Streetwise Professor

September 16, 2017

You Too Can Own a Copy of Hillary’s Therapy Session Notes, For a Mere $30!!!

Filed under: Politics — The Professor @ 11:15 am

Hillary Clinton expects you to spend $30* to read the notes from her post-election therapy sessions–all 512 pages(!) of them. She is also on tour, broadcasting hour after hour of therapy session with assorted media shrinks.

The therapy has obviously been an utter failure, because Hillary remains stubbornly stuck in denial and anger, and incapable of moving anywhere close to acceptance. The therapy has also failed to resolve her rampant internal contradictions, wherein she is simultaneously the smartest, most powerful woman in the world and the serial victim of offenses committed by all humans great and small, simultaneously the ubermensch and untermensch.

In What Happened, Hillary purports to explain her (to her anyway) inexplicable loss to the worst man in the world, bar none, Donald Trump. What Didn’t Happen would have been a much shorter book, because in her tome (and in her interviews) she blames everyone and everything for her loss. Check that: she blames everyone and everything except Hillary Clinton, save for some pro forma acknowledgements of responsibility, before she returns to her regularly scheduled blamecast. There are more scapegoats in this book than in all of Greece.

James Comey–whom, as you may know, I loathe–is the target of considerable ire. Lest you think that this is one thing Hillary and I can agree with, it ain’t. One of the reasons I dislike Comey is that there is ample evidence that he gave numerous passes to Hillary: most recently, it was revealed that he had basically decided to clear her before interviewing her or any of her flunkies, and basically said mother-may-I when requesting (not demanding) documents. But Hillary blames Comey’s late-in-the-day hedge on some of those passes for her loss: he never should have terminated the investigation that he felt compelled to resume later on.

The most tedious refrain in Hillary’s pity party is that she was the victim of misogyny. Please. For one thing, if misogyny is so rife in affecting American votes, why are there so many women in elective office in the US? It was just one woman in particular whom many Americans found off-putting.

For another, Hillary and her ilk believe that misogyny is rife on the right–but those people weren’t going to vote for her in any event. Hillary therefore must impute misogyny to middle-of-the-road swing voters in places like Wisconsin and Michigan and Pennsylvania who voted Democratic in the past but who voted for Trump this time around. (And who voted for women for high political offices–note that Debbie Stabenow has received a majority of the votes in Senate contests in Michigan, and that Jennifer Granholm was elected governor years ago. Tammy Baldwin, a woman–indeed, a lesbian–was elected to the Senate from Wisconsin in 2013.) Indeed, since there was a swing to Trump of female voters who had previously voted Democratic in these states, she would have to argue that moderate and Democratic-leaning women acted out of misogyny. Evidence for these assertions would be nice. I’ve seen none, and she presents none. Chalk this up as another example of Hillary’s penchant for insulting those she should flatter. In brief, Hillary believes that if you voted against her you are a misogynist, and if you are a woman who voted against her (or did not vote), you are a traitor to your ovaries to boot. That’s just pathetic.

The issue of states leads to one of her most appalling rants–the attack on the Electoral College. Well, those were the rules going in, lady, and had been in place for 229 years and 57 presidential elections prior to 2016. You didn’t play the electoral map properly. Trump did. You lose.

Further, if she had been an even remotely decent candidate, the Electoral College wouldn’t have mattered a whit. The loss in the Electoral College demonstrates some of her fundamental failings as a candidate, most notably an overweening belief in her own inevitability, which led her to run a lazy, uninspired, unstrategic and frankly stupid campaign.

I will also note in passing that precisely because of the Electoral College, her husband cruised to victory twice despite receiving a minority of the popular vote, and indeed a smaller fraction of that vote than the reviled Trump. Besides demonstrating one of the virtues of the Electoral College system (which can result in an unchallenged outcome even in a sharply divided electorate), this is also deliciously ironic, and karmic. But irony is not one of Hillary’s strong suits. (I honestly can’t say what Hillary’s strong suits are, but appreciation for irony and karma are definitely not among them.)

The obsessive self-focus of this book also apparently blinds her to all of the slings and arrows that Trump endured during the campaign (many of which were self-inflicted). By any objective measure, Trump experienced far more negative treatment than Hillary. You can argue that it was warranted, but you really can’t argue that fact. So why were negative coverage and damaging revelations fatal to Hillary, but not to Trump, even though (in her mind at least) those directed at her were false and those directed at Trump were true? After all, this was a contest between two individuals, meaning that the relative degree of negativity should matter.  Furthermore, it is gravely insulting to the American people to insinuate, as Hillary does, that they are utterly incapable of distinguishing fair criticism from false. In Hillary’s mind, she is wonderful, and every criticism is unfair, but Americans are too stupid to see through fake news concocted in Macedonia to perceive her incomparable wonderfulness.

The book and the interviews primarily show that Hillary is still Hillary, and she will always be Hillary. This should not be surprising. Hillary is a narcissist, and narcissists never change. She believes that she is so wonderful that any criticism is a grave injustice, and that Trump is so horrible that no criticism is too strong: the fact that she was criticized at all is to her an outrage. In her mind, she should have been elected by unanimous affirmation. She should move to North Korea.

Further, the book and interviews show that Hillary lost despite every objective advantage because of her myriad personal defects. Well before the election I pointed out often that Hillary was a horrible candidate, in large part because she is a horrible person. And wouldn’t you know, she done wrote herself a book to prove that to the world.

*That’s list price. The book is available at $17.99 on Amazon almost immediately after release: indeed, it is available new for $12.99 from some sellers. Draw your own conclusions.

Print Friendly

8 Comments »

  1. I have often seen her supporters refer to her as brilliant or super smart. I’ve never seen the first evidence for these claims. She seems to me to have a routine intellect and to have held high office entirely as Slick Willie’s wife.

    Comment by dearieme — September 16, 2017 @ 12:57 pm

  2. Did you read the book? I haven’t read the book (though I may). I’m curious what the real truth is. I feel like I’ve seen many hot takes but few in depth reads. Hearing from a few people who have read the whole book, I gather yes, there is much discussion of how others impacted the election, often unfairly. However, there is also plenty of self blame as well. In the words of one reviewer: “Again and again she blames herself for losing, apologizing for her “dumb” email management, for giving paid speeches to banks, for saying she would put coal miners “out of business.” She veers between regret and righteous anger, sometimes in the same paragraph.”
    Unfortunately this election gives something to everyone: if you want to blame someone for the outcome, you’re probably right! When an election was that close (very few votes in very few states making the difference), it’s entirely accurate to say that many things “caused” the outcome. Sure, the home run in the bottom of the ninth determined the winner of a close ballgame, but so did the error in the third and the walk in the sixth. To use your language, the reason the insults to Trump weren’t “fatal” to his campaign is because his campaign won. Hillary’s campaign didn’t. If Trump had lost, several distinct things could be pointed to as being “fatal” to his campaign as well. As a victor, his red trucker hat is an instant emblem of his connection to the working class. As a loser, it would have been evidence of a pandering attitude.
    On the price question, I wouldn’t read too much into it. I think it’s normal for the list price to be way above the actual price. I quickly checked OReilly’s Killing Reagan and it was priced at $12 under its $30 list as well, shortly after release. So in my highly rigorous study, 100% of $30 books are priced at $18.

    Comment by AnonPls — September 16, 2017 @ 1:19 pm

  3. Quick edits!
    Hearing from a few people [[who are sympathetic to Clinton]] who have read the whole book, I gather yes, there is much discussion of how others impacted the election, often unfairly [[in Clinton’s telling]].

    This is one topic where word choice is important. I feel like things get quite heated when Hillary comes up in conversation. I’m just trying to have a conversation. We’re all friends here!

    Comment by AnonPls — September 16, 2017 @ 1:37 pm

  4. I guess we need to read the book to know. Funny how so many don’t quite have the stomach for that. Time is in short supply, and the general view is that the book says more about Hillary than it does about the election, and, well, Hillary is not really a priority topic in our lives.

    Comment by Mark — September 16, 2017 @ 6:36 pm

  5. Whenever I hear people bemoan Trump, I love to say, “And to think it could have so much worse!”

    Would somebody please take her away? She won’t do it herself. It’s completely disturbing.

    Comment by Howard Roark — September 16, 2017 @ 8:38 pm

  6. The reason Hillary lost is that she arrogantly had not bothered to become black. And it was clearly her own fault: if Rachel Dolezal could do it, why couldn’t Hillary?

    Comment by Ivan — September 17, 2017 @ 1:44 am

  7. Run down Trump all you want, Mrs. Bill Clinton would have been a disaster.

    Comment by Tom Henderson — September 19, 2017 @ 7:40 pm

  8. @Tom-no disagreement here. Unmitigated disaster.

    The ProfessorComment by The Professor — September 19, 2017 @ 8:20 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Powered by WordPress