I’ve been kicking this around for a few days now and I can’t think of much to say. It’s not anything new. I’m willing to give Hillary Clinton something of a pass on defending Bill against his various accusers as many of them had, ahem, credibility problems (with the exception of Juanita Broaddrick), but Hillary also defended total sleazeball Bob Packwood from accusations of much, much worse shit back in the day, which turned out to all be true. Given that Clinton’s deepest ideal is generally agreed to be women’s rights, is it really unfair to ask that the number of times she ignores women credibly alleging sexual misconduct against a powerful man be zero? What does it say about her that it’s (at least, depending on how charitable you are) two?

Admittedly, she is expressing regret that she hadn’t just fired the guy, if you hadn’t gotten enough of her regret over various things from 2016. I can’t help but get the feeling that this is a person who doesn’t know herself, what she’s capable of, where her own vulnerabilities lie. Obviously we all make mistakes and it’s hard living by principles (much easier to just be a modern Republican!), but I have never really understood how somebody who constantly acted so impulsively and made so many bad choices was considered a sober, responsible grown-up.

Share
Lev filed this under: ,  
  1. Metavirus says:

    yes x 1 million to the last sentence.  it’s hard to imagine a dem with bigger blind spots than hillary.  maybe anthony weiner?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *