You knew it, I knew it and now...the Washington Post has been forced to admit it. It's final - the Clintons are cooked "even unto the generations".
Warning - LOTS of run-on sentences ahead. You'd almost think the author is struggling to get coherent thoughts onto the screen in between choking fits of sobbing.
quote:
The Silencing Of The Clintons Ed Rogers, Washington Post, Jan. 29, 2018
With Hillary Clinton's loss to Donald Trump, Harvey Weinstein's downfall and the rise of the #MeToo movement, the silencing of the Clintons is now underway. That doesn't mean they will quit making noise - and, of course, wherever there is a room full of vapid, hypocritical and cliche Hollywood know-nothings, aging feminists and assorted Clinton alumni, the Clintons will always get some applause - but the audience that respects them and welcomes their participation is marginal at best. Among many in the media and in the broader American political audience, the Clintons are finished. I never thought they would be seen as mostly radioactive by the Democratic Party, but here we are. Democrats in 2018 and 2020 will have to determine how the manage the "Clinton problem" rather than try to dispense Clinton magic and goodwill.
As if the current news of harassment in the workplace wasn't enough to remind everyone of Hillary Clinton's past as an enable of a serial abuser, it was perhaps the coup de grace when the story broke that in 2008, she shielded one of her campaign advisers from accusations of sexual harassment and proceeded to ship the female accuser off to a new job. The abuser stayed in her orbit, went on to abuse again and was finally fired when she couldn't protect him. This is just too much for today's Democratic Party. For all of Clinton's talk about female empowerment, she actively chose to protect predators and to quiet victims. And now, there is no place she can go where she isn't a vivid illustration of what is no longer acceptable. She is from a different era and has too much baggage for the new Democratic bandwagon.
Making matters worse for the Clinton clan, Bill Clinton embodies what is considered poisonous by today's standards and what would never again be accepted by Democrats. If he did today what he did in the 90's, he could never have stayed in office and would have been lucky to avoid a perp walk. So it was a little sad, but fitting, when a video ricocheted around Twitter of Clinton cheerfully engaging a supporter from the backseat of his Secret Service SUV only to move on when a supporter asked, "How's Monica?" You can watch it here (see original text for link - IC). Clinton was all thumbs up until the memory of his predatorial (sic - IC) past was again brought to the forefront. It is unfair for Monica Lewinsky, but the point is that Clinton's presence is a constant reminder of what is unacceptable and what cannot be tolerated. His legacy is being refreshed with today's standards. It is unlikely he will live long enough to rehab his image and build a respected spot in American politics.
For all that Bill and Hillary Clinton have done to disenfranchise themselves from the mainstream Democratic psyche, perhaps the person who will suffer most is Chelsea Clinton. I don't believe a child should be held responsible for the sins of her parents, but she has done little to distance herself from her parents' ambitions. Despite wielding significant influence online with 2.15 million followers on Twitter, she has entirely refrained from participating in the #MeToo movement. In fact, she's never even used the "MeToo" hashtag. Given her parents' track-record of sexual harassment and coverups, she just can't go there. She is prohibited from speaking on one of the Democratic Party's biggest issues. Fair or not, her parents' behavior has sidelined her and her ability to carry on the Clinton legacy.
At most, there's a future defense of Bill's legacy as a "great President" in the notion that "standards were different back then", but I'm not sure that'll fly. You see, right before Bill got elected to the White House, the foes of sexual harassment were on a rampage and the highest single damages award in American history for a 'hostile workplace' had just been handed down against a San Francisco law firm. No, the rules were just, ah...."suspended" due to a political "emergency". IOW, he got a pass then, but he ain't getting no more passes now that he's got nothing to deliver Dem interest groups.
Hillary? Who cares? She sucks as a candidate and no one really thinks of her as a leader.
Chelsea? Weeeelllll....she might be forgiven if she throws her parents under a bus. They'll understand.
Posts: 27293 | Location: Deep in the heart of the brush country, and closing on that #&*%!?! roadrunner. Really. | Registered: February 05, 2008
Originally posted by Il Cattivo: At most, there's a future defense of Bill's legacy as a "great President" in the notion that "standards were different back then", but I'm not sure that'll fly.
You make a good point about how the rules were in place by BJ’s time. At the time I pointed out to a couple of people and in a letter to the editor that an armed forces second lieutenant or squad leader who engaged in similar behavior with a subordinate would have faced cashiering or worse for his lack of immature self-control.
As for such a defense flying today, it would have to lift the very heavy cargo of overcoming the same argument’s being made about the slaves the Founding Fathers and Confederate generals owned. If we’re going to forgive something that happened in the 1990s, then why not things that happened in the 1860s and a century before that? That is, of course, not to say the left couldn’t just ignore the hypocrisy; they’ve swallowed bigger camels than that, but they might have to strain a little more this time.
Interesting article, though. I really expected the left to realize that the Clinton era was finally dead (if not buried) and for the media knives to come out much sooner. I guess that it was perceived there was still enough support for Him and Her among their viewers and readership to avoid any criticism. I will be curious to see what unfolds in the future. My prediction is that many leftist commentators will be careful to couch any criticisms of B&H in terms of, “Well, they turned out to be not very nice people, but who knew and who could have known at the time?” As ridiculous as that would be, it could be the spoonful of sugar necessary to make that bitter medicine go down.
► 6.4/93.6
“Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.” — Plato
Posts: 47410 | Location: 10,150 Feet Above Sea Level in Colorado | Registered: April 04, 2002
Originally posted by mbinky: I will not consider that American hating witch silenced until she is in the jail or under it.
Yup. The Beast needs to go back to Hell.
Not Hell Michigan please.........too close to me!
-------------------------------------—————— ————————--Ignorance is a powerful tool if applied at the right time, even, usually, surpassing knowledge(E.J.Potter, A.K.A. The Michigan Madman)
Posts: 8100 | Location: Livingston County Michigan USA | Registered: August 11, 2002
If we’re handing out pardons because the standards were different back then, then we owe some Naval aviators an apology for making such a big deal over Tailhook.
Demand not that events should happen as you wish; but wish them to happen as they do happen, and you will go on well. -Epictetus
Posts: 8217 | Location: Utah | Registered: December 18, 2008
My Dad, of blessed memory, was a Naval aviator, and when the whole tailhook thing was big news, I asked him if things were really that out of control. He thougth twice before saying something like "that was TAME compared to what I saw at tailhook parties in the 70s."
Posts: 3537 | Location: Alexandria, VA | Registered: March 07, 2011
