By Kevin D. Williamson
Friday, August 26, 2016
Hillary Rodham Clinton has a weakness for questionable,
ethnically vague proverbs — “It takes a village,” from an “African” proverb,
and all that piffle—and she broke out a shopworn specimen in denouncing Donald
Trump, on this occasion an “old Mexican proverb” that seems to exist largely in
Democratic attack rhetoric: “Tell me with whom you walk, and I’ll tell you who
you are,” the idea being that Trump likes to play footsy with peckerwood-trash
racists and the white-power basement-dwellers whose homepage is Breitbart.
Mrs. Clinton is correct about that, for what it’s worth
(I warned you knuckleheads about this back in November of 2015), and undoing
the damage that Trump has done to the Republican party and the conservative movement
will take years. I once had a guy put a knife most of the way through my left
hand, and I’d much rather have that happen again than sit through a Hillary
Rodham Clinton speech, but you have to hand it to Herself on this one: Faced
with a sad, pathetic, gormless little political wavelet animated mainly by the
aesthetics of social-media trolling, Mrs. Clinton responded with her own
masterly exercise in concern trolling.
That’s a Democratic tradition, of course. Ronald Reagan
was Satan Himself from 1979–1999; after 2000, the line was: “Who is this madman
George W. Bush, and whatever happened to good ol’ Republicans like the Gipper?”
George H. W. Bush was, depending on what day you asked the Democrats, either a
wimp or a bloodthirsty war criminal who had mercilessly strafed defenseless
Japanese soldiers while fighting in the Pacific, and then became an insulated
patrician who did not care about the common man. Now, Mrs. Clinton, who libeled
the man endlessly during his active years, holds George H. W. Bush up as the
epitome of the good Republican. Presumably, Dwight D. Eisenhower was compared
unfavorably with Teddy Roosevelt or Chet Arthur. Abraham Lincoln alone was
spared this, being the first Republican president — nobody pretended to miss
the Whigs until modern libertarians developed a soft spot for them.
Still, to have a Clinton — a Clinton, for the love of all that is holy! — run a
guilt-by-association campaign is something that must rankle a mentally and
morally mature human being of any political affiliation. It isn’t that guilt by
association is always an erroneous line of attack: Adults, especially those in
the neighborhood of 70 years of age, are responsible for their associations.
Guilt by association is a perfectly reasonable line of argument in many
situations.
But from a Clinton?
Where does one even begin with Clinton associates?
Considering the report that former Breitbart
boss and current Trump campaign CEO Steve Bannon was accused (during divorce
proceedings) of having roughed up his wife, the reliably merciless Josh Barro
wrote that Trump has a habit of surrounding himself with men who mistreat
women. Fair enough, but . . . remind me again to whom it is that Mrs. Clinton
is married. Yes, yes, tu quoque and
all that, but, for pity’s sake, there are few people in American public life
who have mistreated women more mercilessly — and more consequentially — than
Bill and Hillary Clinton. Inevitably, we can expect Herself to undertake
sorties on that same line of attack, and we’ll be expected to forget the smear
campaigns she organized against women such as Paula Jones and Monica Lewinsky
who were — let’s remember this part — telling
the truth about Bill Clinton’s misdeeds.
Mrs. Clinton’s right hand, Huma Abedin, walks with some
interesting characters, not the least of them her husband, former congressman
Carlos Danger (D., Emperor’s Club VIP). She also served as associate editor of
a radical Islamist journal that veered from mocking Mrs. Clinton’s own brand of
for-profit corporate feminism to casual anti-Semitism. (Sneaky Jews, etc.) The
journal also claimed that the United States was responsible for the terrorist
attacks of September 11, 2001. Abedin’s mother was and is the editor of the
periodical.
A Clinton campaign spokesman said Mrs. Danger was only a
“figurehead” at the Islamist journal. Maybe, but a great many of those
neo-Nazis wearing “Make America Great Again” caps think of Trump as a mere
figurehead, too, a convenient totem for their daft little movement. But even if
it is true, Huma Abedin’s “figurehead” status is horrifying in its own way: If
Abedin is being used to confer prestige on a radical Islamist journal, it is
not because she is married to feckless fapper Anthony Weiner, but because she
is the most important aide to the woman who in all likelihood will be the next
president of these United States.
Show me with whom you walk . . .
Mrs. Clinton walks with some other pretty dodgy
characters, longtime supporter and donor Donald Trump prominent among them.
(It’s a weird year.) She sits with them, too, including all those Clinton
Foundation donors and Clinton campaign supporters who got red-carpet treatment
at Mrs. Clinton’s State Department, from the princes of petro-emirates to
deep-pocketed entertainment moguls to sundry Democratic grandees. No doubt Los
Angeles entertainment executive Casey Wasserman had some very important
national-security angle he was working when he sought Secretary Clinton’s
intervention on behalf of a professional footballer having trouble getting a
visa — he wanted to visit Las Vegas! — because of his criminal record.
Show me with whom you play ball . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment