Hillary is NOT pretending to be the victim" she is pretending to be a "fighter". . which is worse

[left lowrider]

The sexism meme that Hillary fabricated 10 days after the first debate is being discussed as Hillary's "playing the victim". But what she is really doing is pretending to "stand up" and "not be silenced" when nobody is trying to silence her. She created the story not to make herself look like a victim, but to make herself look like a "fighter". Playing the victim is damaging to the real cause but is rooted in reality - there are real victims and sexism is a continual battle on all fronts. But pretending to be a fighter in a fake battle is something that has much worse implications

If you look her pattern of inventing false battles and taking fake "tough" stances while not showing up for the real battles on political issues we should assume that this will continue.

Her support for the iraq war is a perfect instance - driven by the need to appear "tough" rather than the real toughness required to stand against the war. On a smaller scale her wallowing in endless personal "battles" with Republicans rather than standing up to them on policy is the same pantomime of "toughness"

Anyone who is a real "fighter" recognizes this. Real fighters don't smile as if winning a game when they talk about a personal point of sexism . . .because a personal "win" doesn't end the struggle for others, or throw out "zingers" like "we came, we saw, he died" when discussing a war that killed perhaps a million people and bankrupted our country.

[oasis]

1. Hill and Bill have battled the right wing machine for 20+ years and

both are still standing.

If she's not a fighter, then no one is.

[onehandle]

4. OP. Undone. Perfectly. nt

[bl968]

37. There is a difference here

One is a real battle, the other is a made up battle. The sad thing is I doubt Hillary herself knows the difference.

[Motown_Johnny]

7. Specifically, what policies are you referring to?

Again, please be specific.

[oasis]

17. The on going, 20+ year, right wing/ GOP policy

focused on the the takedown of the Clintons.

[Motown_Johnny]

63. So you admit the only thing she fights for is herself?

That is not a policy.


Thanks for admitting that she does not fight for policies. At least this was an honest post from a Clinton supporter. Those seem to be less common now a days.

[oasis]

67. A helpful practice in maintaining credibility would be to

think twice before publishing unwarranted assumptions.

[Motown_Johnny]

70. Then please provide specific policies that she has fought for.

Here, let me provide a couple examples of what I am asking for.


As First Lady she was given the responsibility of getting Health Care Reform passed through Congress.

She failed miserably at that one and only task which she was given, but it can be argued that she did fight for it.


Then there is the 19 minute speech she gave encouraging other Senators to pass the resolution for the use of force in Iraq. There can be no doubt that she fought hard for that one.



Get the idea now?

If you can only provide examples of her fighting for things which benefit her directly then the assumption that you are admitting that she only fights for herself is not unwarranted.

[oasis]

83. See post # 43. (eom)

[DonCoquixote]

61. seems like the op had one

Real fighters don't smile as if winning a game when they talk about a personal point of sexism . . .because a personal "win" doesn't end the struggle for others, or throw out "zingers" like "we came, we saw, he died" when discussing a war that killed perhaps a million people and bankrupted our country.

here is a very specific reminder:

and fighting Isis sure as hell is not achieved by turning another mid east country into a theocratic boil.

[jeff47]

9. As opposed to?

Were you expecting them to curl up into a ball on the floor, sobbing?

[oasis]

20. Barbara Olson (deceased), Laura Ingraham, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter

Matt Drudge, and host of other right wing whackos became famous over the years by their relentless attacks on the Clintons.

It never had anything to do with civil discourse on political issues. A constant tsunami of lies and propaganda which seeped into the mainstream media.

And more recently, the far left has chimed in with their rancorous, misguided criticism.

But, in spite of it all, Hillary, the fighter, is still standing.

[jeff47]

21. Again, as opposed to?

Again, what is the alternative you expected them to take?

By remarking how "tough" they are to be still standing, you must have expected some other response from the attacks. Otherwise, it would not show they are tough.

So what did you expect them to do?

[Armstead]

12. A fighter for what?

What major policy battles have they been fighting? (Since you are combining the two of them my answer refers o the two of them.)

Yes some good things bit it is a VERY mixed picture, including pushing Corporate Giveaways, Wall Street deregulation, Media Deregulation, Draconian "free trade" Agreements, an awful and stupid war an hawkish foreign policy, Media Deregulaton, Welfare Deform....Screwing the Pooch on Universal Healthcare.

And, um, fighting back against self inflicted wounds based on personal mistakes.

[oasis]

22. I only addressed the false accusation of Hillary playing the"victim".

You have only to check our local DU Hillary Group for a list of her accomplishments.

[Enthusiast]

46. PLUS ONE, a whole bunch!

The media deregulation is the gift that keeps on giving. Well, the trade deal too.

[left lowrider]

33. What does the US "win" if the Clintons "win" their 20+ year personal battle with republicans?

Don't we have real issues to solve that affect more than one political couple?

[erronis]

36. Oh, that should hurt.

But it probably doesn't, since they are both have thick skins and are used to slinging the barbs.

Yet, if they weren't ultra-rich, would they even be able to be part of this discussion? Bernie got here because of a hell of a lot of concerned people. The repugs got here because of a lot of concerned xians, xenophobes, moneyed owners. I'm sure HRC is here because she has always represented the majority of the US - not just the wealthy...

[left lowrider]

39. you are right

I removed the comment on their personal wealth.

[oasis]

40. For openers the US "won" 22 million jobs created during Bills

two terms.

The Clinton team has always focused on improving the lives of ALL Americans, I see no reason why that shouldn't continue.

[arcane1]

52. In the end, Wal Mart became the nation's largest employer.

Gee, thanks.

[oasis]

58. I doubt if all 22 million are employed at Wal Mart. Nt

[arcane1]

59. You are correct n/t

[stevenleser]

66. And 10 hours later we have crickets in response to your post.

Of course. They have no answer for that.

[ish of the hammer]

49. The Clintons are the ying to the repubs yang

They need each other to keep to the circle of donors going.
In case you don't remember, Hillary cut and ran when the repubs pushed back on her health care program in the 90's.
The only thing the Clintons have fought for successfully is their own aggrandizement. How do you go from "flat broke" in
1990 to 45 mill$ (H's half) in 2015 doing "charity" work. What, doctor's sans borders were full up? What can they possibly be selling?

[oasis]

56. Hill was First Lady when the right wing shot down her

Health care plan. What was she supposed to do, self emolate on the Capitol steps?

As for getting rich after 25 years in the public arena, I'd have to say it would be pretty hard for anyone NOT to.

[ish of the hammer]

62. Sanders net worth is less than mine.

Weak tea, oasis. The Clintons are building a dynasty right in front of you. Pretty hard NOT to, with citizens like you.

[oasis]

65. Sanders was never in the national spotlight. Sarah Palin is

Most likely set for life and she was a next to nobody eight years ago. Money and influence are the byproducts of fame.

[ish of the hammer]

72. true, but

millions of $ are disposed of daily in congress. Insiders get to know and can act accordingly. How did the Clintons make 100,000 $ in the futures market all those many years ago?

[kelliekat44]

87. She had a best seller book and many paid engagements. Why do we bemoan their getting rich

They earned it. Neither Bill nor Hillary were born rich. In fact, the RW snobs used to refer to them as "trailer trash." They are rich but very wealthy by 1% standards. We begrudge folks like the Clintons for getting rich after 30 years of public service what the hell will you folks do when Bernie gets all that money from speaking engagements and his book and the largess from his run for office?

[oasis]

90. Exactly. It would be terribly difficult to be famous in America

without getting rich.

Certain DUers have a built-in double standard for Hillary.

[Fawke Em]

55. Sure - they're great at fighting for themselves.

For the average person? Not so much.

[oasis]

60. I'm sure if you were under attack, you would fight for yourself.

For some, it's always a different standard for the Clintons. Bill and Hill have to follow in the footsteps of the Dalai Lama to get their approval.

[Fawke Em]

64. I would, but that wasn't my point.

My point is that they are great at fighting for themselves, but I don't see them fighting for the little people very much. Some people can do both.

[sabrina 1]

68. THEY didn't fight the Right Wing WE DID. They were cavorting with the Bushes while

we were fiercely fighting on their behalf what we thought were their enemies.

They were probably laughing at all of us 'liberals'.

There's an old saying 'fool me once ... I believe it was the Clintons' best friend and surrogate brother according to Babs, who screwed up that old saying.

But lesson learned. For a whole lot of us. Obama won the 2008 election. Imagine if the Clintons had been what we thought they were, Hillary would be finishing her second term in the WH right now.

People don't like to be betrayed, well we little people anyhow.

[riderinthestorm]

2. I am deeply troubled that her desire to seem "tough"

will keep us embroiled in the ME.

She's already said she believes we need to be involved militarily in Libya and Syria. Ugh!! Two countries for which there's no "winning" there, ever. Just more blood and tears and ruination.

You're correct of course, that the harder choice would have been to vote against involvement in Iraq. If "we" DUers collectively, and a vast majority of people outside DU who protested military action in Iraq, knew there wasn't any WMDs and that starting a war in Iraq was a bad idea, then I'm positive she knew.

She's a war hawk.



And agreed about the sexist issue - it's a phony and I say that as an ardent feminist.

Welcome to DU!

[Nitram]

3. Your obsession with the sexism thing is just pretending Sanders is a victim. nt

[frylock]

15. Your obsession with the sexism thing?

So now countering Hillary supporter's claims of sexism is an obsession?

[left lowrider]

34. I don't think it has much to do with Sanders or Sexism

She's just pretending to be a "fighter" again and in this instance referenced a real issue- sexism- to set up her pose.

[Nitram]

35. I have seeen a boatload of post by Bernistas on the topic

But nothing from Clinton supporters. If you have the time, maybe you could count them up and give us a ratio.

[frylock]

47. We haven't seen any posts from Clinton supporters defending Sanders against her baseless attacks..

accusing him of sexism You are correct.

[Nitram]

71. Cute. In fact, most of the Bernista posts are written as attacks on Clinton.

And how many DU posts attacking Bernie for sexism by Clinton supporters did you find?

[frylock]

73. Most of the "Bernista" posts are critiques of Clinton's policy positions or past votes..

they only look like attacks if you're ashamed of either her policy positions or past votes.

[Nitram]

74. A significant number just rely on bumper sticker corporatist smears.

Or are satisfied to state how untrustworthy and unfriendly she appears to be. I admit I don't have the time to comb the4 archives and compile the ratio of ad hominem attacks vs criticism on policy positions. let me know if you do.

[frylock]

75. Not my assertion, so it's not my job.

And, no. Posting documented video evidence of Hillary's own words, or questioning past votes and comparing her policy positions today from those of just a few short years ago are not "bumper sticker corporatist smears".

[Nitram]

76. Obviously, frylock, I'm not referring to video posts.

I suspect you just don't "see" gratuitous smears on Clinton.

[frylock]

77. You claimed as fact that "most of the Bernista posts are written as attacks on Clinton."

You are unable to prove that claim. We're done here.

[Nitram]

78. Oh gosh.

I guess you must be right!

[JoePhilly]

5. Hillary is tough, this OP is weak.

Hillary kicked the butts of 7 nut jobs over 11 hours.

She did not need to fabricate anything. She kicked their asses. We all saw it.

The GOP has spent the last 20 years attacking the rest of us.

I'd rather have Hillary fighting them than anyone else.

[riderinthestorm]

13. She did great in that hearing.

That's why her resorting to this tactic now is so disappointing.

She doesn't need to do this. I have my own reasons why I'm wary of her posing as a "fighter" and find the Sanders sexist smear to be irritating.

[JoePhilly]

14. More war on Chrisrmas nonsense.

[oasis]

23. Correct. Hillary's handling of the Bengazi panel says it all.

She's a fighter. Period.

[CharlotteVale]

6. She adjusts her pandering accordingly.

[Hortensis]

8. Who on earth WOULD be a fighter in your mind then?

A rabidly hostile right wing AND the mainstream media have been trying to destroy her consistently for nearly a quarter century. This includes the Kochs and many other very, very powerful people. And, presumably, in spite of people like you.

And yet, here she is. Breezing through an 11-hour Benghazi grilling (yet another - #8!) cool as a cucumber. Never quitting public service. And today probably our next president of the United States.

[Armstead]

16. Yes he's a fighter. But a fightr for what?

I respect you a lot, but agree with the OP. And (to spare myself from redundent typing), I gave my thoughts in another post on this thread.

[Hortensis]

24. She's not left enough for my preference either, Armstead.

But she IS at least on the left side, most definitely. Just look to the right!

The whiff and signs of increasingly fascist leanings and policies are all over the GOP. We have been on a long slide toward fascism ever since the late 1970s, and it has been, and is being, engineered by right-wing power groups.

We HAVE to win the presidency, and we really, really need to take as many other offices as we can. I never thought it would get as bad as it has, but it has because our enemies succeeded on dividing us and turning us against each other while they rewrite our laws and redistribute our national wealth.

Fascism: “A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.”

Fascist governments always indulge their citizenry by choosing a group or groups for persecution, and don't we have a lot of people who are eager for just that? Whose votes can be secured even by a circus clown who merely agrees "those people" are a problem that has to be dealt with?

The NY Times has an article pointing out the "privatization of justice" through the now extremely widespread use of arbitration clauses. Citizens United and the rest of the laws allowing business to buy elections. Corporations now even have "religious freedom" too. Fascism already has far stronger tendrils into all parts of our public lives than we realize -- until we take a good look.

“The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerated the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than the democratic state itself. That in its essence is fascism: ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or any controlling private power.” ― Franklin D. Roosevelt

“I really am a pessimist. I've always felt that fascism is a more natural governmental condition than democracy. Democracy is a grace. It's something essentially splendid because it's not at all routine or automatic. Fascism goes back to our infancy and childhood, where we were always told how to live. We were told, Yes, you may do this; no, you may not do that. So the secret of fascism is that it has this appeal to people whose later lives are not satisfactory.” ― Norman Mailer

[Armstead]

38. I agree -- But I believe Bernie will actually stand up to this

I think we need someone who will state what you said out loud. And I think Bernie could be electable if all of the people who say "I agree with him and love his ideas and message but...." actually supported him.

I fear Clinton is just another instrument of what you were referring to. Without being sexist, she and her husband are a team, and Bill did a lot of damage and advanced that process when he was president. I fear she will do the same, with a cheerful smile the whole time.

If I have to settle for Clinton (again) as the lesser of evils, I will fall in line and do it. But we can do better, and until the gates close I'm going to do my infinitesimal part to at least try to do better.

[Ed Suspicious]

45. Your post is good and I see where you're coming from, but "Just look to the right!"?

That's the problem as I see it. When we deem left to be anywhere to left of proto fascists it isn't too far a stretch to wind up lionizing Reagan as a champion of the left.

I'm sorry but not as bad is simply not good enough.

[Hortensis]

48. HRC is on the left side of a huge gulf, not just

"anywhere" to the left of the fascists. As for who I vote for, I'm still waiting for the Bernie phenomenon to turn into a national wave that could actually WIN the White House. If it happens, then we'll see. In any case, whoever wins the democratic nomination will be outstandingly safer than the best of the right-wing fascist wave we're facing.

[Ed Suspicious]

50. I guess I just see it differently. I see her utilization big money in elections as tacit

approval of big money in elections. If Democrats are doing it and Republicans are doing it, then where the hell is the off ramp? I guess if she is significantly to the left of those who are for corporate control of our government, as you believe she is, then I see her playing a very dangerous game. It reminds me of the kids in high school who take up smoking in social settings just to give them a little edge on the coolness scale. The problem is it backfires and they end up with a pack-a-day habit they just can't seem to shake.

[Hortensis]

54. Ed, barring a big upset, she's going to win the presidency.

I see that as indicating she did at least something right by raising big money and making deals. Competence. Pure, undirtied idealists sitting well out of the fray in their club chairs are worthless to us.

The rest of your analogy, no. Both she and Bill headed straight for public service -- instead of money, and they could have made bundles. They lived in a little apartment in the Arkansas governor's mansion, left with virtually nothing (not even furniture), and still had virtually nothing when Bill left the White House. These things are relative, of course, but she was very sincere when she made the mistake of saying they were practically "poor" at that point, or whatever the statement was. (The people they associated with in those days typically were "worth" tens, to hundreds, to millions of millions of dollars, after all.) They're not "poor" now, of course, thanks to the humongous speaking fees top-drawer people make these days.

In any case, they now have enough money to be independent of need, and then some. with ability to raise more any time they want. That is the one thing I do not worry about. They're proven many times over not to be money-driven people, any more than they're hooked on intravenous drugs.

HRC is, in fact, in that respect exactly what those who buy power don't want in office. The type of person who doesn't admire and look up to an uber class because it can buy presidencies. That's for fascists and other authoritarian followers. And by the way, the GOP is full of those.

[leftofcool]

10. Another anti-Hillary thread good for trashing.

[Broward]

11. Great post n/t.

[JaneyVee]

18. A "fighter" travels the world, meets foreign govts, and...

Spreads diplomacy and philanthropy. A "fighter" does not just travel back and forth from Vermont and DC casting some votes. That's a job.

[Thinkingabout]

29. Very good, good point. Hillary is a fighter and does not back down to Sanders or others.

[840high]

42. Travel back and forth and encourage war.

[Fawke Em]

57. ...pads her pockets on the government's dime...

[MisterP]

19. it's the mantra of cyberbullies: "I will NOT let you silence me!" after screaming into people's

mouths full blast for months

[La Lioness Priyanka]

25. hillary does stand up against sexism pretty consistenly

and that should be amply evident to anyone who has followed her life. this is not a fake battle for her.

[FlatBaroque]

31. We must have been observing two very different lives

I saw the one where she gleefully asks America to start wars, and I'm pretty sure that in the process of thousands of people losing their lives because of her decisions she doesn't worry too much about the women who die as well.

[Dustlawyer]

44. It certainly is a fake accusation!

I called BS on Benghazi and the email crap even though I am a Bernie supporter because it is crap. I expect Hillary supporters to do the same! Bernie is about as sexist as Mother Teresa was!

[Uncle Joe]

26. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, left lowrider.

[Thinkingabout]

27. The first sentence says Hillary fabricated a meme and is playing the victim. Did Hillary make

Sanders say Secretary Clinton, all the shouting..... or did Sanders do this all by himself. Sanders is not the victim of any thing except by his own words, he owns his words, he and his supporters needs to get past the victim and admit Sanders said it, now he wears the words.

Hell, yes Hillary is a fighter, and yes she did bring out in a speech the next day, if Sanders has a problem with what she said the next day he could have apologized the night of the debate but getting upset over what she said the next day is what happened.

[FlatBaroque]

28. That is an astute observation.

She claims to be a fighter, but in reality she is a political coward.

[oasis]

43. Yes, like when she called out the Chinese govt. for human rights abuse

when she was visiting China as First Lady.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

79. Was that before she said that our torturers shouldn't be prosecuted?

[oasis]

80. Yeah, in your eyes Hillary can never do anything right. I wonder

how wonderful things would be in our society if you were in charge. It's so easy to sit at a keyboard and constantly take negative pot shots at a world figure who has actually made a difference for good.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

81. Do you consider the massacre in Iraq "good"? Torture "good"?

[oasis]

82. No, but I do consider Hillary good. And most importantly,

good for America, the best nation on the planet.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

84. Thanks for the flagwaving.

Does torture and war make America the "best nation on the planet"? Does advocating for war and torture make Hillary "good"?

Do tell how that works.

[oasis]

85. Who was advocating for war and torture?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

86. Hillary.

[oasis]

88. Get this straight.

Hillary is recognized by fellow Democratic leaders as being worthy of the leadership of the party and the country. They believe she holds dearly the same Democratic principles as the rest of the party. No unnecessary wars, and no human rights abuses under any circumstances.

Thanks for your opinion, but I prefer to go with those who know her.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

89. Are you saying she didn't vote for the war or advocate torture?

Are the ones who "know her" saying that?

I know a lot of people. Most of them would be unfit to hold the job of president. I know Hillary by her votes, speeches, and record. She is among the unfit for public office that I know.

[oasis]

91. Well then, you and the "lot of people" you know can

sit around and mope until 2020, because with your collective points of view it's not going to get any better for any of you.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

93. I'll forego the moping.

But, I will try to hold Hillary accountable if she should succeed in gaining an office she's unfit for.

[oasis]

94. If your efforts help to move America forward

then, good luck to you.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

95. I've long ago given up on the notion that my single vote is going to have any effect

on America's going in any direction. However, Hillary's votes have moved America in the direction of war, torture, and the surveillance state which you seem to be able to put aside.

[Sheepshank]

30. Pretending?

my, my, my aren't you reaching.

Going back in time, she has never let up on women's since her historic speech in Beijing. Back when she was FLOTUS, she fought valiantly, for months on end against the GOP machine and their sexist put downs trying to get Healthcare for the nation. She has never given up on that dream. That you want to pretend she hasn't been involved in the good fight is ludicrous.

[left lowrider]

32. "Winning" the Bengahzi battle doesn't make her a real fighter against the right wing slide

Yes she "fought" the Republicans on the Bengahzi panel.
A real fighter would push back against the MIC and not have the troops and CIA in there in the first place.

There is the fake endless 'soap opera" fight against the republicans on television - some self inflicted like having parallel email accounts or indescretions with interns or claiming sniper fire that didn't happen

Meanwhile there is no resistance to the MIC, no fight against money in politics, no fight against oppressive trade deals or unregulated wall street, domestic spying, regressive taxes, no fight for single payer healthcare.

I am not saying she doesn't fight against anything . . . but that her battles are chosen for show

[AzDar]

41. K & R

[HassleCat]

51. She fights for what she believes, which may change a little

She's been pretty consistent in fighting against Republicans, with a few unfortunate exceptions. If she is elected president she will be fighting all the time, no doubt about that.

[VanillaRhapsody]

53. Anyone who is a "real fighter"

like myself....disagrees that she is not one!

[tishaLA]

69. Of all the anti-Clinton posts, this one is, I think, most on point

I know she likes to portray herself as a fighter, but the truth is that, with some exceptions, she tends to choose the path of least resistance and the most immediately efficacious. One could argue that's what makes her a good politician--"politics is the art of the possible" and all that--but I think the criticism is more fair than unfair. Yes, politics requires more pragmatism than some would allow, but it also requires a willingness to stand firm against an increasingly extremist RW. That's not a characteristic she has exhibited in the past IMO and not one I suspect we'd see much in her as president.

[EndElectoral]

92. Well written post.