HOW MANY TIMES IS HILLARY GONNA BE CONFUSED BY MEN?: Chris Matthews (clinton's SNL problem)-video

vanity | 2.17.07 | Mia T

[Mia T]

HOW MANY TIMES IS HILLARY GONNA BE CONFUSED BY MEN?: Chris Matthews
MISSUS CLINTON'S 'SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE' PROBLEM - PART 3

PART 2

PART 1

by Mia T, 2.17.07

This is how she explains her vote to authorize the war: "I would never have expected any president, if we knew then what we know now, to come to ask for a vote. There would not have been a vote, and I certainly would not have voted for it."

John Kerry could not have said it worse himself. ^{1, 2}

No wonder last weekend's "Saturday Night Live" gave us a "Hillary" who said, "Knowing what we know now, that you could vote against the war and still be elected president, I would never have pretended to support it." ³

Compounding this problem for Mrs. Clinton is that the theatrics of her fledgling campaign are already echoing the content: they are so overscripted and focus-group bland that they underline rather than combat the perennial criticism that she is a cautious triangulator [NOTE: A dumb one, too: A triangle requires three points. A polarized electorate has only two.] too willing to trim convictions for political gain.

Last week she conducted three online Web chats that she billed as opportunities for voters to see her "in an unfiltered way. "Surely she was kidding. Everything was filtered, from the phony living-room set to the appearance of a "campaign blogger" who wasn't blogging to the softball questions and canned responses.

Hillary Clinton's Mission Unaccomplished
By FRANK RICH
January 28, 2007

 [NOTE: missus clinton's campaign of nonsense makes plain the following:

• She thinks we're a bunch of idiots.

• She must be an idiot herself to think the nonsense would sell.]

 

BACKGROUND:

'EVIL AND BAD MEN' A LOSE-LOSE FOR HILLARY!
MISSUS CLINTON'S 'SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE' PROBLEM
PART 2

PART 1

by Mia T, 1.31.07

 

seemingly disproportionate tumult of confusion and disbelief surrounds missus clinton's "evil and bad men" remark. The press, pundits, plain folk--even missus clinton herself--can't seem to decide how to play it-- joke or misstep--not realizing that either option is very bad news for the quondam shoo-in.

 

OPTION ONE-joke:

Missus clinton managed, with one not very smart quip, to turn a serious question about the decisive issue of her candidacy, whether she is qualified to be a wartime commander in chief, into fodder for late-night TV.

Even worse, in order to play the victim card... yet again, (HEAR SUSAN ESTRICH: hillary plays 'the victim' for votes )... clinton invoked the evilness and pathological dysfunction of her notorious 'partnership,' conflating her better half with bin Laden: Will Osama sue?

Any votes missus clinton may pick up by this maneuver surely will be offset by the increasing number of those for whom the transparent tactic only reinforces their perception of clinton as a reckless opportunist who is either feckless (I could hardly breathe....) or ruthlessly complicit.(HILLARY CLINTON THREATENED JUANITA BROADDRICK 2 WEEKS AFTER BILL CLINTON RAPED HER (VIDEO))

'Joke' is the option favored by Ann Kornblut of the Washington Post and Adam Nagourney of The New York Times... and the option finally settled on by the budding comic herself. All three have concluded--wrongly--that this option salvages her commander-in-chief credibility, a construct impervious to ratiocination in any case, being a clinton machine fabrication from the getgo.

OPTION TWO-misstep:

Missus clinton is so lacking in mental agility and awareness that she cannot see five words and one premise ahead of her.

I argue in Part 1 that this is the factually true option. It is provably true by a frame-by-frame analysis of the video, and is supported by missus clinton's post-event excited utterance.

Either way, would you want this person running the War on Terror? I don't think so.

(Of course, there are numerous other reasons you wouldn't want missus clinton (and the husband) to be the people responsible for--to borrow a phrase from the wife--'decking' the terrorists.) (THE CLINTONS 'DECK' WOMEN AND OBAMA. TOO BAD THEY DIDN'T 'DECK' OSAMA.)

But it gets worse for missus clinton. Faced with this lose-lose scenario, what did 'the smartest woman in the world' do?

True to her congenitally 'middling,' greedy, undiscriminating form, she chose both options, of course.

 

 

It isn't that they can't see the solution. It is that they can't see the problem.

G. K. Chesterton

 

... While America appears not to be ready for a female president under any circumstances, the post-9/11 realities pose special problems for a female presidential candidate. Add to these the problems unique to missus clinton. The reviews make the mistake of focusing on the problems of the generic female presidential candidate running during ordinary times.

These are not ordinary times. America is waging the global War on Terror; the uncharted territory of asymmetric netherworlds is the battlefield; the enemy is brutal, subhuman; the threat of global conflagration is real.

Defeating the enemy isn't sufficient. For America to prevail, she must also defeat a retrograde, misogynous mindset. To successfully prosecute the War on Terror, it is essential that the collective patriarchal islamic culture perceives America as politically and militarily strong. Condi Rice excepted, this requirement presents an insurmountable hurdle for any female presidential candidate, and especially missus clinton, historically antimilitary--(an image, incidentally, that is only enhanced today by her clumsy, termagant parody of Thatcher), forever the pitiful victim, and, according to Dick Morris, "the biggest dove in the clinton administration."

It is ironic that had the clintons not failed utterly to fight terrorism... not failed to take bin Laden from Sudan... not failed repeatedly to decapitate a nascent, still stoppable al Qaeda... the generic female president as a construct would still be viable... missus clinton's obstacles would be limited largely to standard-issue clintonisms: corruption, abuse, malpractice, malfeasance, megalomania, rape and treason... and, in spite of Juanita Broaddrick, or perhaps because of her, Rod Lurie would be reduced to perversely hawking the "First Gentleman" instead of the "Commander-in-Chief."

Mia T, 10.02.05
HILLARY'S COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF PROBLEM
(see descriptor morphs)

COPYRIGHT MIA T 2007

 

WHY HILLARY'S IOWA MISSTEP CAN SINK HER
MISSUS CLINTON'S SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE PROBLEM

by Mia T, 1.29.07

ell, it didn't take long for missus clinton, off-leach—(sort of)—to step in it.

On reflection, it will become clear that what is being spun as a little Iowa faux pas is in fact a huge blunder with national implications and the potential to sink the clinton candidacy.

All the more surprising when one realizes that the visit to Iowa by this Thatcher pretender,¹ this wannabe-commander-in-chief, ² was more a micromanaged toe-dip than a bold foray.

Watch the blunder as it unfolds. Notice how the crowd initially laughs at her, not with her. Notice, also, her initial cluelessness.

COVERAGE... OR JUST COVER?

It is revealing that clinton sycophant, Ann Kornblut of the Washington Post, formerly of The New York Times, quickly mischaracterized the blunder thusly:

Asked by a voter what qualified her to handle leaders from countries such as Iran and North Korea, Clinton began her reply, then stopped and, for effect, repeated the question.

"What in my background equips me to deal with evil and bad men?" she said wryly, prompting peals of laughter from the audience. [emphasis mine]

Missus clinton repeated the question not wryly, but cluelessly, totally oblivious to its deeper implications.

Ms. Kornblut's revision is giving missus clinton and her house-of-cards candidacy cover. Not for the first time, either. ³ (ON REJIGGING GALLUP'S LOSING NUMBERS FOR HILLARY: THE ALTERNATE [sic] UNIVERSE OF ANNE KORNBLUT)

On a superficial level, this misstep is an early indicator that missus clinton will not survive her tin ear, her lack of mental agility, her clumsy lack of candor, her baggage... and, of course, her Q score.

With a Q score—a measure of celebrity likability among the hoi polloi—in the toilet, missus clinton can win elections only by running virtually unopposed...

And then only with the help of protheses, props, poses, PR machines, scripted appearances, screened audiences, vetted questions, Secret Service barracades, secret police, softball settings and sycophantic hosts... fictionalizing, 'humanizing,' digitizing and otherwise hiding the real hillary clinton.

And then we have the baggage....

Anyone else but a clinton would have been summarily laughed off the stage.

HILLARY CLINTON'S Q SCORE
Hollywood take note
(WHAT THE HELL IS THIS MORIBUND LOSER DOING IN THE POLITICAL ARENA ANYWAY?)
by Mia T, 01.26.07

 

I neglected in the above analysis to consider the reflexive nature of the response to absurdity. Perhaps not literally—yet—but Missus clinton was, indeed, laughed off the stage at that 'town hall' meeting in Iowa Sunday.

And therein lies the problem for missus clinton.

SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE SYNDROME

If the Saturday Night Live clip and missus clinton's "I'm in!" video taken together make plain the absurdity of a hillary clinton commander-in-chief, ⁴ the Iowa misstep reinforces it.

Watching the Saturday Night Live clip and missus clinton's "I'm in!" video in succession confirms the obvious: The pundits and pols are asking the wrong hillary! question.

The fundamental question concerning missus clinton's candidacy isn't "Can she win?"... or "Will she win?"... or even "Should she win?"

No. The fundamental question is this: "Can missus clinton be taken seriously? Is missus clinton's candidacy more than simply a bad joke? Is missus clinton's candidacy legitimate? "

By asking the other questions, legitimacy is the presumption, the unasked question, the "When did you stop beating your wife?" sort of fallacy.

But the Saturday Night Live clip and missus clinton's "I'm in!" clip taken together belie that presumption.

The reason the Saturday Night Live sequence is so devastating is because it is not the usual SNL farce based on fact.

Rather, it is fact based on farce.

And missus clinton's "I'm in!" video confirms it.

Let down the curtain: the farce is done. (Rabelais)

Somebody stick the fork in that baby, already. Please.

ADDENDUM:

This exchange on Hardball underscores the farcical condition of the hillary clinton candidacy. Pay special attention to Howard Fineman.

HILLARY "I'm in" CLINTON'S 'CONVERSATION' WITH SELF
(OKAY HILLARY. LET'S TALK.)
~with commentary from Saturday Night Live
by Mia T, 01.22.07

also: THE PUNDITS AND POLS ARE ASKING THE WRONG HILLARY! QUESTION...

Clinton Administration Veteran:
"Hillary Rodham Clinton needs to be kept very far away from the White House for the rest of her life."

My two cents' worth--and I think it is the two cents' worth of everybody who worked for the Clinton Administration health care reform effort of 1993-1994--is that Hillary Rodham Clinton needs to be kept very far away from the White House for the rest of her life. Heading up health-care reform was the only major administrative job she has ever tried to do. And she was a complete flop at it. She had neither the grasp of policy substance, the managerial skills, nor the political smarts to do the job she was then given. And she wasn't smart enough to realize that she was in over her head and had to get out of the Health Care Czar role quickly.... there is no reason to think that she would be anything but an abysmal president.

J. Bradford DeLong
professor of economics, Berkeley
clinton Administration veteran

Hillary Clinton?
Who would even know her name were it not for her attachment to a man?

Thank you, Gavin McNett, for your tribute to the incomparable Tammy Wynette. (TAMMY WYNETTE, 1942-1998)

Too many pundits, usually leftist and privileged, sneer at country music. To these critics, any music created by poor, Southern whites (at least those poor, Southern whites who didn't attend an Ivy League university) must be held in contempt, along with its correlatives: incest, racism and trailer parks.

Hillary Clinton? Who would even know her name were it not for her attachment to a man? Where would she be now if she as a child had to pick cotton from sun up to sun down?

Tammy Wynette stands alone, a legend; and she will be admired wherever people appreciate the honesty of the human experience. Human beings are vulnerable. We all should be thankful to any artist courageous enough to bare her soul on the public stage so the rest of us who are listening and know whereof she speaks might benefit.

Sean Smith
Fresno, Calif.
Salon.com

December 7, 1941+64

AN OPEN LETTER TO TIM ROBBINS, DAVID GEFFEN, CHRIS MATTHEWS, MAUREEN DOWD + JEANINE PIRRO

RE: a not-so-modest proposal concerning hillary clinton

Dear Concerned Americans,

Hillary Clinton's revisionist tome notwithstanding, 'living history' begets a certain symmetry. It is in that light that I make this not-so-modest proposal on this day, exactly 64 years after the attack on Pearl Harbor.

The context of our concern today--regardless of political affiliation--is Iraq and The War on Terror, but the larger fear is that our democracy may not survive.

We have the requisite machines, power and know-how to defeat the enemy in Iraq and elsewhere, but do we have the will?

In particular, do we have the will to identify and defeat the enemy in our midst?

Answerable to no one, heir apparent in her own mind, self-serving in the extreme, Hillary Clinton incarnates this insidious new threat to our survival.

What we decide to do about Missus Clinton will tell us much about what awaits us in these perilous new times.

COMPLETE LETTER

December 7, 1941+64
Mia T


COPYRIGHT MIA T 2005, 2007

COPYRIGHT MIA T 2007

COPYRIGHT MIA T 2007

[Mia T]

[Mia T]

missus clinton is confused by most things. ;)

[My Favorite Headache]

Tremendous work as usual. I can't wait for the 1960s to be overwith once and for all...

[Mia T]

I, my sister Dede, and another Gold Star Mother, Lynn Braddach, whose son, Travis Nall, was killed in Iraq in 2003, met with Senator Clinton in DC in September of 2005. We poured our hearts and souls out to her. We cried as we told her of our sons and our fear for the people of Iraq and the escalating body count of our brave young people. She sat there stone-faced and walked out and told Sarah Ferguson of the Village Voice, "My bottom line is that I don't want their sons to die in vain.... I don't believe it's smart to set a date for withdrawal.... I don't think it's the right time to withdraw." She may as well have slapped us in the face using Bloody George's line and using our son's sacrifice to justify her war-mongering.

On Thursday, January 18th, Senator Clinton introduced a meaningless bill to put a cap on the number of soldiers that can be in Iraq, set at January 1st levels. It is as weak and meaningless as a nonbinding resolution - and a politically safe move, since almost three fourths of the country oppose the war and oppose Bloody George. By the time she introduced her Senate bill last Thursday, over 1000 of our young people had come home in body bags and tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis had died, while she was waiting for the best political time to be semi-against the war. How many of our troops are lying in Walter Reed with devastating injuries that could have been prevented if a Senate leader like Clinton had taken a moral stance instead of political one?

This occupation of Iraq can't be won by being smarter - it was lost before we went in. The US, again, was a big loser in a capricious military expedition, with the support of Senator Clinton. She is an amazingly brilliant person, and she cannot say that she was fooled by George. We, the American public, can be brilliant too, and we can't buy that baloney.

In 2005, I was dying to support Hillary for president: finally, a bright woman with experience. However, she is a champion fence-sitter and politically heartless.

I again affirm my commitment to peace. I don't care if it is a man or a woman; Democrat or Republican; white or black; Christian, Jew or otherwise. I will only support a candidate who is courageously and uncompromisingly committed to peace.

Hillary Clinton is not that person. She never will be. History speaks louder than words.

Cindy Sheehan: Hillary for President?
(discussed here)
Tuesday, 23 January 2007, 5:10 pm
Opinion: Cindy Sheehan

 

Cindy Sheehan's erroneous belief about hillary clinton's intelligence aside--(missus clinton's 'brilliance' is belied daily by the transparency of her demagoguery)--Ms. Sheehan has in fact nailed the arrogant, self-serving, power-hungry phony... and if this country is lucky, buried her, too.


'HOW MANY TIMES IS HILLARY GONNA BE CONFUSED BY MEN?': Chris Matthews
MISSUS CLINTON'S 'SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE' PROBLEM - PART 3


DENNIS MILLER TAKES ON HILLARY CLINTON:'I'M PRETTY SURE YOU'RE NOT SMART ENOUGH TO BE MY PRESIDENT.'


STALINIST RISING?
HILLARY CLINTON ABUSE OF POWER
(WHERE IS THE UNREDACTED BARRETT REPORT ANYWAY?)


CINDY SHEEHAN: ECHO OF THE LEFT
the democrats are gonna get us killed (kerry, clinton + sandy berger's pants) series₅


DEBUNKING CINDY SHEEHAN
(HEAR ABE LINCOLN/JOHNNY CASH + PBS' NEIL CONAN)


CINDY SHEEHAN'S JUMP-THE-SHARK MOMENT?




"SONNY" CALLAHAN + BILL CLINTON'S CINDY SHEEHANS


BILL CLINTON'S CINDY SHEEHANS


THE ROOTS OF CINDY SHEEHAN


HILLARY FLUNKED D.C. BAR EXAM
"the smartest woman in the world" sought less competitive venue


HILLARY!?? WHAT IS THIS MORIBUND LOSER DOING IN THE POLITICAL ARENA, ANYWAY? (bill's bud explains)

COPYRIGHT MIA T 2007

[Mia T]

thank you, My favorite Headache. :) I can't wait for the 1960s to be overwith once and for all...

Well said.

The hillary run is looking more and more like the baby boomer's last gasp.

[Mia T]

A Global Intelligence Briefing for CEOs

The unintended consequence of baby-boomer solipsism of the clinton kind.
Namely, the rise of the islamofascist terrorist and the extinction of western civilization...
with the latter occurring even without the help of the former!



Peggy Noonan's excellent piece in yesterday's Wall Street Journal is really the story of the death of democracy. At its core it is the description of the human double helix gone terribly awry, of a denatured protein grotesquely twisted, of two mutant, tangled strands of DNA, the basest imaginable of base pairs linked permanently, as firmly as guanine to cytosine, bill inexorably to hillary and conversely, doing what they do best, and doing it relentlessly.

Killing. Killing insidiously. Killing as they pose and pander and feel our pain.

My only complaint is with Peggy Noonan's title. The Mad Boomer, doesn't begin to capture candidate clinton considered separately or even taken as the self-anointed "twofer," permanently conjoined at that cavity conspicuously empty except for ego, that place where brain and soul and guts and heart normally reside.

This is not to say that she -- that they -- are not both quite mad and of that self-indulgent, arrogantly, ignorantly solipsistic age sandwiched flatly between yesterday's innocence and tomorrow's insouciance. Rather, it is that their madness and their boomerism don't even begin to explain their noxious influence: The cloying, internally inconsistent clinton calculus. The unspoken clinton threats. They permeate the atmosphere like a coiling miasma, choking off all freedom.

Even in New York. Especially in New York. When she wrote "The New Colossus," Emma Lazarus hardly had in mind this pair of mutant, deadly, twisted aliens....

If Act I was a thinly veiled allegory about naked clintonism, then Act II is a parable about the plan for world domination by the Establishment, aged hippies in pinstripes all, with their infantile, solipsistic world view amazingly untouched by time.

Alien Abductions, Flying Saucers + Other Weird Phenomena, c.1992-2000
Mia T, June 9, 1999

[Mia T]

bump!

[petercooper]

bttt