CNN bends over backwards to laud Hillary
CNN is currently running a story hailing Hillary Clinton as " woman of many firsts."
(CNN) -- Hillary Clinton is a woman of many firsts.In 1978, she became first lady of Arkansas when her husband, Bill Clinton, was elected governor. She became the nation's first lady in 1993, when Clinton became the 41st president of the United States.
Then, on November 7, 2000, she became the first sitting first lady to win elected office when she defeated Republican U.S. Rep. Rick Lazio for the open U.S. Senate seat from New York.
So let's get this straight - the fact the Hillary was First Lady of her home state, then First Lady of the United States (just like Laura Bush, Nancy Reagan, etc.) makes her a "groundbreaker" or a "revolutionary" of sorts? What is CNN smoking? Certainly her election as NY Senator is a "first," but by my count, that is one first, not "many firsts."
They go on to suggest that Hillary's political career is somehow due to her excellent education:
Clinton's legal background paved the way for her political career.
"Paved the way?" Are you kidding me? While her background is undoubtedly useful to her in her current position, it hardly "paved the way" for her. Instead, her marriage to Bill Clinton "paved the way" to her political career. Why doesn't CNN call a spade a spade?
The fact is, CNN is already starting to manufacture a great and glorious history for this woman in anticipation of a 2008 presidential run. Hillary Clinton is not a woman of "many firsts," and she didn't get to where she by using her own acumen and hard work. When will the media and the left realize that they're doing it backwards? To win, you need to pick the candidate with the best resume, not pick the candidate you think is best then manufacture a resume.
Posted by jkhat at November 17, 2004 11:26 AM
The trackback entry for this page is : http://www.inthehat.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/534
| Trackback Entries |
Comments
| # March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM Converted_Comment | |
"To win, you need to pick the candidate with the best resume, not pick the candidate you think is best then manufacture a resume." Not true. GW has a terrible resume (failed businesses, poor Nat'l Guard record). But he was picked as the best candidate, and those things have been glossed over (remanufactured) quite nicely. Regardless, Hillary isn't going to get the Dems nomination in 2008. She's far too polarizing a figure. Tom |
| # March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM Converted_Comment | |
Tom, How does Bush have a "poor Nat'l Guard record"? He was honorably discharged. He fulfilled all the obligations of his service. People had to stoop to forging documents to try to prove that Bush was guilty of any misconduct in the Guard. I think it's cute that you don't want to mention that Bush was Governor of Texas. That's kind of a big deal. Additionally, since he was running for a second term, don't you think his first term would be a big part of the resume? So, NCLB, the liberation of 50 million people, lower taxes, fast economic growth, over 3/4 of al-Qaida dead or captured. Sounds good to me. Wow, I disagree with everything you've said. I think Hillary will absolutely be the nominee. One thing she has in her favor is that she *can* run as a hawk. She voted for the War in Iraq and has never backed down from that position. Of course, Hillary, is actually pretty open & honest about her social-ist tendencies, but that won't hurt her in the primaries. |
| # March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM Converted_Comment | |
Bending over backwards? I think you mean they're bending over forwards. |