Tuesday, January 28, 2020

Hillary's Revenge

The text comes from the Washington Examiner via Hot Air via Maggie’s Farm.

The question must be contributing to today’s national political divisions. Why has Hillary Clinton, designated loser in the last presidential election, refused to go away? Why has she refused to accept defeat graciously and gracefully?

In the annals of soreloserdom, Hillary Clinton will have a chapter all her own.

The Examiner opens by noting that losing presidential candidates have always had the grace and the dignity to retire from the fray.

John McCain returned to the Senate after his loss in 2008 to Barack Obama. John Kerry similarly went back to work in the Senate after the 2004 election and later joined Obama’s administration. Al Gore still complains about losing in 2000 to George W. Bush, but he also found a new calling and made his mark as a (self-appointed) spokesman for the planet. Bob Dole left politics altogether after his defeat in 1996 and went on to star in commercials for Pepsi and Viagra. George H. W. Bush split his time after 1992 between charitable work and his vacation home in Kennebunkport, Maine. Walter Mondale returned to his law firm. Jimmy Carter has Habitat for Humanity.

They do it because they love their country more than they love their own ambition. And that they understand that the country does not owe them a victory in a contested election.

The Examiner suggests that Hillary is settling a score. That means, she is exacting revenge, blaming the country, blaming the American people, showing how unworthy are of her. The fault does not lie in her pathetic campaign or in the fact that she is an incompetent fraud. The fault lies with America. And America must be punished:

Each accepted failure and moved on with life — some more begrudgingly than others.

But Clinton has a score to settle with the world.

The former secretary of state’s many public appearances over the past three years have served the sole purpose of allowing her to name and blame persons, places, and things she believes caused her to lose in 2016. Many of them, she says, robbed her of her rightful spot behind the Resolute Desk. Clinton lives now to mourn her failed candidacy and to lash out at anyone she deems to have been insufficiently loyal.

Failing to accept defeat gracefully counts as moral dereliction. It is a sign that the individual in question has no character, no dignity, no self-respect, no decency. When you allow your rage to undermine your judgement and to tarnish whatever is left of your good name… you are morally degenerate.

It fits the woman who announced before a Senate committee that the Benghazi attack, attack that took place on her watch, at a time when she bore direct responsibility for the security of her ambassador, had nothing to do with her. By saying that: “What difference at this point does it make” she was showing her true depravity… and was blaming everyone but herself.

Strangely enough, today’s Democratic Party is marching in lockstep with Hillary Clinton. Since she has failed to acknowledge the Trump victory, the Democratic Party has refused to acknowledge Trump’s legitimacy.

Is the impeachment trial Hillary’s revenge? Would it have been different if the Democratic candidate for the presidency in 2016 had had some sense of decency?


Sam L. said...

Hillary: Can't let go of her rejection. Can't (it seems) or has no interest (more likely) in getting back with Bill. Has nothing to do except let her stomach acid work its way with her. Has no friends (does anyone like her?) Not a housekeeper. Been stewing in her own juices since Trump's election. Life's a Bummer, but she's not dead yet.

David Foster said...

It is all explained, in comment #5 here: