« The Lynx Is Out Of The Bag | Main | So I Attended The Press Conference »

It's Not Like This Is Anything New

OK, so Hillary dissed the military when she lied about being shot at. I'm sure that it was just a slip of the tongue--surely she didn't mean to.

Well, actually, since she's running for president, I am sure that she didn't mean to. But it's indicative of her cluelessness about the armed forces over which she viciously ambits to become Commander-In-Chief. When he came into office, her husband was similarly clueless. It took him a long time to learn to salute properly, and he never really got it down (though it should be noted that there is no requirement that the President salute to the troops--that was a tradition started by Ronald Reagan, and one that both Clintons no doubt wish that he hadn't). But this goes beyond simply basic lack of understanding of how the military works. Underlying it is a contempt for the military, and authority itself, other than their own.

Consider this passage from Unlimited Access:

Another close source, this one in the Secret Service, told me that she had ordered her Secret Service protective detail to "stay the f--k away from me!" and to keep at least ten yards of distance between her and them at all times.

The Secret Service agent told me that it was much harder to protect her from a distance of ten yards, and she was told this, but she didn't seem to care what the Secret Service said. He also told me that she had a clear dislike for the agents, bordering on hatred, in his opinion.

Along those same lines, another source told me that two Secret Service agents heard Hillary's daughter, Chelsea, refer to them as "personal trained pigs" to some of her friends. When the friends were gone, the senior agent tried to scold Chelsea for such disrespect. He told her that he was willing to put his life on the line to save hers, and he believed that her father, the president, would be shocked if he heard what she had just said to her friends. Her response?

"I don't think so. That's what my parents call you."

As is noted there, if true (and frankly, I certainly have no reason whatsoever to disbelieve it in light of their general history*), it makes sense, because Bill and Hillary were sixties campus radicals, and did indeed come from a culture that considered law enforcement officials "pigs."

And we know, going all the way back to the first Clinton campaign that, no matter how he chose to spin it at the time or now, his letters about his draft deferment indicate that he did indeed "loathe" the military. There's no reason to think that Hillary felt differently, then or now. And when you loathe something, you're unlikely to invest much time in learning about it, or becoming familiar with it. The military culture is completely alien to this woman, and this incident is just one more bit of evidence for that.

And beyond that, even for someone unfamiliar with the military, it would seem obvious that when you tell a tale of running under fire on an air base where the people are dedicated to providing for your safety, that doesn't reflect well on their performance. Obvious to anyone but Hillary Clinton. And she probably thought that showing her bravery under fire would be politically advantageous someone who probably knows nothing about the military other than action movies (many of which depict American troops as depraved) by her Hollywood pals.

But insulting the troops? Telling blatant and repeated lies? What does it matter, as long as she gets back into the White House? The hilarious thing is that it has blown back so badly on her.

The most brilliant woman in the world.

Right.

*Yes, before the trolls drop by and tell me that Aldridge's book has been thoroughly discredited because of the story about Bill Clinton being sneaked out for trysts through a White House tunnel, I give that argument about as much weight as that OJ was innocent because Mark Furhman made some racist remarks--you don't throw out an entire body of evidence because some of it has proven to be suspect.

And, of course, for those who are going to argue that I'm being unfair in ignoring Pastor Wright's good works in condemning his lunatic remarks, I'll just say that the two situations are not in any useful way equivalent, and if you're too dim to understand why, I'm not going to waste time attempting to explain it to you.

Permalink | Comments (14) | TrackBacks (0)
Technorati Links | Digg It

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: It's Not Like This Is Anything New.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.transterrestrial.com/admin/mt-tb.cgi/9286

14 Comments

Leland wrote:

For all the folks who like the term "chicken hawk": What do you call a person hawking her foreign policy credentials based on a false story on being under fire?

For all the anti-gun folks worried about protecting the children: What do you think of a woman, who takes her child into a war zone where she believes she is taking sniper fire?

March 26, 2008 12:23 PM

Karl Hallowell wrote:

"Rathering" maybe for the first question. "Stupid" for the second though I can't imagine most politicians deliberately exposing their children to sniper fire. Maybe the kind in history that has too many kids and most of them angle to take out Mom or Dad so they can upsurp whatever there is to upsurp.

March 26, 2008 1:24 PM

Ashley wrote:

I'm pretty liberal, but I think Rand has hit the nail on the head, here. If I were in the president's shoes, I certainly wouldn't want to be returning any salutes. I disapprove of the military's actions and culture, so why would I want to participate in their traditions?

It's also true that if you loathe something, you'll have no interest in it. For instance, I hate sports, so if someone came to me looking to create a presidential commission on steroids or asking for money to build stadiums, I'd just tell 'em to get lost. I likewise disapprove of most of what the police do, so someone wanting attention for a crime-reduction plan would likely get short shrift from me.

As for the secret service: I don't like security forces, and I wouldn't like them any better just because they're trying to protect me. In Rand's example, they seemed to want respect in exchange for their loyalty, but I doubt that Chelsea ever asked for their loyalty, so why should she have to pay for it?

Some liberals who actually fought, like John Kerry, might have some respect for the military, but for a lot of us, when we say things like "Support the troops - Bring them home", we're not really interested in supporting the troops. We might want to save billions of dollars, improve our reputation abroad, or prevent loads of casualties, but it's not out of respect for the troops. A liberal saying "Support the troops" is like an atheist quoting scripture - they don't believe it, they just want to get believers to behave a certain way.

March 26, 2008 2:27 PM

Larry J wrote:

I disapprove of the military's actions and culture, so why would I want to participate in their traditions?

The salute is a sign of mutual respect - a concept you apparently don't understand.

A liberal saying "Support the troops" is like an atheist quoting scripture - they don't believe it, they just want to get believers to behave a certain way.

And the troops know it and many of them loath you, too. Yet they still are willing to risk their lives to protect your freedoms. Imagine that. They know the converse isn't true. Liberals aren't willing to risk anything to protect the troops' rights.

"A man who won't die for something is not fit to live."
Martin Luther King, Jr.

March 26, 2008 3:25 PM

Steve is ex-military wrote:

I disapprove of the military's actions and culture, so why would I want to participate in their traditions?

Ashley,
do you realize that with the exception of military dictatorships, ALL military forces ACT only on orders from civilians in their governments? Do you really think that our military has the ability and free will to just go fight whomever or wherever they want? You can't seriously believe that's how it works.

I'm not sure what you mean by "culture", unless you mean all that icky murdering and raping and baby killing. But again, you can't seriously believe that's how it works.

Given that you think Kerry has any respect for ANYTHING to do with the military, maybe you do seriously believe that the military runs itself and kills and rapes whomever it wants. It is nice to hear an honest liberal though, you come right out and say that you don't care about the troops. The truth is refreshing.

I do have a question or two though. Why so much animosity toward the military? Some family member murdered or pillaged by the military? And if everyone thought like you and we had no military, just how long do you think we'd keep our freedom to come into a site like this and openly express our views?

I've been reading your comments here for a few weeks and I've come to a conclusion. You're either really young, or you're really stupid. I hope age is the issue.

March 26, 2008 6:22 PM

Jeff Medcalf wrote:

Until the "reading your comments here for a few weeks" remark, I figured "she" was just a conservative having fun trolling with liberal caricatures. I guess that could still be the case, presuming the troll had more than the usual amount of free time.

But I guess if Ashley is serious, the question I would have to ask is, how then can you get angry with conservative presidents who pay no attention to whatever social cause you are angry about today? I mean, if it's OK for liberal presidents to ignore whatever liberals see as conservative, then why should conservative presidents not be able to ignore whatever conservatives see as liberal? The only possible answer is that they should, or that you believe that only your point of view is legitimate. Neither answer casts you in a good light morally, frankly.

March 26, 2008 7:21 PM

Brian Dunbar wrote:

It took him a long time to learn to salute properly, and he never really got it down

I've saluted Naval officers who never mastered a proper hand salute.

Just sayin'.

I was enlisted when Clinton was elected President - many reminders were sent around about reminding us that Clinton was our Commander in Chief, taking trash about him was not going to be tolerated and so forth.\

The impression we had was that he didn't like us much - so the contempt was returned in full measure.

But .. we saluted and carried out orders; that's what the military does in this country.

March 26, 2008 9:53 PM

Steve wrote:

Brian,
it could have been worse. You shoulda' been a squid, under Jimmy Carter like I was. Now THAT was intense.

He was ex-Navy and still teated us like bastard, red-headed step-children.

March 27, 2008 5:16 AM

Steve wrote:

uh...um...make that tReated us like...unless you thought I meant teated as in, "...we got the hind teat". Which would still have been true.

March 27, 2008 5:53 AM

Mark in AZ wrote:

Bill Clinton's hatred for the military was legendary, and recipricated in kind. I have several ex-military friends who extended thier time for no other reason that they didn't want "that signature" on their retirement or discharge papers.

March 27, 2008 11:16 AM

Mac wrote:

This misspeak is costing her too. Her poll numbers took a bigger dip than Obama's did over Wright. Gee, watching these two trip over themselves is like watching President Ford in the old days, just wondering when he'd trip again.

March 27, 2008 2:29 PM

Mac wrote:

Except his were physical gaffs and did nothing to make us think he was un-wothy of the title, President of the United States of America.

Neither Clinton nor Obama is worthy of the titles they now have, much less the next level up.

March 27, 2008 6:32 PM

Mac wrote:

...Neither Clinton nor Obama is worthy of the titles they now have, much less the next level up.

True, but you're still waiting for the next trip up, aren't you?

March 28, 2008 10:12 AM

Ashley wrote:

Sorry I didn't respond earlier, but I haven't had much internet access lately.

"I figured "she" was just a conservative having fun trolling with liberal caricatures. I guess that could still be the case, presuming the troll had more than the usual amount of free time."

First of all, Ashley is my real name, but I'm a male, not a female. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashley_(name) I'm not a conservative pretending to be a liberal; you could call me a left-liberal, or a libertarian socialist. I don't consider myself to be a troll; I visit Rand's site for the space-related material, but some of the political posts just seem so wrong to me that I have to respond. As for being young or stupid, I was near the top of my class when I got my engineering degree, but I'm "only" 27, so maybe that qualifies as young. I also recognize it's possible to be smart in some areas and stupid in others.

"Why so much animosity toward the military? Some family member murdered or pillaged by the military?"

The only personal reason I can think of to dislike the military is that I spent two years in the Sea Cadets, which I didn't enjoy. We spent about 3 hours a week marching, saluting, and standing at attention, but I still never mastered drill. I found it mind-numbingly boring, as well as very hard on the feet.

As for disapproving of military culture, I'm referring to things like hazing, rough or violent behavior outside of combat, disrespect for human life, deference to authority, jingoism, etc. As for my dislike of military actions, I realize it's not the soldier's fault if they're misused, but I still resent it.

"you come right out and say that you don't care about the troops."

Well, not quite. I still care about them the same way I care about all human beings, and if they lose a limb or get disfigured or leave orphans behind, I consider that a tragedy. I don't grant them any special respect, though, as if they were heroes. I also don't "support the troops" in the sense that if they're doing something, it must be right. If someone commits what I believe to be a crime, I won't say it's not a crime just because they're soldiers of my country. I'm also not "rooting" for the troops to win just because they're "our team".

"It is nice to hear an honest liberal though ... the truth is refreshing."
I think the truth is very important, and I try to perform an honest self-examination. The most important position to criticize is one's own, which is part of the reason I read right-wing books and blogs, and criticisms of my other positions.

March 29, 2008 1:08 AM

Note: The comment system is functional, but timing out when returning a response page. If you have submitted a comment, DON'T RESUBMIT IT IF/WHEN IT HANGS UP AND GIVES YOU A "500" PAGE. Simply click your browser "Back" button to the post page, and then refresh to see your comment.

It's Not Like This Is Anything New

0 TrackBacks

14 Comments

Leave a comment

About this Entry

Search