- Feb 5, 2002
- 187,928
- 68,902
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Hillary speaks, but she doesn’t listen. She half-absorbs events and the lives of other people, and coughs out a kind of instinctive Reader’s Digest annotated version, but mangles all the details as efficiently as bad AI.
If Michael Kelly can rise from the grave, this will be the week. He’s been summoned.
Kelly was the most relentlessly savage chronicler of the Clinton administration, and of the Clintons personally, but his opening shot was so subtle you had to squint to see what he was doing. In a long feature story that appeared in The New York Times Magazine in May of 1993 under the that’s-not-a-compliment title “Saint Hillary,” Kelly very quietly mocked Hillary as a preening know-it-all who didn’t know much of anything.
He wrote that she represented “the message of the preacher,” with a way of speaking that delivered a stream of moral lectures, as if she had the authority and the wisdom to direct others in the act of moral reconstruction. If you click on the link and read the whole story, you’ll want to watch for the transitional paragraph, the switch from mostly description to mostly derision. It begins with the words, “It is at this point that some awkward questions arise.” Next paragraph: “If it is necessary to remake society, why should Hillary Rodham Clinton get the job?”
Continued below.
thefederalist.com
If Michael Kelly can rise from the grave, this will be the week. He’s been summoned.
Kelly was the most relentlessly savage chronicler of the Clinton administration, and of the Clintons personally, but his opening shot was so subtle you had to squint to see what he was doing. In a long feature story that appeared in The New York Times Magazine in May of 1993 under the that’s-not-a-compliment title “Saint Hillary,” Kelly very quietly mocked Hillary as a preening know-it-all who didn’t know much of anything.
He wrote that she represented “the message of the preacher,” with a way of speaking that delivered a stream of moral lectures, as if she had the authority and the wisdom to direct others in the act of moral reconstruction. If you click on the link and read the whole story, you’ll want to watch for the transitional paragraph, the switch from mostly description to mostly derision. It begins with the words, “It is at this point that some awkward questions arise.” Next paragraph: “If it is necessary to remake society, why should Hillary Rodham Clinton get the job?”
Continued below.
Saint Hillary Is Here To Tell You You're A Terrible Christian
Her discussions of toxic empathy and the ordo amoris show she doesn’t have the foggiest idea what the basic outline of the discussion is.
thefederalist.com
