Secretary Clinton’s Accomplishments in Africa Blunted by Junk Politics
By Ani on August 16, 2009 at 11:00 AM in Abuse, Africa, Bill Clinton, Bush/Cheney, Current Affairs, Foreign Affairs, Foreign Aid, Foreign Policy, Hillary Clinton, Misogyny, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Sexism
Judith Warner penned an excellent article in the NY Times on Friday, “Hillary Fights a Tide of Trivialization.” She speaks of the vital mission that Secretary Clinton was engaged in while touring Africa, to promote the rights of women and children and also build bonds with partners and allies. Warner points out the American media wishes only to harp on anything and everything that might diminish Clinton’s stature or her purpose:
As she circles the globe in coming years, making the case for women’s empowerment, starting with their basic right to be taken seriously, Clinton really has her work cut out for her. And it isn’t just because the situation of women around the world is so dire, and the ocean of problems confronting them — maternal mortality, sex trafficking, domestic abuse, malnourishment, lack of education, lack of adequate medical care, just for starters — is so wide and so deep. And it isn’t just that her historic mandate — to equally empower the other half of the world’s population, to chip away at the forces “devaluing women,” in the words of Melanne Verveer, the State Department’s new ambassador at large for global women’s issues — is so huge and vague and seemingly overwhelming. It’s also because the tide of trivialization that washes over all things “Hillary” is just so powerful. That tide threatens to drown out anything of substance Clinton might attempt for a population whose problems have long been obscured in the androcentric world of diplomacy. And that’s a huge pity.
Ms. Warner is correct. And shame on the media for their wish to trivialize Secretary Clinton’s work.
This is not about ego or elevating Hillary. This is about decency. The media needs to relearn professionalism, highlighting issues that are of vital interest to our nation and the world. I never cease to be both incensed and amazed that the pundit class and venal newscasters aren’t ashamed to focus on fluff and junk politics. We need to draw attention to important concerns, as Ms. Warner painfully notes below:
This was supposed to be the trip that would show exactly how Hillary Rodham Clinton would make good on her pledge, at her confirmation hearing for secretary of state, to make women’s issues “central” to U.S. foreign policy, not “adjunct or auxiliary or in any way lesser.”
There could have been no more dramatic setting: Overruling the security fears of her aides, she traveled to eastern Congo, where hundreds of thousands of women have been raped over the past decade. She visited a refugee camp and met with one woman who was gang-raped while eight months pregnant; she heard of another who’d been sexually assaulted with a rifle. She was told of babies cut from their mothers’ bodies with razors. She spoke of “evil in its basest form.” She promised $17 million to fight sexual violence.
And back home, all anyone could talk about was Bill.
Had he upstaged her with his trip to North Korea? Had he dogged her, in absentia, all the way to Kinshasa, where a university student, wondering about “Mr. Clinton’s” views, set her off, and set the world cluck-clucking, once again, about her marriage, her temperament, even her hair?
When this last paragraph is all the media can talk about, they send a huge message:
Sexism and misogyny are alive and well.
They also telegraph the fact that they could give a damn about focusing on the atrocities against women in the Congo that left Secretary Clinton so shaken. She has been fighting for the rights of women’s empowerment, education and equality here and around the world long before it was fashionable. When women have greater access to education, health care and jobs, the economy thrives, too. This is not just about a “female agenda.” This is something that affects all of us. As Ms. Warner notes:
This could be a moment for America to redeem itself as far as the world’s women are concerned. Our recent track record, after all, is pretty dim. The Bush administration sent anti-feminists to Iraq to train that country’s women in participatory democracy. We pulled our financing from the United Nations Population Fund and imposed a global gag rule barring women’s health organizations that merely talked about abortion from receiving U.S. funds. We never ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, a pretty base-level human rights treaty, because of worries by black helicopter types that American sovereignty would be compromised. Our lack of paid maternity leave made us something of a world joke. (snip)
…a peculiarly gendered form of trivializing scorn still tags our secretary of state. Just two weeks ago, The Washington Post had to remove from its Web site an ostensibly humorous video sketch by two of its prominent political journalists that juxtaposed a picture of Clinton’s face with a bottle of derogatorily named beer. This sort of thing bodes badly for the country’s ability to treat her — and the issues she most passionately champions — with appropriate respect.
In 2008, we clearly saw the media is incapable of treating this woman with appropriate respect. It is beyond shameful because by constantly shooting the messenger, we diminish the possibility of citizens getting more involved in these vital causes. Her message is blunted by a media blackout about all things substantial in favor of smear and tabloid journalism.
“We have our own work to do at home,” Verveer told me. “We trivialize the importance too often of these issues: the ‘women’s issue’ — you put it in quotes, that little category over there, the box you check. What we have to do is realize these are the issues; if we want societies to prosper and if we want our own security, we have to raise the status of women.”
Women’s empowerment won’t be delivered at the end of a gun or through economic sanctions or even overt criticism, if it cuts into accepted cultural practices. This is messy stuff; some of our most sensitive allies have horrific records on women’s rights. Programs that show success tend to be slow-moving and incremental. Can all this complexity attract — much less sustain — the attention of the public?
Maybe — if we stop viewing everything Clinton does as entertainment.
The UK Independent’s article today, Hillary Wins Hearts As She Concludes Africa Tour offers more by way of real news and real progress made as a result of Hillary’s trip. Certainly something the American media was loathe to cover. Please be sure to read the article.
As the media has clearly demonstrated its bias time and time again, it seems the fourth estate has long abdicated its responsibility for fair or substantive reporting. And we are losing out in the bargain.
(Release: November 13)
on sale for only $16.95.
has a spatula.)
8% Off at $11.95, with a rare five-star ranking by 294 customers: 
And check out these: 
("This crazy redhead is on to something. Her pink Rambler story alone is worth the price of the book," writes 
- “Richard Sale’s reportage on Washington, the CIA, the American armed forces, and foreign intrigue has created a perfect background for this account of the steady growth of President Clinton as a master of the game of nations.”--W. Patrick Lang, former head of Middle East Operations, DIA
"Anne C. Heller's stunning biography of Ayn Rand" uses a "plethora of newly unearthed research and fresh insight."
No doubt about it she is taking some hits. I still wonder about her broken elbow, and has anyone seen Chelsea lately?
In my small way, I understand the feeling HRC had when she was asked in Africa what Bill’s opinion would be. Years ago, when I was the only female in an educational administration course, all of the men were called by their first names and I was called Mrs….In one class I also was called upon to tell the class what my husband, a well-known area administrator, would think about a certain issue. I bristled and said, “I don’t know what my husband would think, but here is what I think..”
One other night, when it started to snow heavily, I was asked if I would like to leave early. I told the teacher, an area school supt., I will leave when everyone else leaves. It was a hell of a drive home (30 miles on secondary roads), but I wasn’t going to give them fodder for their prejudices.
Maybe it’s just me, but my gut reaction to her comment to that guy asking her a question in Congo was that it had nothing to do with Bill.
Congo is a place where women are raped with guns and gang raped on a daily basis. She heard all of the testimonials of the women living there and it had to have an impact.
I immediately thought that her point was to show the people in Congo that THIS is what a woman who takes charge looks like. Ask MY opinion, not anyone else.
I hope this makes sense.
More about how women are treated in Congo, and less about living in her husband’s shadow.
I totally agree.
Thinker, I agree!! I am sick to death of hearing both media women and men allude to Hillary being “jealous” of the attention Bill received in N. Korea, taking the lime light off of her on this important trip. How utterly ridiculous. These media idiots never cease to amaze!
A very interesting perspective. There were many reports that SoS Clinton was visibly shaken by the horrors that were inflicted on women there. Who knows what was going through her mind at that moment.
FWIW, I heard part of the Diane Rehm show on Friday. One of the “friday news round-up” people on that show talked about HRC’s “blow-up” about the mistranslated question, suggesting HRC consulted with Bill on a regular basis in her job. The speaker suggested HRC is still kind of learning her job and fumbling it a bit.
Diane, IMO, gently admonished the speaker and reminded him that HRC’s work on behalf of women was important. Rhem did not allow him a comeback either.
A good example of how BS overcomes real accomplishment and work when it comes to HRC.
LisaB,
I believe the media’s BS is a good example of how little women are valued in society.
We suspected we were still at the back of the bus, but since the election, women now realize that the boyz would rather keep us “under the bus.”
that women are under the bus? That’s for sure.
read what said odinga the criminal war, genocide, etc
“saying African countries could learn from Clinton’s example when she conceded defeat to Obama during the US presidential primaries.
“That is a lesson Africa needs to learn seriously,” he said. “In Africa, in many countries, elections are never won, they are only rigged. The losers never accept that they lost. If we do this, we will be able to develop democracy truly in the African continent”
The b*stard is calling her loser and remembering her her “defeat”
I plain don’t know how Hillary can stand this b.s. decade after decade. The chickenshit media males and females who curry favor with them are despicable. Junk politics is rignt. bho the fraud and his thugs in D.C. are robbing We the People blind, deaf and dumb with his corporate fascist puppet politics while Hillary still, even now, has to speak up for basic respect for herself and by extension, all women.
Shame on those amoral pigs sullying OUR WH with their continuing disprespect for our SOS. Their overt and covert misogyny is disgusting.
Amen, TX Playwright. Well said.
And thanks, Ani, for this important post. It is staggering that no matter how hard Clinton works (when was the last time you heard of HER taking a vacation), she is constantly put down, and marginalized by the very Administration she is serving.
Perhaps it is because she was focused primarily on WOMEN that there was so much crap abt her trip - as in, ‘only women’s issues.” One thing we have learned well is misogyny is most definitely alive and well, and it certainly is NOT present just in other countries.
The corporate media cannot tolerate the work and successes of a woman, any woman, unless she’s Michele Obama or NeNe Leakes or J. Sotomayer. Women of color only please.
The tables have indeed been turned and I suppose its fun for them to watch white women degraded when really NO ONE should be degraded.
Another thing: Any accolades that are justly due to Hillary will be ignored by the media since the inference is that they were wrong to elect BO. They cannot and will not ever admit wrong and so the alternative is for Hillary to be continuously demeaned, her vital work efforts played down or ignored.
Hammer. Nail. Head.
What they are doing to HRC is what they’ve been doing to women, in general, since the beginning.
Here’s how pathetic these guys are…they are given a forum (women would never be given such a forum to express the same outrage)from which to complain that not enough conservative men are in our history books. The progressives have all but written them out or left them out! Of course, these same men totally ignore that those women, who achieved greater things than a lot of the men who are in history books, have been left out altogether! What about that injustice?
Let’s face it, women are not valued in a totally run patriarchial society.
The dumb asses do not understand she represents this country overseas. When they trash her they hinder the work she does for the country. They have trashed her for so long is has become habit. Both Clintons have done more to uplift this country to other countries than anyone today. The media chose color over country and sold this country down the river. They do not know how to report the good she does or how she helps this country because they are too lazy to do their jobs.
WOMEN WITH INTELLIGENCE AND EXPERIENCE,MEN WHO SUPPORT THEM AND COUNTRY BEFORE PARTY ALWAYS
PUMAS,BUBBAS,EQUALISTS AND THOSE PEOPLE RULE
Great post.
But it’s not because they are too lazy, they just don’t want to admit that Hillary Clinton was the better person for the job. Hands down.
They don’t want to admit that they were on the wrong side of history.
…I hope this post makes it through. I tried to talk about the 48 Laws of Power last year, but my posts went into spam:
Law 36: Disdain Things you cannot have.
The more attention you pay an enemy, the stronger you make him; and a small mistake is often made worse and more visible when you try to fix it. If there is something you want but cannot have, show contempt for it.
Practical Application: If someone has more power than you and you secretly desire their position, make fun of them.
Anyone who has read this book will IMMEDIATELY recognize the fact that Davil Axelrod has read this book as well.
The link provided by ani is important. She is winning the hearts and minds of women around the world and giving them hope in the midst of horror and pain. Last year, Dr Maya Angelou posted the following on Hillary’s website:
“You may write me down in history
With your bitter, twisted lies,
You may trod me in the very dirt
But still, like dust, I’ll rise.
This is not the first time you have seen Hillary Clinton seemingly at her wits end, but she has always risen, always risen, much to the dismay of her adversaries and the delight of her friends.
Hillary Clinton will not give up on you and all she asks of you is that you do not give up on her.snip
Hillary Clinton is a woman. She has been there and done that and has still risen. She is in this race for the long haul. She intends to make a difference in our country.
She is the prayer of every woman and man who long for fair play, healthy families, good schools, and a balanced economy.
She declares she wants to see more smiles in the families, more courtesies between men and women, more honesty in the marketplace. Hillary Clinton intends to help our country to what it can become.
She means to rise.
She means to help our country rise. Don’t give up on her, ever.
In fact, if you help her to rise, you will rise with her and help her make this country a wonderful, wonderful place where every man and every woman can live freely without sanctimonious piety, without crippling fear.
Rise Hillary.
Rise. “
Yes,and having Michelle in the WH, isn’t doing much for women’s issues. Other than building good biceps, and her latest outfit, Michelle is certainly not focusing on women. Thank God for Hillary.
The MSM is afraid (correctly) that HRC’s achievements will diminish Ozero. Can’t have that.
exactly.
Condi Rice was on the news all day every day when she was SOS but Hillary only makes the news when they want to try to make her look bad.
2008-2009 shed light on the sexism that still exists in this country.
I’m not naive, but damn was I shocked.
Ani, neat read, thanks.
Regardless of the MSM rot, SOS Clinton will make progress. Quietly, but firmly progress will occur under her leadership.
Her response to the “what would Bill think” is fine with me, but it does make her point that the question itself shows how the marginalization of what women think as being a valuable contribution manifests in the words of young women of today.
i have been wondering why the press has not been reporting on hillarys travels when they cover everytime obama takes a leak. i would not be surprised to learn that obama gave orders to the press not to cover any of her accomplishments lest they outshine him. he fears folks will see who should have been our real president. actually since he spends so little time at the WH, i think he doesnt really like being there except for all the perks (which he he and his family have certainly taken advantage of.) he has outsourced most everything to people even less experienced than himself so he could run around the country and the world seeking adoration, which by the way is fast becoming harder to find as more and more people catch on to his real agenda.
One of my great pleasures is when the LA Times calls me to renew. I explain that in good conscience I can not justify the cutting down of trees for a daily Obama news sheet.
WOMEN WITH INTELLIGENCE AND EXPERIENCE,MEN WHO SUPPORT THEM AND COUNTRY BEFORE PARTY ALWAYS
PUMAS,BUBBAS,EQUALISTS AND THOSE PEOPLE RULE
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8204207.stm
This some of what Secretary Clinton is fighting against. What is the msm doing to help? When is the last time the msm did anything to help change bad laws and show any outrage over them?
Remember we have military over there. We could have an impact to getting the law removed.
WOMEN WITH INTELLIGENCE AND EXPERIENCE,MEN WHO SUPPORT THEM AND COUNTRY BEFORE PARTY ALWAYS
PUMAS,BUBBAS,EQUALISTS AND THOSE PEOPLE RULE
Thanks Ani for bringing this to NQ. I read the Warner article a couple days ago and was pleased as I believe it was directed at Tina Brown and others who annoyingly continue to trivialize Hillary’s important work.
One of the pictures that recently moved me were the lines of women in the road at Cape Verde strongly supporting Secretary of State Clinton. But if you read the news feed on the right this is the Reuters version…
So forget about the previous travel to Africa of Hillary, Chelsea or Bill, it meant nothing until they could lean on the heritage and celebrity of Barack Obama. I mean for fuck’s sake, who writes this shite and why do they get away with it?
Hillary is the most remarkable person and I will forever admire her, for her courage, her competence, her diligence and her intelligence, and to her credit she keeps on in the spirit of the women that inspire her. Obviously it’s a man’s world, and right now it is an elite black man’s world, and Hillary’s thankless work must be attributed to the man with the heritage and celebrity, apparently she’d be nothing without her man.
Meanwhile Obama is flyfishing, reading teleprompters, improving his game of golf, and Michelle and girls are floating down river on a nonstop vacation. While Obama is relishing his time away from what he has described as the White House ‘container,’ I know were Hillary president she would consider it a privilege to do the people’s work in that container without all the pomp and circumstance of glorious celebrity the Obamas’ need.
She’s leaning on his celebrity???
The beginning of that article is beyond disgusting.
We shouldn’t be surprised but personally I am always ticked off when I see this sort of coverage on Hillary Clinton. And the most vicious attackers are frequently snotty women. Tina Brown comes out and gives a left-handed explanation that HRC was tried and “hawt,” having a bad hair day and feeling fat. She felt slighted by being upstaged by Bill’s Korean mission or was jealous that he was celebrating his birthday in Las Vegas.
Talk about petty “channeling.”
We have someone with their feet on the ground in Africa, talking about issues that are counter to many of these cultures: brutal rape and mistreatment of women and children, an eyeball witness at these refugee camps, where the most vulnerable [and by and large forgotten] people have been dumped, where the history and the stories would rattle even a stone. And this isn’t a safe part of the world for any woman to go, to speak out against generations of abuse, where mind-blowing cruelty has become a way of life.
But she went anyway. And what does she get?
“She’s got a chip on her shoulder. She lost her cool. She’s unprofessional.”
“Or she’s having a bad hair day.”
Give me a frigging break!
Let’s face it. The American press is AWOL.
Ani,
I need to add my thanks for this post. We should develop some organized way to “get in their [MSM’s} faces” every day en masse every time someone finds an example of trivialization of her work for women. It makes me so sad that the feminisist movement lost so much ground.
I do what I can every day trying to find news about what she is doing so I can read it and mention it to all the idiots I know who decided O would be better than she.
I’m not sure if you missed the Odinga quotation from the UK Indepentent’s article you linked. It’s a good article, but I did almost barf when I read this from Odinga:
He said this after asserting that Kenya did not need a lecture on democracy, though she gave one anyway. He said it to give her “praise” for the gracious way she suspended her primary campaign.
I know the point he is making, and I understand Hillary’s decision not to tear the Democratic Party further apart by fighting for what she had a right to fight for. I know many of us were torn, some wishing she had fought, though the primary had been so rigged and it would have taken years sorting out all the caucus fraud in court to prove anything.
But to hear this praise from Odinga, given his family connections, did make me sick.
Now to repeat something I menioned in a comment long ago but which does have relevance in regard to recent news about Hillary, I’d like to continue this long comment with this story about my experience as a Hillary delegate during our congressional district assembly and election:
Hillary’s surrogate speaker was an ex-mayor of Denver, Wellington Webb. O’s was also an ex-mayor of Denver, Frederico Pena.
Pena got up first and did a cutsie speach with the point being that he was Hispanic and for Obama, Webb was Black and for Hillary, and so……wasn’t it nice that race was not an issue? The rest of his speach I can’t remember because my ears closed, so to speak, from nausea. I do know he tried to rally his crowd with a “Yes, we can” chant that didn’t really go well in our CD simply because we’re not the type to be pep club members.
Then Webb, who is an ex pro basketball player, very tall, very imposing, got up to speak for Hillary. Well, of course, he immediately got heckled by a woman in the back yelling out some irritating question about Hillary’s vote on sending troops to Iraq. Webb couldn’t hear what she said from the stage, so he asked everyone to be quiet. When she repeated her question, Webb said something to the effect that she was asking about the past and she would need to ask a lot of people in Congress that question, but she needed to be reminded that Hillary had a plan for going forward. He said he knew Obama gave a speech of some sort, but he also knew Obama had voted for funding and his plan kept changing. And then asked if she didn’t mind letting him hive his prepared speech for Hillary uninterrupted, as Pena’s speech was given.
Then he gave a speech that brought tears to many eyes of the women in the audience. He asked us all to look around and judge what sex was largely responsible for organizing and setting up everything necessary for the assembly. He asked us to think about our churches, our community organizations, our social service organizations, our charities, etc., and ask the same question about what sex got that important work done. And then he reminded the audience about Bill and Hillary’s, but especially Hillary’s because she didn’t have to do it as First Lady and she came back often to do it, work in Denver to help him and his wife out with some important work to help the poor and often Black community of Denver and specifically women and children. He ended by saying that this was not a time for him an AA to turn on a friend. (He had been getting some heat about that.)
It was a speech that she couldn’t give because she could only make small side comments about the many women who told her how much they wanted to see a woman elected.
I will never forget that speech by Webb. The reason I bring it up is that in the Denver paper this week, they printed a small, back section, easilty ignored article about Hillary’s nominating Webb for a U.N. position of some sorts. (The article was so small that I could not figure out what the position would entail.)
He deserved the nomination, and she IS a great friend to women, children, and men who are not sexist.
Diana,
Thank you so much for this beautiful post. I appreciate you bringing this to our attention.
Thank you, Ani — as usual, a wonderful post.
I’d also like to draw everyone’s attention to today’s New York Times article entitled “Hillary Clinton’s Folksy Diplomacy” by Jeffrey Gettleman.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/16/weekinreview/16gettleman.html?hp
It seemed too good to be true at first. I mean, a Times article actually lauding the diplomatic style and substance of Hillary Clinton?! And a positive portrait of her for the second time in one week??? I could not believe my eyes!
But alas, my pleasant surprise was short-lived. The author gradually descends into dismissal and underhanded criticism, focusing on the things surrounding Hillary — the trappings of her being our nation’s top diplomat, a former First Lady with mandated security detail, her celebrity status (NOT her fault, people of the Times, and the uncoddled treatment of the press corps (awww, poor babies…I feel so badly about this!) — and not on her work per se. To Gettleman, it seems, these incidentals trump her substantive accomplishments and goals.
At one point, he makes himself an example of his own earlier criticism, when he discussed the disproportionate treatment that her “inconsequential” retort to the Congolese student received in the context of all the other significant points of her trip. He describes a scene that “Bill would have definitely jumped” to be a part of and laments that her motorcade passed.
Guess he just couldn’t help himself, that Times reporter, huh?
I would invite and encourage all of you to do as I will: to write a letter to the editors of the NYT decrying this continued shabby treatment of Hillary, particularly in light of the excellent assessment made by Warner in her column on Friday.
Thank you, Ani — as usual, a wonderful post.
I’d also like to draw everyone’s attention to today’s New York Times article entitled “Hillary Clinton’s Folksy Diplomacy” by Jeffrey Gettleman.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/16/weekinreview/16gettleman.html?hp
It seemed too good to be true at first. I mean, a Times article actually lauding the diplomatic style and substance of Hillary Clinton?! And a positive portrait of her for the second time in one week??? I could not believe my eyes!
But alas, my pleasant surprise was short-lived. The author gradually descends into dismissal and underhanded criticism, focusing on the things surrounding Hillary — the trappings of her being our nation’s top diplomat, a former First Lady with mandated security detail, her celebrity status (NOT her fault, people of the Times, and the uncoddled treatment of the press corps (awww, poor babies…I feel so badly about this!) — and not on her work per se. To Gettleman, it seems, these incidentals trump her substantive accomplishments and goals.
At one point, he makes himself an example of his own earlier criticism, when he discussed the disproportionate treatment that her “inconsequential” retort to the Congolese student received in the context of all the other significant points of her trip. He describes a scene that “Bill would have definitely jumped” to be a part of and laments that her motorcade passed.
Guess he just couldn’t help himself, that Times reporter, huh?
I would invite and encourage all of you to do as I will: to write a letter to the editors of the NYT decrying this continued shabby treatment of Hillary, particularly in light of the excellent assessment made by Warner in her column on Friday.A
Thank you, Ani — as usual, a wonderful post.
I’d also like to draw everyone’s attention to today’s New York Times article entitled “Hillary Clinton’s Folksy Diplomacy” by Jeffrey Gettleman.
It seemed too good to be true at first. I mean, a Times article actually lauding the diplomatic style and substance of Hillary Clinton?! And a positive portrait of her for the second time in one week??? I could not believe my eyes!
But alas, my pleasant surprise was short-lived. The author gradually descends into dismissal and underhanded criticism, focusing on the things surrounding Hillary — the trappings of her being our nation’s top diplomat, a former First Lady with mandated security detail, her celebrity status (NOT her fault, people of the Times, and the uncoddled treatment of the press corps (awww, poor babies…I feel so badly about this!) — and not on her work per se. To Gettleman, it seems, these incidentals trump her substantive accomplishments and goals.
At one point, he makes himself an example of his own earlier criticism, when he discussed the disproportionate treatment that her “inconsequential” retort to the Congolese student received in the context of all the other significant points of her trip. He describes a scene that “Bill would have definitely jumped” to be a part of and laments that her motorcade passed.
Guess he just couldn’t help himself, that Times reporter, huh?
I would invite and encourage all of you to do as I will: to write a letter to the editors of the NYT decrying this continued shabby treatment of Hillary, particularly in light of the excellent assessment made by Warner in her column on Friday.A
Hey, all you Clintonistas:
Now we really know what Hillary thinks about America.
About the same as Barack Hussein Obama - which is not much.
Her throwaway line in Nigeria about 2000 in Florida didn’t do us a hell of a lot of good, but hey…
I always knew the difference between Obama and Clinton was only biological.
You missed her point, greywolf. The last three presidential elections have more in common with third world countries than democracy. In 2000, the SCOTUS appointed Bush in a hearing which never should have been granted. Bush/Cheney began the “Unitary” presidency and Obama is taking it to it’s logical conclusion: messiah/monarchical leaders who would throw out the Constitution given enough time.
graywolf
In 2000 the election was STOLEN from Gore by the Bush Clan, the supporters of Al Qaeda’s famous son Saudi Arabia’s billionaire playboy Osama bin Laden. Why do you think Bush let the Saudis get away with murder? Learn. Read. Then open your mouth. In 2008 the Nomination was stolent by Barry from Hillary. Live with it!
I don’t understand why the media wants to weaken their own excellent Secretary of State. I can understand when the media wants to bring down a bad SOS, or other representative, if they think the person is doing a terrible job, but to try and undermine a SOS from the beginning is totally irrational and unamerican.
The rest of the world envies America’s optimistic and proud image of itself. If the media cannot be proud of its SOS, then they are projecting a weakened image of the US across the world.
The rest of the world looks to America to provide guidance of good practise in many areas of business and government. The shocking treatment of Palin and Clinton by the media has undermined the US in these areas, in the eyes of international observers.
I hope the mainstream media is dying, because I would go so far as to say that they have become a security threat to the interests of the American people.
“Mistranslation” my posterior! The young sexist punk knew fully well what he meant and said. It was almost as if he had been planted there.
The real insult is adding:
“….and what would the football player Mr. Mutabo thinks through your mouth?”….
Having witnessed mothers crippled from effect of savages ripping babies out of their mother’s bellies, girls as young as 4 yrs old and grandmothers of 84….Hillary’s response was APPROPRIATE and…
A REAL TEACHING MOMENT FOR THE CONGO MALE SAVAGES.
now if Obama would learn from this and show some godam passion, real passion, as much as he did in protecting his elitist friends’ litigious prospects, if he could show that fired up passion Hillary showed in….getting the HealthCare reform passed….
McCafferty had called Hillary “Scolding Mother” when she said to Barack “Shame on you!” for misrepresenting her views on the Harry/Louise brochures to gain some votes he was losing fast…
Well, the Scolding mother is a badge she should wear with PRIDE!
LET THE TEACHING MOMENT FOR THE WORLD BEGIN!women have been victimized for far too long!