It seems that Hillary Clinton has been nominated by the Democrats (I predicted this result in April 2015). My friends on Facebook are going nuts about how this is somehow historic and will inspire American women and girls.
Can this be true? Isn’t part of Hillary’s message that you can’t get ahead in American society or in the American economy unless you are born to rich parents, are white, etc. If people believe that message, why would they be inspired by a woman who succeeded financially and politically by being married to the President? There are more than 150 million American women and girls yet only a handful of living past, current, and future Presidents of the U.S.
Readers: Do any of you who are parents of K-12 girls think that Hillary being President for 8 years will significantly affect the practical opportunities that are available to your daughters?
This presumes she would actually win which, to me at least, seems very unlikely against Trump. Also, predicted in Aug.15 by: http://blog.dilbert.com/post/139541975641/the-trump-master-persuader-index-and-reading-list
This should probably be followed by a disclaimer. I think both are a bad choice (as if there are ever any good options in politics). And, as an outsider, I don’t particularly care who runs your country.
If Hillary is the best that women can come up with to represent them, it doesn’t reflect well on women. How could anyone be happy this corrupt, greedy, horrible woman was chosen as the Democrat nominee?
Rich white blogger takes unimaginative cheap shot = insightful?
Bill: Sadly I cannot be considered “rich” in any context where Hillary Clinton is mentioned. Her hourly wage, e.g., for giving a talk to a Wall Street bank, is approximately equal to my annual income. Add in the billions of dollars that Hillary can control through the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Foundation (with essentially no restrictions on spending) and she is closer to Warren Buffett or Bill Gates than I am to her.
What’s the practical difference? I can buy a Sony A6300 camera to play with; Hillary could use her own assets and some money borrowed from her friends at Goldman to buy the Sony camera division.
Handout is shorthand for society.
You pay tax. Money are handed out to police officers to protect you from hungry criminals. Money are even sometimes handed out to hungry criminals to make them less hungry and less criminal.
Smart societies are usually democracies with a fairly high level of taxation.
I am hoping more women in US politics will result in the US getting involved in fewer wars. Europe has some outstanding women leaders, including Angela Merkel and Christine Legarde. These leaders are also great role models for girls.
Steven…Bernie….is that you?
If my girls grow up to be like Hillary I would consider myself a failed parent. Hillary to me embodies the will to power without principles, power over others for the sake of power itself.
GC, you might be disappointed with Queen Hillary –
http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2016/01/european-queens-waged-more-wars-than-kings.html
My daughter (still in the K-12 range) is completely disgusted by Hillary.
@G C – I expect Hillary will involve the US in a war if elected. I’m sure the defense contractors are already stuffing her purse with cash.
@ Al (or is it Ai?) #2:
Hillary is not the best that women can come up with, but presently she’s APPARENTLY the best that her Democratic party members can come up with as candidate for POTUS. When disparaging her qualities, or lack of some, as a politician and leadership rôle model, remember that she does not live, does not act in a vacuum, but in that bottomless pit of political sleaze that you & your fellow Americans (assuming you are one) are so enamored of, that you repeat it at every possible moment, chest-thumping and endless pledges of allegiance not optional. In short: you have the candidates for the highest office that you asked for and so deserve. Too bad all we others will have to live with the consequences of these your choices.
You must be mistaken. It’s highly unlikely that Hillary would have said that only white people with rich parents can get ahead. There’s a black man in the White House after all.
Also, it’s also highly unlikely that Goldman Sachs would lend her money to purchase a manufacturing division of a multinational corporation.
It also makes no sense to say that you’re not rich because there are some people somewhere who are richer. This is some sort of American disease. If you have 10 or 20 times as much wealth as the median American household, you’re rich. Just be pleased about your good fortune.
The idea that the Clintons are close to Warren Buffett than you are to them is also silly. Even the geometric mean between you net worth and Buffett’s has to be at least half a billion dollars. I doubt that the Clintons have that much.
Re: Phil’s comparison of his vs. Hillary Clinton’s wealth: he can buy a expensive camera to play with; Hillary with some money borrowed from her friends at Goldman could buy the very expensive camera maker’s camera division.
… which reminded me of a satirical ad of some developer who liked to brag of his humble self-made-man origins, and then fell flat in a bubble: “I began with 2 empty hands, and now I stand here with 2 million m² unsold empty space.”
In a word: no
A (female) friend looked this posting and said “Hillary’s success shows that, for a woman, marrying the right man is the key to acquiring wealth and power. It might have been historic if someone responsible for her own success like Elizabeth Warren or Oprah Winfrey had been nominated.”
OK, you’re not as rich as the Clintons, so what, you’re still extraordinarily privileged by almost any measure. And you are white.
The notion that money given controlled by the Clinton Foundation “belongs” to Hillary is nonsense. You may not like her, but the Foundation, which is dedicated to global health, gets good ratings from independent authorities, such as https://www.charitywatch.org/ratings-and-metrics/bill-hillary-chelsea-clinton-foundation/478
She’s not without flaws, but my feeling is that Hillary is one of the most maligned politicians in US history – it goes back to 1991 when she chaired the health care panel before Bill’s inauguration. She came across as smart, ambitious and threatening and have never heard the end of it.
I wonder if the folks calling out our host for being a white male would also feel comfortable calling out his Jewish privilege? If not, why not? If so, why so?
Bill Swersey,
If you’re not Sid Blumenthal you must have been separated at birth.
It’s good to see that others are beginning to realize that the narrative of Hillary being such an “accomplished woman” is a myth foisted off on the public by the left-wing media. Everything she’s ever done or gotten has been a direct result of marrying Bill Clinton and riding his coat tails. If she hadn’t married Bill we would never have heard of Hillary Rodham.
As for “accomplishments”, everything she’s touched has been a disaster and the stink of scandal follows her everywhere. The thought of her being responsible for the national security of the United States scares the bejabbers out of me.
She’s the last person I’d want as an example or role model for my daughter.