The Shocking Truth About Hillary Clinton

HitleryI came across this incredible article about Hillary Clinton: #HillaryCoverageIsCrap.

It is >>shocking<< because it’s not only true, but glaringly obvious. And yet nobody  talks about it.

Media coverage of Hillary Clinton — Hillary the candidate, even Hillary the person — is so blatantly vicious, so casually demeaning, so gleefully mean-spirited, it’s … disgusting. Horrifying. SICK.

I’d like to select out a pithy quote from it, but the whole damned article is so good, so obviously true, it’s hard to decide on the best excerpt. So here’s a big chunk of it, with some of my own bolding to emphasize more shocking parts:

Somehow, enragingly, it is acceptable for panelists of talking heads to discuss her voice, her laugh, whether she smiles enough. To admonish her for “shouting.” To talk about her hair, her clothes, her accessories. To sneer at her jokes and disdainfully disqualify any personal tidbit she shares as “pandering” and “cynical” and a desperate, pathetic attempt to connect to voters.

To openly laugh at anything she does that reveals her humanity.

This is not news coverage. This is harassment. This is rank dehumanization. This is abuse.

How have we gotten to a point where we tolerate this deeply sexist, deeply personal sustained attack on one of the most admired women in the world?

How have we allowed ourselves to become so inured to a public, ritualistic humiliation of one of our nation’s most admired public servants?

Why do we expect that this overpoweringly unhealthy dynamic should be the cost of her public service, when no man in her position – including her disgusting opponent – is subjected to anything like this level of harassment and dehumanization?

Could any other human being survive this level of aggressive, ceaseless auditing, judgment, scrutiny, and personal criticism?

Why are the media doing this to her? And why are we allowing it to happen?

Hillary is the only person in public service at this level for whom unbridled contempt is not merely acceptable, but encouraged.

There is an elite Beltway media club, dominated by conservative-leaning white men, and every reporter on the political beat wants to belong to the club – a club whose gatekeepers have set as a requirement for entry the willingness to abandon all pretense of objectivity toward Hillary.

More:

The theme that runs throughout her career in public service that she is dishonest, corrupt, compromised is accompanied by a parallel theme of exoneration. She is investigated; she is found to have done nothing wrong. She is accused; the accusations are found to be without merit. She is battered by insinuations that are, upon objective scrutiny, found to be unjustifiable.

But they are endlessly repeated nonetheless, in order to create enough smoke that some voters reflexively assume there must be a fire.

But there is no fire. There is only a smoke machine.

And still more:

I refuse to abide in silence this toxic dynamic of a culture that treats as normal the ritualistic shaming and abuse of the woman who could be our first woman president.

A-fuckin’-men.

 

  • yazikus

    Yeah, I liked that piece too. Even NPR is guilty of it. And it is crap.

    • Raging Bee

      NPR has been the mother of all disappointments lately. Maybe they’re so afraid of being defunded that they feel they have to start acting like Fox Lite.

      • yazikus

        The other morning they were talking about how ‘Trump has shamed Obama into going to LA’ when in reality the Gov. had asked that Obama wait so they wouldn’t have to strain their already strained resources taking care of high profile visitors. Shameless.

        • Raging Bee

          Wow, I missed that bit. I did catch the bit where suddenly Florida is a “must win state” for both candidates — like everyone else was dead wrong about the unusual number of states that were no longer safely red?

          NPR is starting to suck in earnest.

    • Shadowbelle

      I’ve supported NPR for over forty years and I’m pissed about their treatment of Hillary.

  • valleycat1

    Odd how this is a post-sexist, post-racist world and loving Christian society we supposedly live in, yet she is the lightning rod for all the c.r.a.p. many women face every.single.day.of.our.lives, just as President Obama has been for black people these past 8 years. Have you seen the Atlantic article about getting ready for the bitch years once she is elected? http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/08/the-era-of-the-bitch-is-coming/496154/ Fortunately, as the article points out, she is tough enough to deal with this, since she has been subjected to it in the most public ways for at least half her life.

  • Otto T. Goat

    Delusional.

    • TheBookOfDavid

      A remarkably introspective comment, despite its brevity. Keep it up.

    • Joe

      You decided to turn the mirror upon yourself finally.

  • Raging Bee

    Hillary is the only person in public service at this level for whom unbridled contempt is not merely acceptable, but encouraged.

    Must be that “woman card” Trump was talking about.

  • yazikus

    Since I’m already bagging on NPR, before the DNC speech they were going on about how ‘This was an opportunity for her to really be likable. I mean, we don’t need another five point policy plan, this is her opportunity to relate!’ and I’m thinking, no, I don’t really care if a candidate is likable (though I think Clinton is), I’d rather have the five point plan, thanks very much.

    • Raging Bee

      And how the fuck is she supposed to “be likeable” on TV? Make a speech that’s all friendly small-talk? She’d have been slammed for “lack of substance” or worse. They really are setting impossible standards, and they know it.

    • Tobias 27772

      Yaz,

      I agree with you on the like-ability bullshit. I cannot escape hearing that people voted for W because he seemed like the kind of guy that they would like to have a beer with.

      I am NEVER going to get to drink a beer with the President (unless I am a racist cop), but I am going to get to follow the vision & the initiatives of one.

      OTOH, questioning a candidate’s like-ability is not sexist. All candidates have to deal with this because that is how many people make their choice on whom to vote for (or hire, or give a raise or promotion, etc.). The sexism comes when so many of us differentiate between the “likable” qualities of a man versus those of a woman.

  • Raging Bee

    I remember a cartoon many years ago that showed Hillary maintaining a stone face while hearing words like COLD, CALCULATING, ROCK-HARD, LACK OF EMPATHY, etc. Then she sighs, and the response is EMOTIONAL FEMALE!

  • Joe

    I haven’t read such a strong defense of Hillary before, and I have to say I agree. As a non-American following this race from overseas, I haven’t seen this kind of treatment of a candidate before. I can only presume it’s greatly motivated by sexism and fear of a powerful woman. The only comparable attacks of this type I am aware of (admittedly I haven’t always followed US politics) was against Obama.

    Now, this can be explained perhaps by the modern age of social media and the internet exposing us to more dissenting voices, but I don’t buy that. It really seems that covert (and sometimes overt) racism and sexism are to blame here. At least in part.

    The worst part about this treatment of a presidential candidate is that it clouds the line between truth and reality, so false claims get equal billing with true criticisms. Thus making the entire political process all the poorer.

    • Raging Bee

      I haven’t read such a strong defense of Hillary before…

      Neither have I, and I habitually read center-to-left news and commentary sites. That in itself says a lot.

  • StevoR

    Ramen! Well writ and spot on. Thanks Hank Fox & Raging Bee.