Say, Why Does Hillary Want To Be President, Anyhow?

Today’s the day when Hillary plays small ball with her announcement to run for president. At least, we are assuming that she will announce that, rather than saying she is not running. The Washington Post’s Dan Balz has a few questions

When Hillary Rodham Clinton arrives in Iowa next week as a candidate for president in 2016, every statement, gesture, laugh, outfit, facial expression and interaction with voters will be put under a microscope the likes of which few, if any, previous candidates have experienced.

Doubtful. The media were BIG Hillary supporters in 2008, and switched to Obama when he won the nomination. They’ve barely had a negative word to say during her terrible tenure as Secretary of State, in which she accomplished….can anyone say what she accomplished?

Her every step will be analyzed for signs of change or continuity. Has she learned from her loss to then-candidate Barack Obama in the 2008 primaries? If so, what? Does she act entitled or hungry? Has she shifted on foreign policy issues since she was Obama’s secretary of state? Are her economic views the same as Obama’s or Bill Clinton’s or Elizabeth Warren’s? Does she appear to like campaigning or see it as a necessary duty to reach her ultimate goal? Is she rusty or sharp, chilly or warm? The list is endless.

The answers to these questions will be provided helpfully by the Compliant Media.

Two questions above all others hover over her candidacy: Why does she want to be president? And will voters find her honest, authentic and empathetic enough to entrust her with their futures?

The answer to the first should be interesting. Her campaign released a mission statement to aides, which includes

“We are Hillary for America,” declares the document, first reported by Politicoand later obtained by The New York Times.

“Our purpose: To give every family, every small business, and every American a path to lasting prosperity by electing Hillary Clinton the next President of the United States.”

In a sentence freighted with significance, the memo continues: “This campaign is not about Hillary Clinton and not about us — it’s about the everyday Americans who are trying to build a better life for themselves and their families.”

So, Hillary running is not about Hillary. Riiiiiiight.

Anyhow, Maureen Dowd chimes in with a howler

WHEN my brother Michael was a Senate page, he delivered mail to John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon, who had offices across the hall from each other.

He recalled that Kennedy never looked up or acknowledged his presence, but Nixon would greet him with a huge smile. “Hi, Mike,” he’d say. “How are you doing? How’s the family?”

It seemed a bit counterintuitive, especially since my dad, a D.C. police inspector in charge of Senate security, was a huge Kennedy booster. (The two prominent pictures in our house were of the Mona Lisa and J.F.K.) But after puzzling over it, I finally decided that J.F.K. had the sort of magnetism that could ensorcell big crowds, so he did not need to squander it on mail boys. Nixon, on the other hand, lacked large-scale magnetism, so he needed to work hard to charm people one by one, even mail boys.

Or, it could be that Nixon was just a polite person, and actually interested in people. Something that is actually reinforced in Nixon’s book In The Arena. He was an introverted man in an extroverted arena. Introverts often find ways to play that small ball in asking about other people and greeting them. But, hey, this isn’t about Nixon

As Hillary finally admits the axiomatic — she wants to be president — she will take the Nixon approach, trying to charm people one by one in the early states for 2016, an acknowledgement that she cannot emulate the wholesale allure of Bill Clinton or Barack Obama.

In this age of Media Everywhere, 24/7 news stations, people able to take and upload videos in a heartbeat, etc and so on, can playing it small and informal, work? I met Hillary way back in the 1990’s, and she was cordial and warm. It was not a political event. Conservative radio host Mike Gallagher, in his book Surrounded By Idiots, writes about surprising his Democrat wife with a trip to meet Hillary, who was, again, very nice and pleasant. At the end, though, Mo Dowd seems to come off the rails

But if Hillary really wants to help those children, maybe she should give them some of the ostensible and obscene $2.5 billion that she is planning to spend to persuade us to make her grandmother of our country.

Interestingly, for all the Democrat caterwauling about money in politics, they sure like to spend lots themselves. And, at the end of the day, why, exactly, does she want to run for president?

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

18 Responses to “Say, Why Does Hillary Want To Be President, Anyhow?”

  1. John says:

    The Media
    Teach there is plenty of mkn compliant media but Americans choose not to consume that media
    That is your real complaint, Americans do nit choose the media that YOU want them to choose.

  2. John says:

    dorry bouncing truck that should be NON compliant media

  3. Jeffery says:

    Finally, the correct question is being asked, and must be answered to the satisfaction of enough Americans to overcome Republican electoral perfidy:

    Say, Why Does Hillary Want To Be President, Anyhow?

    What is her plan to improve America? She can’t continue the Republican-lite policies of her husband – Americans won’t tolerate that anymore. Senator Warren will pull Clinton to be more progressive. Republicans hate Clinton but fear her, too, so when elected she’ll be more effective than Obama.

    You are flat wrong that the media cut the Clintons any slack, as they despise both of them as Arkansas Hillbillies, philandering liars, potential murderers and greedy power-mongers.

    The Repubicums will likely nominate stealth radical Scott Walker with Marco Rubio as VP, unless they feel they need a female VP to counter Clinton. Hey, how about Sarah Palin, lol. Likely female VP choices are Susana Martinez (R-NM; but not a red meat con), Kelly Ayotte (R-NH; also not radical enough for base), Cathy Rodgers (R-WA; RWNJ too), Nikki Haley (R-SC; RWNJ AND ethnic!, but from a Repub state), Pam Bondi (R-FL; RWNJ, pretty AND from a big swing state! now, if she’d marry some Hispanic guy…)

    Repubicum strategy: Benghazi and emails that proved she hates America; she’ll take your guns; she’ll make you have gay sex and eat penis cakes; she’ll make you have health insurance; she’ll make you get abortions; she’ll make you pay more to heat your house; she’ll let the terrorists win; and her husband will try to bang the help.

    The real issues: 1. An economy that serves primarily the wealthy, not the rest of the citizenry. Our currently emerging plutocracy/ new Gilded Age/ state-corporatist capitalism. 2. See number 1.

    Will Clinton take on the moneyed interests? Wall Street? I doubt it. Still, she’ll be better than any shill the Repubicums put forth, just as Obama was a better choice than either McCain/Palin or Romney/Ryan.

  4. gitarcarver says:

    You are flat wrong that the media cut the Clintons any slack, as they despise both of them as Arkansas Hillbillies, philandering liars, potential murderers and greedy power-mongers.

    Oh look!

    Jeffery tells a joke!

  5. dorry bouncing truck that should be NON compliant media


    She can’t continue the Republican-lite policies of her husband..

    Funny, because Democrats keep telling us how things were super great when Bill was president. Which is it, Jeff?

    Jeffery tells a joke!

    Sadly, he really believes that stuff.

  6. Jeffery says:

    Democrats keep telling us how things were super great when Bill was president

    I don’t hold you responsible for every RWNJ statement, do I? And it’s also Repubicums who compliment Clinton.

    That said, things were pretty good when Clinton was president, but not all because of his doing. He cut the deficit, cut the welfare rolls, signed NAFTA and Gramm-Leach-Bliley – he was no ideologue, no progressive – he was a pragmatist. He chose not to invade Iraq. But America can not stand a continuation of conservative policies.

    Conservatives always think if the legitimate media doesn’t parrot RWNJ/FOX/Repubicum talking points that they’re being easy on a Democrat, so your protests can’t be taken seriously. You probably still think Benghazi is a scandal. Instead of just making the claim that the media are easy on Clinton, why not prove it? Is FOX (the most watched cable news station in the media) easy on Secretary Clinton?

  7. Jeffery says:

    The AP claimed that Secretary Clinton used a fake identity for the email server. Shown to be false.

    The New York Times insinuated that Hillary Clinton “may have violated federal requirements”. She didn’t.

    Washington Post suggested that the purpose behind a State Department review was to determine whether Clinton “violated policies designed to protect sensitive information.” No, that wasn’t the reason for the review.

    Politico claimed that Clinton’s email account was at odds with the 2005 policy used to “warn officials against routine use of personal email accounts for government work.” Umm, no.

    RNC Chairman Reince Priebus “habitually describes Clinton as a cold, Nixonian liberal millionaire” and Maureen Dowd agreed today in the NY Times, saying: Clinton will “take the Nixon approach” by “trying to charm people one by one in the early states for 2016, an acknowledgement that she cannot emulate the wholesale allure of Bill Clinton or Barack Obama.”

    Maureen Dowd HATES Secretary Clinton, and has for over two decades. On Clinton’s book: “a testament to caution and calculation,” an accusation she has lobbed at the former secretary state for decades. Dowd called Clinton “scarred and defensive” and asserted that she lives in an “ice palace.”

    Dowd has repeatedly accused Clinton of being an enemy to or betraying feminism (35 columns), power-hungry (51 columns) unlikeable (9 columns), or phony (34 columns). She’s also attacked the Clintons as a couple in 43 columns, many of which included Dowd’s ham-handed attempts at psychoanalysis.

    And remember these lies the so-called liberal media used to help kill many thousands in Iraq:

    Al Gore claimed to have “invented” the Internet.

    Al Gore claimed the romantic lead character in Love Story was modeled after him.

    Al Gore claimed he “was the one who started” the campaign to cleanup of the toxic contamination in Love Canal, New York.

    The media have disliked the vile Clintons for as long as the Arkansas hillbillies have been in DC. Al Gore was collateral damage, giving us 8 years of W and the dead in Iraq cry out from their graves (Bob Somerby).

  8. Al Gore wasn’t able to win his own home state.

  9. Jeffery says:

    Ruth Marcus, columnist for WaPo, directed this at Secretary Clinton: You’re rich beyond your wildest imaginings! You don’t need any more! Just. Stop. Speaking. For. Pay.

    Phillip Rucker of the WaPo complained about the “grotesque” and “obscene” amounts the Secretary earns giving speeches.

    You DO recall the so-called Whitewater scandal? It was in all the newspapers and other media all the time.

    According to Nicolle Wallace, the conservative voice on The View and Morning Joe, members of the media “hate” Hillary Clinton more than Republicans do. On The View, Wallace offered this: “The media, they hate her the most, okay? More than my party. They hate her.”

    The media hate Hillary and she hates the media right back.

  10. Jeffery says:

    Al Gore wasn’t able to win his own home state.

    And that’s related how? He won more votes overall than W.

    Did Mitt Romney win Massachusetts?

    No evidence of how the media love Secretary Clinton, though?

  11. Jeffery says:

    Al Gore wasn’t able to win his own home state.

    Is that from the deflector shields known as the conservative random comment generator?

    I’ve noticed this before. If it a race-based discussion it spits out, “Oh yeah, what about black on black crime?”

  12. gitarcarver says:

    Jeffery continues to tell funnies.

    He believes that because a few people in the media write negative things about Clinton, that somehow offsets or excuses the multitudes of media that either excuse, promote or every investigate her and her husband.

  13. Jeffery says:

    gitar continues to suck balls.

    Show your evidence that “multitudes of media … either excuse, promote or every(?) investigate her and her husband.”

    Or is this just something that all cons “know”, like the hoax of global warming.

    Why do you even bother to comment if you never want to discuss anything?

  14. JGlanton says:

    Hillary wants to be president because her life is meaningless.

  15. Jeffery says:


    Hillary wants to be president because her life is meaningless.

    You’ve obviously put a lot of thought into developing this position. Can you enlighten us further by sharing more of your knowledge of what constitutes a meaningful life?

  16. Monday morning links

    p value BS:  Still Not Significant Misunderstanding Shame and Guilt Two hedge fund managers walk into a bar Poles apart? Dancers say their performance is sporting not sexy News media’s sloppy week Price: Colleges’ new test Make the Leftis

  17. Jeffery says:

    Ron Fournier in the National Journal = and a frequent contributor on MSNBC – on Secretary Clinton:


    e’ve had sleazy and stupid—and, now, with these emails, suspicious. If she runs, are we going to have a full Seven Dwarfs?





  18. gitarcarver says:

    gitar continues to suck balls.

    Ah yes… the true Jeffery comes out.

    Without any meaningful reply, he resorts to insults.

    Why do you even bother to comment if you never want to discuss anything?

    I discuss, you insult.

    Perhaps you don’t know the difference.

Pirate's Cove