Peter Daou collected many examples from mainstream news outlets and makes this observation:
What is unique in Clinton’s case is that personal attacks which would normally be the province of political opponents and critics are promulgated by the mainstream news media.
Daou got some misguided pushback in the WaPo {"
The 13 words you can’t write about Hillary Clinton anymore") and I noticed this absurd headline from the Christian Science Monitor:
Did Hillary Clinton destroy evidence in 'wiping clean' her email server?
Friday was the deadline for Hillary Clinton to respond to a congressional subpoena for emails and documents related to the terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya. She provided nothing since her email server had been wiped clean.
Christian Science Monitor
By Brad Knickerbocker March 28, 2015 4:43 PM
Christian Science Monitor
As I have noted
before, even the GOP-controlled House has come to the conclusion that there is nothing to the Benghazi "scandal," so the Monitor's headline is more appropriate for World Nut Daily.
Posts
3 comments:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2015_03/governors_as_minipresidents054852.php#disqus_thread
Avatar
square1inny • 3 hours ago
Kilgore's love for Hillary is, frankly, embarrassing.
Since governors are obviously associated with domestic policies, it is not unexpected that a governor running for President would feel the need to point out areas of his job that touched on foreign policy. How Kilgore gets from there to accusing O'Malley of claiming to be able to "smoothly move into the Oval Office as [sic] assume the responsibilities of Commander-in-Chief without some culture shock" is beyond me. Where did O'Malley say that?
But I wouldn't really have a problem with Kilgore's post if his point was simply to point out anybody who moves into the Oval Office will experience some culture shock. But to single out Hillary as the one person who will not experience this is a joke.
Do I need to remind people that on the single most important foreign policy decision of the past 25-40 years -- the decision to invade Iraq -- Hillary got it completely wrong? And not only did she get it wrong, but she failed to evaluate all the evidence in order to make the most informed analysis possible.
Was Hillary Secretary of State for 4 years? Yes, but let's not make it out like those were 4 of the most impressive years in U.S. history. As for whatever credit Kilgore is giving Hillary for being First Lady...talk about about a child in a car seat pretending to drive.
• Reply•Share ›
Hilary did get Iraq completely wrong and if we use that as our main test, almost all GOP candidates are ruled out.
have voted third party since 1972.
haven't been proved wrong once.
she got Libya wrong too.
she's a free trader.
she's not even in the running for consideration.
she dissed Edward Snowden.
what more do you need?
Post a Comment