As resolute as a Sherman Tank, and just as subtle

That would be Hillary Clinton who is transparently, and deeply, campaigning to be the Democratic nominee for President in 2008.

Let’s see, today we read that the NY Times will be doing a reliably gushing piece on Hillary where this devotee of all abortion rights, including partial birth abortion, is proposing new “language” about abortion rights.

Don’t be suckered by it. As a former liberal Democrat, I can tell you that “new language” simply means new packaging, new euphemisms and a thick cover of sheer fakery for entrenched ideas and immovable stands. And, according to Drudge, she’s inserting the faithtones into that “new language.” Completely unsurprising, of course, given the “values” meme leftover from the 2004 election. Transparent.

This follows Hillarytalk earlier this week about (what else) faith, her deep faith, how faithful she is, and her faith…and she’s not saying it herself, she’s getting others to say it. I can’t judge her faith. God will have to do that. Maybe she is incredibly holy, but so gifted in humility that she hides it. I dunno – anything is possible, and I’m not God.

Then, of course, this morning we read Hillary’s remarks about America’s leaders lacking vision. Hillary, incredibly, has had two (2) Drudge headlines in one day. Hillary is doing Morning and Evening Prayer of a sort.

Aggressive. You’ve got to hand it to her, she’s not afraid to work hard. She’s out there, she’s playing the game. This woman is tireless and if she needs to work for four solid years to erase some memories and soften others and move convincingly to the center, you can count on her to do it.

Transparent and ballsy. She doesn’t care that she’s as see-through as plastic wrap. She is counting on four years of media goodwill – which she will certainly get – coupled with the “short-attention-span” theatre that colors a good portion of the American public’s perceptions – to see her through. Her new, and non-stop, yakking is part and parcel of her usual manuevers of disingenuity and cynicism. In case you haven’t noticed, or forgotten, the woman says anything she wants, and gets away with it, courtesy of a press that is utterly owned. “The truth is, I’ve always been praying person…The truth is, I’ve always been a Yankee fan…I have no idea how I made $100,000 in cattle futures, I’m just a little woman sitting here in a hot pink skirt and jacket…”

Let me stop there, because it’s such a perfect example of this disingenuity. The woman’s story is that in 1978 she gave a broker a small amount of money – $1,000 and in just one week he made her a 10,000% profit, bagging her $100,000.00 When the story broke, she needed damage control – and quick – so she called her minions in the press together, gathered them in an Oprahesque sitting circle (this is talking to the press, mind you) and held court wearing a pink suit. (Hillary always goes for the pastels when she needs help. Actually, she also softens herself by wrapping a cardigan around her shoulders…over her suit. Which is just weird. A cardigan. OVER a suit jacket. Think about it. It’s a metaphor for her whole habit of illusion and cynicism – Hillary is so fabulous, she doesn’t HAVE to make sense…but I digress….)

Anyway, so she gives the man $1,000.00. A week later he gives her back $100,000.00. Hillary never invests in cattle futures again. And she has no idea how she made that money. That’s what she told the adoring women, circled around her in her pink suit: “I have no idea how I made that money, I don’t know anything about investing or commodities trading! I’m just this dimple-faced little woman sitting in my pink suit, how can you think I could have anything to do with any sort of scandal! Heavens! The truth is, my brains are mostly butter!”

I watched this charade go on – still thinking of myself as liberal but utterly unfamiliar with what modern liberalism seemed to be becoming – and I was thinking…this is the most cynical person I have ever seen in any walk of life. And she’s going to get away with holding court and fibbing like this.

Did I say fibbing? Yes, fibbing. I’m sorry but I’m a pretty smart woman, just like Hillary, and I can tell you that if I had made a 10,000% return on a commodities trade (in one week), two things would have happened: I would have tried my hand at it again, and I would have asked my broker how it all came about. At a minimum, I would have done those two things. I might even have considered that perhaps something funny had occured in that investment bonanza, and asked about it.

She didn’t do any of those things.

Hillary was completely incurious about her returns (incurious…incurious…wait – that’s what they call GW Bush! Hillary can’t be incurious! Only stupid people are incurious, and she’s smart, smart, smart!) I, on the other hand, who had winced through her “I’m not sitting home having teas and baking cookies” and gave her the benefit of the doubt on several other silly statements finally decided that there was no way I could trust this woman.

I understand, from those who have met her, that Hillary is remarkably charismatic in person, “electric” says a relative, “but not necessarily in a good way, if you’re really attuned,” says a friend.

I’m sure she is charismatic. But she’s also terrible off script, and in her Shermanesque Tankism, she tends toward indiscretion – as this summer when she told a “safe” audience in CaliforniaMany of you are well enough off that … the tax cuts may have helped you…We’re saying that for America to get back on track, we’re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.”

Tsk, tsk. That’s okay to say to an audience so wealthy it doesn’t suffer when taxes go up. It’s okay to say when nothing at all is being asked of you; when your flights, your meals, your clothes and your ambitions are largely being subsidized by either taxpayers or friends. It’s easy to say when you’re giving up nothing at all. But you’re not supposed to let that get out into the mainstream!

Sigh. I’d better pace myself. It’s going to be a long four years. And unless something happens that doesn’t work in her favor, causing her to go quiet for a while, we’re going to be treated to Hillary at Morning, Noon and Night, as she rolls along.

About Elizabeth Scalia
  • pendell

    We’ll see if her career follows the same path as the Sherman tank as well, which :

    1) Caught fire and burned very frequently, so frequently that it’s crews nicknamed it the “Ronson”, after a then-popular brand of cigarrette lighter. This was due to it using gasoline instead of the harder-to-burn diesel fuel. They were the ’74 Pintos of WWII.

    2) Were wholly inadequate to confront German armor, especially the late model Mark Vs and Mark VIs. The Mark V Panther ranked up a kill ratio of 5-1 vs. Shermans. Both the Mark V and VI could kill a Sherman if they could see it, from any angle. By contrast, the 75mm cannon on the original Shermans would not penetrate the frontal armor of a Mark VI Tiger even at point blank range. The later addition of a 76mm high velocity gun was an improvement but not much of one.

    The Sherman tank: Vulnerable, underarmed, underarmored, and totally inadequate for the task it was designed for. Kind of like the foreign policy of certain politicians.

    Respectfully,

    Brian P.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X