Rebutting Christopher Hitchens’ Latest Vilification of Hillary and Bill Clinton

Responding to Christopher Hitchens’ attack on Hillary Clinton is an unwelcome distraction this morning from preparations for Thanksgiving dinner.

I’ve managed to ignore Hitchens over the years and actually had to review his background to remind myself where such a depraved distortion of Sen. Clinton’s character and qualifications for the position of secretary of state was coming from. A quick glance at his Wiki entry was all it took.

In his post at Slate, Hitchens writes:

“In matters of foreign policy, it has been proved time and again, the Clintons are devoted to no interest other than their own. A president absolutely has to know of his chief foreign-policy executive that he or she has no other agenda than the one he has set. Who can say with a straight face that this is true of a woman whose personal ambition is without limit; whose second loyalty is to an impeached and disbarred and discredited former president; and who is ready at any moment, and on government time, to take a wheedling call from either of her bulbous brothers? This is also the unscrupulous female who until recently was willing to play the race card on President-elect Obama and (in spite of her own complete want of any foreign-policy qualifications) to ridicule him for lacking what she only knew about by way of sordid backstairs dealing. What may look like wound-healing and magnanimity to some looks like foolhardiness and masochism to me.”

Where to begin?

1. “The Clintons are devoted to no interest other than their own.”

Both Bill and Hillary Clinton are known throughout the world for their lifetime efforts on behalf of human rights.

Over the past eight years as a U.S. senator, Hillary Clinton has earned a reputation for her in-depth knowledge of the important issues facing our government, her dedication, her compassion for those in need, and for her ability to work across the aisle.

As for Bill, today the William Jefferson Clinton Foundation addresses climate change, HIV/Aids and Malaria, childhood obesity, sustainable development in Africa, and economic opportunity for all.

2. “A president absolutely has to know of his chief foreign-policy executive that he or she has no other agenda than the one he has set.”

Here again, we have a male chauvinist commentator assuming from the get-go that as secretary of state, Hillary Clinton will be assuming the role of a subservient, dutiful wife constrained from expressing her honest opinions and best judgment in fulfilling the responsibilities of her position.

3. “a woman whose personal ambition is without limit”

Why must we repeatedly remind chauvinists like Hitchens that only women continue to be criticized for being ambitious.

4. “This is also the unscrupulous female who until recently was willing to play the race card on President-elect Obama and (in spite of her own complete want of any foreign-policy qualifications) to ridicule him for lacking what she only knew about by way of sordid backstairs dealing.

Note how perniciously, Hitchens uses the word “female” to describe Sen. Clinton. Would he have pointed out the gender of a man he was attacking, as in “this is also the unscrupulous male?” I think not.

And just who was playing the race card, Mr. Hitchens? I recommend that Mr. Hitchens view the video of Obama’s national co-chair Jesse Jackson, Jr.’ s tirade against Sen. Clinton the day after she won the New Hampshire primary.

Time after time Princeton historian Sean Wilentz debunked the Obama camp’s egregious attempts to smear both Bill and Hillary Clinton as racists. In an op-ed in the Philadelphia Inquirer, Wilentz wrote:

‘“Obama's backers, including members of his official campaign staff, then played what might be called ‘the race-baiter card.’ Hillary Clinton, in crediting both Lyndon Johnson as well as the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. for the Civil Rights Act in 1964, had supposedly denigrated King, and by extension Obama. Allegedly, Bill Clinton had dismissed Obama's victory in South Carolina by comparing it to those of the Rev. Jesse Jackson in the 1980s. (In fact, their electoral totals were comparable — and in the interview at issue, Clinton complimented Obama on his performance ‘everywhere’ — a line the media usually omitted.)”’

When pinned down during the Las Vegas debate, Obama made clear – after most of the damage had been done – that along with the rest of the world, he was well aware the Clintons were not racists.

5. “What may look like wound-healing and magnanimity to some looks like foolhardiness and masochism to me.”

That could be due to your jaundiced, bigoted view of reality, Mr. Hitchens. As one who essentially hates women from the misogynous depths of your soulless being, you could not be expected to be aware of the fact that Hillary Clinton is already widely respected among the majority of world leaders.

Incidentally, it occurred to me in passing the other day to imagine the roles were reversed and President-elect Clinton were attempting to find an appropriate slot in her administration for Barack Obama. With Obama’s thin resume, we have to immediately rule out the vice-presidency; an apprenticeship in the Chicago Daley machine and experience as a community organizer just doesn’t cut it. He has no background whatsoever in health care, economics, or any other domestic policy area. And as far as foreign policy goes, he went on a road trip abroad last summer to meet world leaders for the first time.

In response to Obama’s repeated attempts to justify his dearth of experience by identifying with Abraham Lincoln, a little reminder might be appropriate: the world is a lot more complex than when Honest Abe was president.

Neophyte Obama will indeed be fortunate to have the experienced Hillary Clinton on board as secretary of state.

America’s Treatment of Women Encourages Atrocities in Other Nations: See Public Stoning of 13-year-old Somali Girl

The media is at it again – both the old and the new. A cursory glance across the online MSM and the blogosphere is all it takes for anyone who followed the primary and the general election to get the picture. From David Corn at Mother Jones to an editorial at the Chicago Tribune, the possibility of HRC at State has unleashed the good old boys’ pathological Hillary-hatred full force.

Marie Cocco’s sober assessment of women’s progress in 2008 cuts through the latest outbreak of Clinton Derangement Syndrome that has dominated news coverage the past several days. Cocco begins:

“WASHINGTON -- It is time to stop kidding ourselves. This wasn't a breakthrough year for American women in politics. It was a brutal one.”

Cocco concludes by suggesting that in its treatment of women, the American culture is not that different from the cultures found in developing nations.

I’m with Cocco: I’ve noted in previous posts that as the supposed leader of the western world, America has set a horrid example to other nations in the widespread trashing of Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin.

Cocco reminds us:

“The glass ceiling remains firmly in place -- not cracked, as Hillary Clinton insisted as she tried to claim rhetorical victory after her defeat in the Democratic nominating contest. It wasn't even scratched with the candidacy of Sarah Palin as the Republican vice presidential nominee -- unless you consider becoming an object of national ridicule to be a symbol of advancement. As divergent as these two women are ideologically and temperamentally, as different as are their resumes, they both banged their heads -- hard -- against the ceiling. Both were bruised. So was the goal of advancing women in political leadership.”

Cocco continues:

“Even if President-elect Barack Obama chooses Clinton as secretary of state, no ground will be broken. Clinton would be the third woman to hold the post. And there is no longer anything extraordinary in a president naming women to his Cabinet. Franklin D. Roosevelt did it first, when he appointed Frances Perkins as labor secretary in 1933. Since then, every president but Harry Truman and John F. Kennedy has named women to the Cabinet or to Cabinet-level posts, according to the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University. Bill Clinton holds the record: He appointed 16 women overall, and at one point about half of those serving in Clinton's Cabinet were female.”

Cocco cites some international statistics on women in politics:

“Including incumbents and newcomers, a record number of women will be serving in Congress, but still only 17 percent of its members will be female. This is where that record places us: on a par with the legislative representation women have achieved in sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean. The United Nations, which tracks women's global political advancement, says that at this rate, it will take women in the developing world 40 years to reach parity with men.

“How long will it take us? We already are well into the fourth decade since the contemporary women's movement of the 1970s spawned a generation that sought to claim an equal place in the halls of power.”

Here’s the deal: as Gloria Steinem pointed out, now that we’ve elected the first male African-American president, the first woman president will have to wait in line until after we’ve elected the first male Hispanic, the first male Asian-American, the first Jewish male, etc., etc.

Cocco continues:

‘“Those who watched the media's sexist hazing of both Clinton and Palin often rationalize this treatment as the result of these two candidates' particular personalities and the legitimacy -- or presumed illegitimacy -- of their campaigns. But Barbara Lee, whose Boston-based family foundation has conducted extensive research of gubernatorial races involving women, routinely identifies the same undercurrents in state campaigns. Voters demand more experience of a woman candidate, and judge her competence separately from whether she is sufficiently ‘likable.’ Male candidates typically must clear only the competence bar to be judged -- as Obama indelicately put it during a primary debate – ‘likable enough.’

‘“We heard that over and over again -- that no woman is ever right,’ Lee says of her focus groups. ‘They like the concept of it but when it comes to a real, live, breathing candidate, they don't.”’

Cocco notes;

“Yet American women are a majority of the population and a majority of the electorate. They earn more than half the bachelor's and master's degrees, a level of educational achievement far exceeding that of women in developing countries. There must be some reason we don't do any better than women in impoverished, rural regions of the world where cultural norms oppress women.

“Maybe it is because our culture isn't so different after all.”

One might well argue the treatment of Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin on the national political scene this year gave tacit permission to the people of Somalia to commit an unspeakable crime against an innocent 13-year-old girl who was brutally raped by three men. The child sought help from the authorities and was charged with adultery. As punishment, she was then publicly stoned to death.
I wonder how America’s Hillary-haters would feel about taking credit for that?

Obama Gets the Picture: It Takes Experience to Make Change Happen

Update: The rumor of Hillary Clinton’s possible appointment as Secretary of State is still out there; her meeting with Obama to discuss her role in his administration has been confirmed.

Politico’s Ben Smith and Carrie Budoff Brown report this morning the Obama transition looks increasingly like the former Clinton Administration:

“Thirty-one of the 47 people so far named to transition or staff posts have ties to the Clinton Administration, including all but one of the members of his 12-person Transition Advisory Board and both of his White House staff choices.

“Most of those appointees weren't West Wing heavy-hitters, but lower-profile policy hands such as former Deputy Secretary of Defense John White and former State Department official Wendy Sherman. They include former deputies to National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, Defense Secretary William Perry, and Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, and some currently work at consultancies run by those Clinton administration principals.

“Others are old Obama allies who also have Clinton ties, like Michael Froman, a transition adviser who was Obama's classmate at Harvard Law School and served as Robert Rubin's chief of staff at the Clinton Treasury Department, and Christopher Edley, who taught Obama at Harvard and also served Clinton, and who is married to a former Clinton deputy chief of staff.

‘“This is a good way to try to be helpful without giving up my new life at Berkeley,’ said Edley, who is now dean of the law school at the University of California at Berkeley, in an email.

“The highest-ranking member of the group with deep ties to both Clinton and Obama is Emanuel, a Chicagoan who is very close to Obama and his chief strategist, David Axelrod.

“Though the transition is still young, former Clintonites say they feel a change in the atmosphere.

“‘It's heartening to see that that was just primary rhetoric,’ said a former Clinton aide of Obama's criticism of Clinton's administration.”’

One might also ask if Obama’s praise of the Reagan Administration was just campaign rhetoric.

Read more.

Latest Rumor: Sen. Clinton as Secretary of State

Wow! I just posted an item about the Obama Administration’s ties to the former Clinton White House and this afternoon brings the possibility of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Wapo’s Kamen and Rucker provide this nugget:

“There's increasing chatter in political circles that the Obama camp is not overly happy with the usual suspects for Secretary of State these days and that the field may be expanding somewhat beyond Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), Gov. Bill Richardson (D-N.M.), Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) and maybe former Democratic senator Sam Nunn of Georgia.

“There's talk, indeed, that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) may now be under consideration for the post. Her office referred any questions to the Obama transition; Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor declined to comment.”

Read more.