Published on Townhall.com
In a galaxy not so long ago and not so far away, Hillary Rodham began her long and ambitious political journey. By all accounts, she was idealistic and passionate, not unlike so many others in that time of war and upheaval.
Although she entered Wellesley a young woman of new privilege, and Republican like her father, her thesis on Saul Alinsky’s playbook for social action through deception belied her heritage. It was in1968, the year when Martin Luther King was assassinated in April and Robert F. Kennedy, in June, that she left college—and her upbringing—behind forever.
At a time when other college graduates went to the military, this young woman went to Yale, where she stoked the fires of zealotry, novice though she was in the ways of social action. There, she met Bill Clinton, and for the most part, they became a pair, marrying in 1975, after landing in his home state of Arkansas. It was an unlikely place for a Wellesley grad, but a great one in which to nurture her passion for her brand of social reform amongst the politically unwashed.
In What's Really Ailing Hillary, Todd S. Purdom, an apparent laureate in Clinton apologetics, tells us that in the early days, Hillary Rodham, and then, Hillary Clinton, was open and truly transparent in her emotional expression, but for some reason, the media had none of it. In a 1993 speech, for example, she said the nation was suffering from “a sleeping sickness of the soul.” Even the fabled, unpaid DNC operative, the New York Times, mocked her as other media lemmings joined in unending rounds of criticism. After suffering this barrage of surprising disparagement, according to Purdom, “Clinton would arguably never again sound so open, so vulnerable, so searching, so full of hope.”
Clinton’s choice of “a sleeping sickness” to describe her milieu was interesting, except that it was all on the wrong side of the political universe. For at least the next eight years, Americans were sucked in by the Clinton schmooze, denied to themselves the surfacing Clinton sleaze, and went to sleep until sales of nights in the Lincoln bedroom, payment for the Marc Rich pardon, and Monica Lewinsky rang alarm bells. Even then, many Americans, abetted by State Media, made excuses for the Clintons and gave the First Lady their immeasurable sympathy. Even before Bill’s Oval Office sexcapades, however, the Purdom-described transparency had come to a full-stop.
It was a tectonic shift, to be sure. Was it the HIllarycare catastrophe? Or was it when Whitewater finally came to haunt them? Maybe it was when Travelgate spread a stink around the White House no amount of febreze could dissipate that the Alinsky stonewall arose. Over the next few years, they perfected the slow-roll as Nixon never did. With slavish media and surrogate help, every scandal was denied, unanswered, or ignored because they knew if they held out long enough, public attention would waver and move on. It’s worked every time.
Investigators make many mistakes when looking back over someone’s life. Two amongst them are that what people “are” remains static over time, and that age and experience only gives them wisdom, but creates no “DNA” changes. That’s what’s wrong with Hillary’s use of the Maya Angelou line that when people—like Trump—tell you who they are the first time, believe them. In her case, a life of philosophical, religious, and political polar shifts, the opposites have been true. It’s the past twenty-five years that tells her tale.
As Colin Powell wrote: “I would rather not have to vote for her, although she is a friend I respect. A 70-year old with a long track record, unbridled ambition, greedy, not transformational, with a husband still ****ing bimbos at home (according to the NYP).” And, "everything HRC touches she kind of screws up with hubris."
Consider well Powell’s chosen phrases:
· “unbridled ambition”: meaning she’ll further herself without restraint or moral check as in Benghazi;
· “greedy”: how do people who have never been in other than public service amass $200,000,000?;
· “not transformational”: no changemaker, she!; and,
· “screws up everything she touches”: Hillarycare, yada, yada, yada.
In a recent Daniel Henninger piece, Les Deplorables, he reminds us that in stacking up the cash bags they pumped out of their public service connections, the Clintons have done nothing for lower and middle class living standards. Absolutely nothing. While the New Progressives profit from the liberal tendencies of the creative class—the digital billionaires—and what has also become a public sector political party, the rest of us have been all but ignored, much like Amity Shlaes’s The Forgotten Man.
We deplorables will not be forgotten. According to the latest Emerson Poll in Arkansas, Trump is ahead of the state’s former first lady, Hillary Rodham Clinton, by 28 points. The people of Arkansas bade the Clintons a firm farewell years ago and will resoundingly reject them again in 2016. What’s taking the rest of America so long?