Hillary’s “They were never going to let me be president”
Well, it depends who the “they” was. It turns out that it was the American voters and the electoral system.
But this is also the woman who posited a “vast right-wing conspiracy” out to get her husband in 1998, involving Monica Lewinsky and other scandals. Of course, no one forced Bill to have sex (or sort-of-sex) with the lady in question. But yes, the parties are in a battle in which dirty tricks and traps occur on both sides. This is nothing new. What’s new is the heavier involvement of the organs of government these days (IRS and FBI, for example). And although Hillary Clinton and the Democrats might think so (or tell themselves so, or tell us so), for the most part it’s not been marshaled by the forces of the right; it’s the left that’s been playing that particular game.
Hillary’s recent statement was reported to have been uttered on Election Night, as she was in the middle of getting the shock of her life So in that sense it’s quite understandable that she might blame some shadowy and nefarious “them” rather than herself. After all, she was not just losing, she was losing to a man everyone on her side (and many on both sides) held in tremendous contempt and thought would be easy to defeat. But:
Three hours later, the Rust Belt was awash in red, and somebody had to tell Hillary Clinton.
Robby Mook, the drained and deflated campaign manager, told his boss she was going to lose. She didn’t seem all that surprised.
“I knew it. I knew this would happen to me,” she said, now within a couple of inches of Mr. Mook’s ashen face. “They were never going to let me be president.”
People in politics have tremendous egos. They are not ordinarily big on self-blame, and Hillary is hardly an exception. So this utterance—which was made in private–was almost inevitable.
But I’ve noticed something else, a phenomenon that seemed to begin with Barack Obama in terms of presidents or presidential candidates: and that is that the old Trumanesque adage “the buck stops here” is dead and buried. I see this statement of Hillary’s as part of that change.
It goes with the modern sensibility of victimization that has become so popular on the left and in America as a whole. Nothing is anyone’s fault if that person is a member of some supposedly oppressed minority: it’s a result of discrimination. Obama started the “I’m a victim” drumbeat back when he was a candidate in 2008 (I noted the development quite early on (here, for example). And the entire party was prepping the ground for the blame game prior to the 2008 election in the event that Obama might lose. I wrote about that here:
…[T]he furor and rage that has been building all these years in the Democratic Party now gives us the fascinating although creepy prospect of an excuse for a possible loss being heavily pushed before a defeat has even occurred. This time the ever-present fraud allegations are combined with the far more toxic assertion that, if it occurs, Obama’s defeat will be the result of racism.
I don’t have to give you links; articles asserting this have been published in major periodicals at the rate of several a week for quite some time now. Sometimes they cite dubious interpretations of polls. Sometimes they merely state the case as though it is a self-evident fact. Sometimes they threaten””or fearfully predict, or both””race riots if Obama is not elected. But is there any question that, were Obama to lose, the main Democratic explanation will be that the perfection of Obama was rejected by the undeserving and racist American people?
That was written close to ten years ago, in September of 2008. It’s only gotten worse since then, much worse. And Hillary is going with that flow. No more “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars / But in ourselves, that we are underlings.” (Julius Caesar, Act I, Scene III, L. 140-141). Well, it’s not “stars” that people blame these days instead of themselves; it’s prejudice and conspiracies.
Candace Owens, a young black conservative, is now being reviled by leftists both black and white for daring to suggest that black Americans should escape from the culture of victimization which is, course, heavily promoted by the Democrats for votes.
Gotta push back on your interpretation of Cassius’ line; in context, it’s not about acceptance of blame, but to stoke Brutus’ envy of being outshone by Caesar.
A great big hug & pat on the back to “they”
Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
She ever mention the federal reserve?
https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_14986.htm
The Federal Reserve System is not “owned” by anyone. Although parts of the Federal Reserve System share some characteristics with private-sector entities, the Federal Reserve was established to serve the public interest.
O really? Okay, let’s wait and see, benefit of the doubt time.
The Board reports to and is directly accountable to the Congress but, unlike many other public agencies, it is not funded by congressional appropriations. In addition, though the Congress sets the goals for monetary policy, decisions of the Board–and the Fed’s monetary policy-setting body, the Federal Open Market Committe–about how to reach those goals do not require approval by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government.
Ah, I see, this is for our public interest…. WTF WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT BOY. This is the very definition of UNACCOUNTABLE.
How is somebody “accountable” to Congress when Congress doesn’t fund them… these are not the balance of powers in Articles 1 or 3 Of the US Constitution.
Some observers mistakenly consider the Federal Reserve to be a private entity because the Reserve Banks are organized similarly to private corporations. For instance, each of the 12 Reserve Banks operates within its own particular geographic area, or District, of the United States, and each is separately incorporated and has its own board of directors. Commercial banks that are members of the Federal Reserve System hold stock in their District’s Reserve Bank. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. In fact, the Reserve Banks are required by law to transfer net earnings to the U.S. Treasury, after providing for all necessary expenses of the Reserve Banks, legally required dividend payments, and maintaining a limited balance in a surplus fund.
So who is on the current board that is not accountable to Congress again? Can we vote them off the way we vote off Presidents and Congresscritters…. guess not.
Oh, we were wrong. It’s not a private entity. After all, a private entity could not be funded by Congress. Except the federal reserve isn’t funded by Congress, it just gives a kickback to Congress of 88 ish billion per year, as part of the private profits…
This makes sense, I guess, for a bunch of American slaves.
Brian Swisher:
I agree it means something different in the play. But that’s not what the sentence actually means on the face of it, and I was using it that way, not as an analysis of the line in the play.
I don’t quite know what Hillary’s diagnosis might be.
But, her constant blaming of everyone and everything under the sun–I’m sure she’ll get to whatever caused her defeat that’s located on Mars and on the other bodies in our solar system soon enough–is turning her–has turned her–into a laughing stock, a figure of ridicule, a buffoon, a maudlin drunk, blubbering at the local bar.
It is all the fault of evil white men and their (sometimes) women. How can we sit here and ignore this blatantly obvious fact, belabored on every campus in the USA, blared into our consciousness so many times every day?
From now on, every time a Hillary quote appears, we need to do a tweaked RickRoll singing “Never Gonna LET HER up” — followed by a spoof cover of Tammy Wynette singing “Stand-by STRAW Man.” If that happened, Hillary could finally prove that THIS strawman conspiracy against her is REAL, not like all the other strawmen and invincible demons she had conjured up before.
.
rickroll: https://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQ @40sec
wynette: https://youtu.be/AM-b8P1yj9w @1min20sec
“I don’t quite know what Hillary’s diagnosis might be.”
Not sure we really want to go there (but let’s be kind and call it “disappointment”…).
One may begin to understand her “strategy” of lashing out at everyone and everything as the political/emotional equivalent (and a very potent one at that—if deployed by the “right” candidate) of fourth generation warfare:
http://www.theaugeanstables.com/2018/04/12/hamas-4th-generation-warfare-israeli-responses-and-western-own-goal-newsmedia/
The joke is, of course, that Clinton was the unbeatable, unstoppable, shoo-in, backed by all the “right” people and an all-powerful media. All she had to do was put the finishing touches on her victory speech….
(And what remains? What remains is a cranky whiner who really should have read Aesop’s fables a bit more often…)
Now she’s playing the victim of a vast conspiracy. (Well, she should know about conspiracies…)
People say they’re tired of her antics. Enough! Others say, let her talk. And talk. And talk. Until ever larger swaths of the electorate understand just how close the USA got to having such an embarrassment as its president.
her constant blaming of everyone and everything under the sun
Gosh, that sounds just like her old friend Trump’s playbook.
She was surprised, shocked, only because she never considered and accepted that she could lose. She rigged the primary system, with lots of help, to eliminate Bernie’s challenge. She couldn’t do the same with the national election and electoral college. She never campaigned as if she could lose, she never tried to win over the folks that expressed opposition to her as a candidate, or even those that were ambivalent. She KNEW she would win, especially against such a person as Trump.
She is so sorely lacking in self-awareness that she blames the voters, the systems, and, now, “they”. It is said we learn more from our failures than our successes, but that requires that we accept our role in the failure. This woman will never learn.
Hillary Clinton–Our very own, current day “Miss Havisham.”
During the campaign she couldn’t figure out why she wasn’t ahead by 50 points. So it is not difficult to hear she couldn’t figure out why she lost. Hillary reminds me of a crack about Argentines. How do you get rich? Buy an Argentine for what he’s worth, and sell him for what he thinks he’s worth. Ditto for Hillary.
Some people are noticing. Her popularity keeps declining.Hillary Clinton’s popularity has plunged since election, poll finds.
At 27 %, only about half of the Democrats have a positive view of Hillary. Does that mean that, like half of the Republicans, half of Democrats are Deplorables? 🙂
Hillary, PLEASE keep talking, and PLEASE run in 2020.
her constant blaming of everyone and everything under the sun
Ann replies:
During the campaign, Hillary was telling us what a BAD PERSON Donald Trump was: misogynist, islamophobe, homophobe, racist, Republican candidate…what have you. Now you are telling us Hillary is no worse than Donald Trump.
LOL, or 🙂
Currently it’s not just ” they ” who are responsible but I read where she is throwing in her media sycophants as culpable for her misfortune, ( didn’t she all ready blame them ???).or is she now given to repeating herself?
Trump has character flaws but in no way approaches the
unhealthy mentality of this woman
Just as a further thought , as a fellow sufferer of hypothyroidism, perhaps Hillary needs to have the level of replacement medication checked. Depression is a feature of the condition and it improves when your treatment level is optimized
“People in politics have tremendous egos.” neo
e·go·tism n. An inflated sense of one’s own importance; conceit.
The immature elect the immature.
Reportedly, very low attendance at Hillary’s appearances was common. She knew… and denial of reality is prima facie evidence of unfitness in leadership.
That half of America voted for her anyway speaks volumes about the current state of our political system.
Ymar,
I’m not a fan of the Federal Reserve and take seriously Jefferson’s warning about the inherent danger of banks;
That said, perhaps you’re giving undue importance to the non-elected aspect of the Board of Governors of the Fed.
Considering that,
In addition, “The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. In fact, the Reserve Banks are required by law to transfer net earnings to the U.S. Treasury”
So, those involved in the Federal Reserve’s operations are prohibited from directly profiting from their insider status. Of course there’s room for corruption but no system is immune from that flaw. Compared to most, ours appears to have a fair degree of integrity.
And while it can be improved, special interests do all they can to obstruct reforms, thus absent a greater degree of Congressional integrity it is what it is. It all comes back to the people and our current state of governance reflects the level of maturity of its electorate.
I would have voted for Sarah Palin. Right principles.
It doesn’t at all surprise me that Hillary has no consciousness of the existence of flyover country and blue-collar America — she’s the apotheosis of the Brain-Dead Liberal. What does surprise me is that no one in her campaign was either smart enough, or experienced enough, or close enough to her to say, “No, Hillary, you can’t go to West Virginia and tell the coal miners you’re going to put them out of work,” or, “No, Hillary, you can’t ignore the formerly industrial Midwest, with its millions out of work.”
It’s really extraordinary — was there not one old-time Democratic ward-heeler or union guy around her? Not one?
It’s really extraordinary – was there not one old-time Democratic ward-heeler or union guy around her? Not one?
From what I have read, it appears that her husband told her, but she didn’t listen to him.
Barry Meislin Says:
April 24th, 2018 at 5:53 pm
(And what remains? What remains is a cranky whiner who really should have read Aesop’s fables a bit more often…)
* * *
When I first started commenting on blogs, I chose my nom for the purpose of drawing attention to how topical were the old Fables, and cited the appropriate one in my comments; but then it seemed like every single story that came to view was an example of something Aesop had already warned us against a thousand years ago and the repetition became too boring — obviously, no one now was paying enough attention to his warnings to take corrective action; and, despite the claims that “his”* wisdom had been revered by the Greeks, probably no one ever had.
* * *
*”Although his existence remains unclear and no writings by him survive, numerous tales credited to him were gathered across the centuries and in many languages in a storytelling tradition that continues to this day. ” – Wikipedia
“Gosh that sounds…”
I suppose so. But I really wish he’d get around to blaming George W. Bush, I really do.
If only for old times sake…
(But then I guess I’m just waxing nostalgiac for grand traditions….)
And this just in.
Things are looking up for the MSM as CNN has been discovered disseminating news—important news, far more consequential than, oh say, the Nunes interview….—news that cannot, thus far at least, be verified as “fake”…
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/04/24/us/goose-golf-attack-michigan-photos-trnd/index.html
Oversight of the Board of Governors
Consistent with the Inspector General Act, the Board of Governors’ Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducts and supervises independent and objective audits, investigations, and other reviews of Board programs and operations to promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness, and to prevent and detect fraud, waste, and abuse.
They are about as effective or incorruptible as the FBI/IRS audits, and the audits of Madoff and Enron pyramid schemes.
I am sure you Americans can put your trust in these independent audit bodies, right.
While Audits are to detect embezzlement, when a foreign body controls how much your currency is issued GB, did you ever realize they don’t need to embezzle money. They have more power than Soros did over breaking the British currency markets.
So, those involved in the Federal Reserve’s operations are prohibited from directly profiting from their insider status.
That doesn’t mean anything. The decisions of the Federal Reserve are made without respect to Congress or the President. You have no leverage or power over them. They Rule you, not the other way around.
It is also why the banks are “too big to fail”. Not because of Cruz and his wife working for Gold Man Sachs, btw. But because the DS are the ones propping up and controlling the US currency itself. Congress cannot rule the nation without a stable currency. None of your elected officials determine what happens to the US fiat currency. They could print you into another Weimar Republic great depression, and you would have no say on it.
During the Great Depression, more millionaires were produced than at any other time in the USA, all added up together. You might want to think about looking into how the truly wise rich make their wealth. It’s not in the stock market or through “profit” on bank loans.
You have been given more than enough hints. Still can’t figure it out? And yet Americans think they can “win”, right.
Remember “the arc of history bends towards Justice” ?
If you believe that, AND you believe that you’re on the side of Justice, then you have to believe that you’re on the side of “History”.
You can’t possibly be wrong. Therefore, you have to believe that you’re destined to win. So, if you don’t win, then it can only be because somebody, somewhere, is cheating you out of your rightful victory.
All I can say is that the salt of her tears makes for the finest of savour.
@Richf ya but it’s more personal with Clinton. She wants power & not the *right side of history *
You could call the woman an unhealthy paranoid. Like I said her hypothyroid medication needs a bump up.
Richard Saunders:
It’s really extraordinary – was there not one old-time Democratic ward-heeler or union guy around her? Not one?
Very probably not. That’s one of the key things to understand about today’s politics, and today’s Democratic Party. The Dems are divided into separate wing and factions just like the GOP, and Hillary is very nearly the embodiment of the currently-dominant ‘elite white liberal’ wing.
They’re college-educated, many of the older ones are old hippies or the like, they tend to focus primarily on _social_ issues. Racism, feminism, genderism, gay agenda, whatever. When people say that the Democrats hate America, this is the group that they’re mostly thinking about.
They don’t like working class white America, they like unions as a source of money but tend to despise their rank-and-file membership, often even the public-sector ones. They tend to be ferociously hostile to Christianity and they are the ones going on about ‘toxic masculinity’ and the like.
So it’s hardly surprising that Hillary didn’t have much input from the people who were linked to the white working class vote. I suspect she didn’t even like thinking about them. She’s culturally alienated from them.
Bill Clinton, whatever his faults, is politically astute, and he probably had some idea of the score. But I don’t think Hillary likes listening to Bill, either.
In her heart of hearts, I think she had this in common with McCain: that she wanted to win, but to win _her way_. Her preferred road to victory was feminism, ‘vote for me so I can be the first woman President’. McCain wanted to win with ‘vote for me because I’m a war hero and can work with Democrats’, and his heart wasn’t in anything else.
Hillary tried ‘vote for me because I’m a woman’ in 2008, and the result was a loss to Obama in the primaries. She came close to catching up to him after Super Tuesday by switching over and appealing to the traditional white working class Dems, but I think she hated every minute of it.
In 2016, she went back to ‘vote for me because I’m a woman’, because that’s where her heart is. She wanted to ‘win with feminism’.
“You have no leverage or power over them. They Rule you, not the other way around” Ymar
Well it’s all relative because the elite are ruled by the Illuminati, who are in turn ruled by the space aliens… right? Oops my mistake, not space aliens, it’s the “Prince of Darkness”, right?
If you can set aside your ego, you might consider that history demonstrates that the elite “rule” at the sufferance of the majority. History is filled with examples. The ice upon which they stand is far thinner than you apparently credit.
Every major life decision in my 20s and 30s – when to get married, where to buy an apartment, whether to freeze my eggs until after the election – had revolved around a single looming question: What about Hillary Clinton?
Good to know you have a nice objective perspective there.
The long-suffering feminist heroine would make history not in a festooned lovefest but in a dreary, mechanical slog.
By late fall, the traveling press – called “the Girls on the Bus” since on any given day, of our cohort of about 20 regular reporters, as many as 18 of us were women – were calling it Hillary’s Death March to Victory.
If I had to identify a single unifying force behind Hillary Clinton’s candidacy, it was her obvious desire to get the whole thing over with.
I think this does touch on something very fundamental about Hillary. I thought it back in the 90s, and everything since has only reinforced my opinion on this: Hillary Clinton hates politics.
This is, she hates ‘retail politics’, the actual, practical process of appealing to voters for their vote, of reaching out to voters whom I suspect she holds in considerable contempt.
(I think the same of Al Gore. But not Bill. He loves it. I think Obama is indifferent to it, he doesn’t enjoy it but he doesn’t hate it.)
To Hillary, actually campaigning is, I suspect, something close to torment, or at best an endurance contest. I believe that she actively dislikes most people, esp. people she considers her social and intellectual inferiors, and probably that she’s one of those people who ‘love humanity but can’t stand humans’.
I could be wrong. I’ve never met her. But that is my firm impression after watching her in action for over 25 years.
The night of the election, when it was becoming clear that Trump was going to be the winner, I remember people starting to speculate about when Hillary would concede and why she wasn’t speaking.
My own first thought, my first instinctive reaction, was that she and her lawyers and staff were huddled looking for some way to overturn the result.
Paranoid? Maybe. But that was my first reaction, and I still rather suspect it was the truth. Hillary longs for power, I think, at a level beyond even the usual run of politicians.
Over the next few days, the story surfaced that she didn’t speak because she couldn’t, she was too angry and hysterical and tearful to face the cameras. That too sounded plausible for what we’ve heard of Hillary behind-the-scenes, but I still lean toward the first one.
I thought Hillary had passed out due to health problems due to the stress of seeing The Republican candidate they thought they could definitely beat, win.
After all, they did the same trick propping up McCain as a Maverick and Hussein won over their selection of the Republican candidate. How can a woman fail to do what a black man did.
If you can set aside your ego
If you can set aside your dogma, maybe you won’t go back into the conspiracy theory argument, GB.
When you constantly talk about how I am worried about being right or wrong, I suspect this is merely a projection to defend your own dogma and doctrines from being challenged. You can’t objectively argue them, so you can’t defend them using reason or arguments. But you can transfer the ego issue over to other people.
That’s so far below your baseline of reasonable argument that it doesn’t take an expert textual analyst to see it.
Ultimately you underestimate the Leftist alliance, the Deep State, and the Islamic Jihad because you believe you have a god on your side powerful enough to Create and thus End these threats. So you aren’t worried. If you were to ever objectively even think that you might have been wrong on the dogma, it all comes crashing down. That’s why you react using projection in talking about other people’s egos. My ego is not in danger here, no matter if I am right or wrong. Your identity is in very much of a danger if your god is not as strong as you thought.