Streetwise Professor

October 30, 2016

Hillary’s the One!

Filed under: Politics — The Professor @ 7:01 pm

No. I have not lost my mind and decided to come out in support of Hillary. The reference in the post title is to Richard Nixon’s 1968 campaign slogan, and Hillary epitomizes all of the worst of Nixon’s traits.

Nixon infamously said “if the president does it, it’s not illegal.” Hillary’s version of this is actually more ambitious: by deed, if not word, her credo is: “If Hillary does it, it’s not illegal.” The email saga is just the latest in a series of events going back almost 40 years (to her work on a Watergate committee, ironically) in which Hillary has acted as if the rules do not apply to her. Any rules. Any laws.

The Podesta emails reveal that even many of those around her were shocked and chagrined at her audacity to flouting the law and democratic and republican mores by operating a private server. But there was no adult who was willing to challenge her. Instead, everyone–and this arguably includes Obama, who corresponded (under an alias!) with her on her private email–enabled and excused her lawlessness.

One of Hillary’s rationalizations for her behavior is that everyone is out to get her–her paranoia is another Nixonesque trait. This most recent episode will only deepen that paranoia.

Which means that if Hillary is actually elected next Tuesday, the nation is in for a continuing series of these scandals. As president, her sense of entitlement and superiority to the law and paranoia will only only increase. In her mind, if Hillary does it, it’s not illegal, especially because she does it because otherwise her enemies (who are everywhere!) will destroy her.

Put differently, the woman is constitutionally unfit for any position of public trust, let alone the most powerful office in the land. Because of her constitutional unfitness, she is a walking (well, sometimes) Constitutional crisis.

The truly dispiriting thing about all this is that it is not news. The standard Clinton excuse for everything is “this is old news.” Well, Hillary’s defective character is very, very old news: the country has been on notice since at least 1993, and those paying attention knew about it well before that. Nonetheless, she was elected to the Senate from New York twice; appointed to the most senior cabinet position; nominated to run for president by the oldest political party in America; and is on the cusp of being elected president.

Hillary’s character failings are her responsibility alone. Tens of millions of people are responsible for the fact that she remains a carbuncle on the body politic. The most culpable are the alleged elite in this country, who plague us from their dens in DC, Manhattan, the Hamptons, Boston, and California. They are the main accessories in the degradation of the rule of law that is the result of the relentless rise of this woman who believes herself above the law.

One last thing. My comparison of Hillary to Nixon is terribly unfair to the latter. Hillary has none of the intelligence and strategic insight of Nixon. Hillary has ridden the coattails of her husband, whereas Nixon was as close to a self-made man as there has been in American politics in the 20th century. Most importantly, for all of his ethical and legal lapses, from time to time Nixon betrayed having a conscience: Hillary has exhibited no such weakness. (I think Obama knows this too. When the email scandal broke anew and Obama advised Hillary to “follow her conscience,” I think he was engaged in trolling on an epic scale.)

But this is the woman who, barring a staggering development in the most recent episode of the email saga, is likely to be the next president. God bless America. We’ll need it.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email


  1. She reminds me of Charles I. She believes she has a divine right to rule, that she is above the law, that she can lie as much as she likes, and that she need never keep her word to anyone. Though, to be fair, Charles actually had merits in his private life, so there is that difference.

    Comment by dearieme — October 30, 2016 @ 7:15 pm

  2. @dearieme-Truly. I read an article today that said this would test Hillary’s loyalty to Huma Abedin. I about fell off my chair. Using “Hillary” and “loyalty” in the same sentence. That is an ultra-oxymoron. Hillary expects loyalty to flow only one way.

    She is the antithesis of Kantian ethics: “act so as to treat people always as ends in themselves, never as mere means.” Everyone is a means for Hillary. Things to be used to gratify her and her ambition. The disgusting thing is how many people are willing to be used in order to advance their own petty appetites.

    The ProfessorComment by The Professor — October 30, 2016 @ 10:10 pm

  3. The sad thing is that I am reading the vast majority of my news now from websites quite recently classified as extremist or crackpot… (((
    Worse, I now check Russia Today for some balance. Is our mainstream media really that bad, that this is what I am reduced to?

    Events now seem insane – Russia is OFF the UNHRC, and Saudi Arabia, Cuba and China are on it? Someone tell me if we have lost our marbles in the last decade or something?

    Comment by KavkazWatcher — October 30, 2016 @ 10:35 pm

  4. @KavkazWatcher-Yes. It is that bad. You are not alone.

    And it does seem that the world is going through some sort of mental breakdown. Absurdity piles on top of absurdity. Farce follows farce.

    The ProfessorComment by The Professor — October 30, 2016 @ 10:55 pm

  5. I see Hillary is complaining that Comey has been put under “intense partisan political pressure”. Which is true, but how come she didn’t think was a problem in July? Her arrogance and tin-ear will be her downfall, I think.

    Comment by Tim Newman — October 31, 2016 @ 1:28 am

  6. I have to say that the Republican Party bears some responsibility for this situation. There are, what, 300 million people in America? – and out of all those, the GOP put up as its candidate probably the only person in the USA who couldn’t beat Hillary.

    It’s astonishing really. Aside from various members of the IRA who stood for the UK Parliament, these two candidates are the most manifestly unfit for any public office in any country that I’ve seen in my lifetime.

    Comment by Green As Grass — October 31, 2016 @ 5:28 am

  7. @Green as Grass – the astonishing thing is that the Demorats put up a crook/commie and a commie as candidates, relying on being Santa Claus with Other People’s Money.

    The astonishing thing is that there are people who are willing to vote for a basilisk/crook/s**t-in-a-pantsuit Killery Billary, just because she claims to be “for the children.”

    Killery has no soul, no conscience, no morals, no ethics – she is out only for herself. Despite her act, that is very, very evident. She is out only for herself.

    Huma and Comey should get extra bodyguards for themselves for protection from the Klinton Krime Family – Don’t Dare Cross the Clintons.

    It is astonishing that a couple of white trash lowlifes – Slick and Billary – got to where they have gotten.

    God Bless American, and please don’t allow Ma Barker Klinton and the Klinton Krime Family to infest the Oval Office again.

    Comment by elmer — October 31, 2016 @ 7:49 am

  8. @Green-I agree completely. I wrote about this months ago, in a post about the failure of the Republican establishment. Trump is a symptom of deep dysfunction, rather than its cause in any serious way. The Republican Party has developed no leader of stature in years. Further, it has become increasingly fissiparous over the years. There was always an uneasy coalition, but Reagan and even the Bushes were able to keep it together, just. However, the Financial Crisis and Iraq have made that virtually impossible. These things happened under Republican administrations, and deeply discredited the Republican “elite.”

    I don’t think all the king’s horsemen and all the king’s men will be able to put this Humpty Dumpty back together again. It is as dead as the Whig Party. It just doesn’t know it yet.

    The ProfessorComment by The Professor — October 31, 2016 @ 8:30 am

  9. @Tim-I agree. I fear, however, that the downfall will occur after she takes the Oath of Office, and that the collateral damage of her inevitable scandal will be immense.

    She is a horrible person and a horrible politician. Yet she is where she is. Pretty damning verdict about America’s political class.

    The ProfessorComment by The Professor — October 31, 2016 @ 8:33 am

  10. Pretty damning verdict about America’s electorate.

    Comment by dearieme — October 31, 2016 @ 9:22 am

  11. But wait, the Financial Times just endorsed Clinton because Trump is a danger to democracy in America. hahahahahahahaha. Hillary Clinton is the poster child of Danger to Democracy

    Comment by Jeffrey Carter — October 31, 2016 @ 10:12 am

  12. It is interesting to note that in the aftermath of WW I and 20 years of crises that followed, the US political system produced FDR and the British system produced Churchill but the Soviet system produced Stalin and the German system produced Hitler.

    What do Trump and (*gasp*) Hillary say about us today? But more so than the electorate, the dysfunctional political systems that produced them?

    Comment by WeNeedThomasJefferson — October 31, 2016 @ 12:09 pm

  13. Starring Huma Abedin as Bebe Rebozo and Anthony Weiner as a bumbling Cuban ‘plumber’.

    Special guest stars John Podesta’s email account and Weiner’s laptop as the Oval Office tape-recording system.

    Comment by Ex-Regulator on Lunch Break — October 31, 2016 @ 2:30 pm

  14. Dearie me
    I think you owe Charles I an apology.
    At least he dressed well and had good taste in paintings.
    A closer comparison might be Molotov. Nastiest and most senior, thought the prize would just drop in his lap, then… oops!

    Comment by bloke in france — October 31, 2016 @ 3:38 pm

  15. @Jeff-Exactly. Anyone who views her- or himself as outside the law is a danger to democracy. Hillary has a track record on it. Trump doesn’t.

    The FT (and The Economist as well) are full-on elite establishment publications that are beyond condescending about the US. I pay no attention to their editorial content anymore.

    The ProfessorComment by The Professor — October 31, 2016 @ 6:36 pm

  16. @WeNeedThomasJefferson–I think this era will be analogous to one of the early chapters of the American analog of Decline & Fall of the Roman Empire. This election is definitely a symptom of a degenerate system.

    The ProfessorComment by The Professor — October 31, 2016 @ 6:57 pm

  17. @Jeff-I note that the FT has been conspicuously silent about Obama’s anti-democratic and anti-republican exercise of executive authority.

    The ProfessorComment by The Professor — October 31, 2016 @ 8:36 pm

  18. The important comparison isn’t between Clinton and Nixon, it’s between Clinton and Trump. My personal view is that Clinton is a superior choice. Based on his extremely unethical business affairs, his unpleasant dealings with women suggesting he is very likely a sex offender, and his deeply sinister relationship with Russia, it is hard to see how Clinton’s emails could be worse.

    Whoever is elected, I think there is a reasonable chance of civil disturbance in the US. There are a lot of armed men who are very angry.

    Comment by Person_XYZ — November 1, 2016 @ 2:22 am

  19. Clear that voters from the Afterlife prefer Hill overwhelmingly and so the one conclusion possible is that Hell has a very active voter registration program.

    If on the other hand voters from the Afterlife strongly supported Trump then my conclusion would be that even those souls are sick to death of the Atlantic elite above all else.

    Comment by pahoben — November 1, 2016 @ 6:16 am

  20. saw this comment on the Daily Mail:

    “I regret I have but one server to wipe for my country” HRC, 2016.

    you know – wipe it, like with a clath

    In the meantime, the DOJ shuts down investigation of the Clinton Foundation and influence-peddling:

    Comment by elmer — November 1, 2016 @ 10:15 am

  21. I would tend to disagree with your characterization of HRC as lacking buance.
    She’s not so much a scofflaw as an extremely able lawyer for whom words, rules and laws are naive constructs prime for shrewd interpretation … and manipulation.
    One suspects Yale Law did leave some impression on the woman’s psyche but that school does churn out the cleverest and most cunning of that profession.
    So I’m sure in her mind she did nothing wrong … just in the same way her hubby (another Yale Law star) never engaged in sexual relations with that woman. A blow job is more akin to a kiss than real sex, you see.
    Anyway, the end point remains pretty much the same: someone so clever and unmoored from scruple will appear to the outsider as if she considers herself above the law.

    Comment by Simple Simon — November 1, 2016 @ 10:38 am

  22. nuance obvo

    Comment by Simple Simon — November 1, 2016 @ 10:38 am

  23. If you want to see a sad example of why Trump has support then look at Peter Woit’s website Not Even Wrong and his post of 30th October concerning the election. Sadly his post is not even wrong.

    Comment by pahoben — November 4, 2016 @ 9:03 am

  24. @pahoben-I only had to read to where he describes Hillary as the “competent, honest centrist candidate.” You might be amused to know that just today Obama said this election does not rise to the level of Survivor.

    He’s not too condescending, eh? And that’s why Trump has a lot of support.

    The ProfessorComment by The Professor — November 4, 2016 @ 2:01 pm

  25. I read your post and it reminded me of something I read before: the life and deeds of Emperor Caligula
    Then I came down to the thread…and comment #16

    Comment by ETat — November 5, 2016 @ 1:51 pm

  26. @ETaT–Great minds!

    The ProfessorComment by The Professor — November 5, 2016 @ 5:23 pm

  27. This might go better for me if I enter a medically induced coma Tuesday morning and return to full consciousness over a week or so.

    Comment by pahoben — November 6, 2016 @ 11:38 am

  28. I wish the California secession movement all the success in the world. If anyone sees a crowdfunding page for this please let me know. Moving the capital from Sacramento to Berkeley would make a lot of sense.

    Comment by pahoben — November 9, 2016 @ 5:07 am

  29. @pahobe–If CA doesn’t secede from the Union as a whole, perhaps inland CA can secede from the rest of the state. Victor Davis Hanson is so right about “Two Californias”, and the coastal elite screw those living in the interior (many of them descendants of Okies, many others Mexican) sideways. The recent referendum on gun control is an example, as is the war on agriculture. That part of California is more like Texas than it is like LA or the Bay.

    BTW, did you see that Kern County, 50 percent Hispanic, went for Trump by 18 points?

    The ProfessorComment by The Professor — November 9, 2016 @ 2:43 pm

  30. @Professor
    Wow-I didn’t see that. Funny that the Dems in typical fashion stereotyped Latinos. I can’t imagine a slice of Texas having to contend day to day with CA craziness-tough people.

    We shouldn’t have a problem defending the border closer to the coast. Not like they will be well armed or in an aggressive state of mind.

    Comment by pahoben — November 9, 2016 @ 4:18 pm

  31. Governor Moonbeam will become Chairman Moonbeam and ensconced in the government complex overlooking People’s Park in Berkeley near the Yoga To The People ashram. Dicaprio will be Minister of Environment and Kim/Kanye joint Ministers of Selfies. The possibilities are boundless.

    Comment by pahoben — November 9, 2016 @ 4:47 pm

  32. Another decade they will be worshiping some claimed quantum computing based AI that in fact is just dumb Eliza 8.0 psychotherapeutic program.

    Comment by pahoben — November 10, 2016 @ 3:22 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Powered by WordPress