeks ago
8 weeks ago Link To Comment
Mr. Hanson: With all due respect, we cannot allow you or any columnist,
pundit or blogger to ever refer to Barack Hussein Obama as an
"African American", for nothing could be further from the truth.
Obama is 6.75% Kenyan black, 43.25% Arab and 50% white.
He 'enjoys' absolutely no connection whatsoever to the unfortunate
black people who were first brought to the Americas in the 1600's.
8 weeks ago
8 weeks ago Link To Comment
"All Clintoned out"-isn't this the same as "Clinton Fatigue"?
8 weeks ago
8 weeks ago Link To Comment
Absolutely, positively Off Topic.
Is it legal for state governors to call out their National Guards for emergencies?
Is it, therefore, legal for border states to call out their NGs to stop the invasion?
Is it, therefore, legal for non border states to use their own NGs to stop the foreign invasion?

What would happen if Texas sent its NG to the border, if only for a view days in order to make the point, and stopped the invasion? What would this do to Gov. Perry's Pres prospects????
8 weeks ago
8 weeks ago Link To Comment
All that Obama needs to do, should Texas call out its National Guard to the border, is to nationalize the Texas NG. Under law the NG owes its allegiance to the Federal Commander in Chief. That's precisely what President Eisenhower did in Arkansas in 1957 when Gov. Faubus tried to use the AR NG to stop integration of the public schools in accordance with Brown v. Topeka Board of Education. Ike stopped Faubus in his tracks, and also called in US Amy troops as an additiona reminder of who is the CinC.
8 weeks ago
8 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 3 4 5 Next View All