November 22, 2017

"Not only did people look the other way, but they went after the women who came forward and accused him."

"And so it doubled down on not only bad behavior but abusive behavior. And then people attacked the victims."

Says Kathleen Sebelius, the former secretary of Health and Human Services and Kansas governor, talking with David Axelrod on his show "The Axe Files."
Sebelius extended her criticism to Hillary Clinton, and the Clinton White House for what she called a strategy of dismissing and besmirching the women who stepped forward—a pattern she said is being repeated today by alleged perpetrators of sexual assault—saying that the criticism of the former first lady and Secretary of State was "absolutely" fair. Sebelius noted that the Clinton Administration's response was being imitated, adding that "you can watch that same pattern repeat, It needs to end. It needs to be over."
It's still too little, too late. Too easy to say this now when it's convenient. Nevertheless, good to hear.

128 comments:

buwaya said...

Hmmm.
Obama gang vs Clinton gang?

To be clear, at least the cabal that had Obama as front man.
He never struck me as a leader.

Humperdink said...

The Clintons have been defanged, disarmed, and disowned.

tcrosse said...

The Clintons have been defanged, disarmed, and disowned.

Yet there are still strange noises coming from under the bus.

exhelodrvr1 said...

And why did Obama not say anything?

Professional lady said...

I wonder what comes next with the Clintons. Maybe an investigation regarding the Uranium deal with Russia?

madAsHell said...

Twat happened.

AllenS said...

Barry Obama always had to watch what he said, because if Michelle didn't like it, she might kick his scrawny ass.

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

Hillary Clinton picked up the support of former Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius on Monday.

In particular, Sebelius pointed to how she felt Clinton would treat issues important to women, children and families.


Was Sebelius lying then or is she lying now?

tcrosse said...

I get the feeling that if Obama hadn't made Hillary SoS, she would have done in 2009 what she's doing today.

Rob said...

It's also worth remembering, when journalists and academics condemn Trump for badmouthing Independent Counsel Mueller, that Hillary Clinton and the Clinton surrogates engaged in a months-long effort to badmouth Independent Counsel Ken Starr and delegitimize his investigation. The quarters that are now so quick to criticize Trump for meddling with the process were notably silent then.

Unknown said...

Way too late. For twenty years they defend these scumbags but, now that they're no longer any use to the Party, they can be thrown under the bus? Fuck off, Democrats. You've made your bed, now lay in it.

Qwinn said...

1) The Clintons need to be cleared away so Dems can run a possible winner in 2020.
2) The Left wants to enshrine "all women accusers must be believed", so that they can use false accusations (ala Moore) to take down anyone they want.

So, they argue that Clinton's accusers must now be believed. 20 years later. When it helps them instead of hurts them.

And as soon as that's done, every Republican across the country will have false accusations alleged against them. And you will be Literally Hitler if you even suggest the accusations are implausible, even if the accusations are in fact completely disproved.

Chuck said...

But Trump threatened to sue his accusers!

Is Trump's reaction less serious because so many of his litigation threats are so impotent?

n.n said...

Obama gang vs Clinton gang?

Exactly. The mainstream press did not just happen to lose control of the narrative. We are unwitting helpers for a Democratic faction to take control of the Party. They still have not remarked on diversity (e.g. racism, sexism), or political congruence ("="), or abortion rites (denying life), so any optimism that the neo-Democratic Party represent positive progress is probably premature.

Sebastian said...

"saying that the criticism of the former first lady and Secretary of State was "absolutely" fair." The dam has broken. Now they can flood the right with accusations. Watch.

Exactly why should we listen to people who now disparage the Clintons but only a year ago told us we were deplorable for denying her the presidency?

Sebastian said...

So progs finally come clean on sexual harassment, sort of, conveniently, 20 years later.

What will progs say 20 years from now?

That everyone knew the Russian collusion was a phony story and Trump should have been believed? that everyone knew the intelligence agencies had it out for Trump and his criticism should have been believed? that everyone knew Obama gave away the store to Iran and that critics should have been believed? that everyone knew gay marriage was a scam that undermined the institution, and critics should have been believed? that everyone knew sex changes and "transgenderism" were a scam and mental health problem, and that critics should have been believed? that everyone knew more Muslims would bring more terror, but was afraid to speak up?

chuck said...

I denounce Caligula. It may be a bit late, but you can watch that same pattern repeated throughout history and it needs to be pointed out.

Yancey Ward said...

Yes, they are trying to clear Hillary out of the way, but I am telling you right now- if they really want get rid of her, they need to put her ass in jail. Absent that or Michelle Obama trying for the presidency, Shelob will be the nominee in 2020. They are bringing a knife to a gunfight as of this moment.

Angel-Dyne said...

Qwinn @3:39:2) The Left wants to enshrine "all women accusers must be believed", so that they can use false accusations (ala Moore) to take down anyone they want.

So, they argue that Clinton's accusers must now be believed. 20 years later. When it helps them instead of hurts them.


Exactly. Sebelius has not "got religion", conveniently or not, nor have any of the others now weeping and rending their garments. It's a set-up for going after their political enemies. "We pilloried Bill Clinton! Now you can't not impeach Trump you rethuglikkkan hypocrites!"

I don't think it will work (regardless of the enthusiastic participation of cuckservatives in the Dem's transparently self-serving purification movement).

n.n said...

People, huh? Suddenly, they are at a loss for labels, colorful and selective.

AlbertAnonymous said...

Do as we say not as we do

tim in vermont said...

I never heard any of these people so upset about what Moore did 40 years ago upset about Hillary's role in the "Bimbo Eruption Squad." The left on this thread was silent on the subject. A few of them didn't like the Clintons for their roles in our recent wars, a couple didn't like the money grubbing. But it was silence on sex abuse. Which is why I don't really give a shit what they say on the subject today. They don't believe it. I will wait for the next generation of Democrats to come along, and for the press to purge themselves of the enablers of this kind of behavior. Maybe the next generation of Democrats will put a halt to this effort to create a casted of "untouchables" for people who live outside of cities.

rhhardin said...

The Clintons aren't being shamed. It's soap opera mob action. There's no woke, just a narrative of woke.

Everything will work the way men and women have always worked because it's always worked out individually.

Women watch because they have the grudges, resentments and postures that interest them against men. It will always be that way, and they won't realize they're being played by the MSM narrative again.

Let us take your neuroses and grab you as an audience.

Unknown said...

Sorry, that should have read, "for twenty years they and Chuck defended these scumbags"...

Ron Winkleheimer said...

The younger, radical wing of the Democrat party can plausibly make a case that they weren't the people who hijacked the party to protect one guy and advance the career of his hack wife. Nor was it their doing that the Clinton crime family engaged in various corruption schemes in order to enrich themselves. And that the cause of the Democrat party's failures in much of the middle of the country can be laid at the Clinton abandonment of principle. As bad as the Clinton's were, at least they were just ordinary crooks. The people who are about to take over the Democrat party are just the sort that C.S. Lewis warned about. They will torment you because the want to improve you. And they will not accept any limits. Because they are on the side of the angels you see. Metaphorically. Because angels aren't real.

Fernandistien said...

I just read Jeannette Walls' "The Silver Star" wherein one of the teen-aged girls is (actually) assaulted by a crazy mill foreman the town is afraid of, she reports and is ostracized by the other kids at school. The foreman bribes a witness and he goes free.

So the girl's uncle shoots and kills the guy - "thought he was a bear". Nobody complained.

rhhardin said...

SoS Secretary of State, but is also shit on a shingle, aka foreskins on toast.

tim in vermont said...

Every time I tried to get a lefty here to respond to the specific under oath testimony of Broaddrick and the woman who found her in the hotel room, it was silence. Or I was called "crazy" Or ARM would prattle on about "crazy conspiracy theories."

None will show up on this thread, or they will lie.

AReasonableMan said...

Angel-Dyne said...
Exactly. Sebelius has not "got religion", conveniently or not, nor have any of the others now weeping and rending their garments. It's a set-up for going after their political enemies. "We pilloried Bill Clinton! Now you can't not impeach Trump you rethuglikkkan hypocrites!"


This is a somewhat self-serving reimagining of what has been a largely unorganized rebellion of the harassed against the harassers. It started with Gretchen Carlson, not with any Democrat, to their great discredit. Carlson got this bus rolling.

tim in vermont said...

Lifelong Cuck "But Trump"

Every single one of your posts.


He's a rodeo clown to protect Hillary. Somebody should tell him that she is roadkill now. He doesn't need to do it anymore.

AlbertAnonymous said...

Watch what happens with Conyers and Franken (and whatever new ones crop up). The parallels - or distinctions they draw - will be pretzel-like in their logic.

Women must be believed! You can't doubt them, or question motives, or even dispute or deny the claims.... unless you have a D after your name, then its different because reasons.

But those with an R after their names? F them. Moore must resign! Immediately. He cannot dispute the claims, or deny them. No sir.

Conyers? Yeah that's different. He settled a claim but he didn't admit guilt. So, different. because, reasons.

Franken, well. Different. he's a comedian, and she wasn't a child, and and and and...

AReasonableMan said...

tim in vermont said...
ARM would prattle on about "crazy conspiracy theories.


Your weird obsession with lying about me is genuinely sad. It is clear you desperately need my attention, but for what purpose?

tim in vermont said...

Carlson got this bus rolling.

Not afraid of the Clintons, not afraid of the press. Another thing that happened to Carlson was that the Obama Administration had shut down her family's car dealership as part of their GM takeover. The process was shrouded in secrecy leaving lots of room for politics.

Angel-Dyne said...

ARM: This is a somewhat self-serving reimagining of what has been a largely unorganized rebellion of the harassed against the harassers.

Because who ever heard of the energies of an unorganized rebellion of the put-upon being diverted to the purposes of the rather better organized?

Almost as unheard of as assorted crack-pots and grifters attaching themselves opportunistically to the unorganized rebellion of the put-upon.

n.n said...

That human life begins at conception? Improbable. Inconceivable. Inconvenient.

That diversity of color, sex, ethnicity, race, orientation, etc. is bigotry (i.e. sanctimonious hypocrisy) high and progressive? Shut up.

That the twilight faith was tapped to normalize population control and deny women's agency? Male chauvinist pig.

That science is one of four logical domains. A logical domain that is by its nature highly constrained in both time and space, past, present, and future, near and far, reflecting the self-evident knowledge that accuracy is inversely proportional to the product of time and space offsets from the observer. Religious nut.

That refugee crises (excluding people lost on the trail of tears and left behind) and immigration reform are coverups for collateral damage from social justice adventures (and resource reclamation) and dysfunction in second and third-world nations, as well as exploited for democratic leverage and welfare profits. Anti-immigrant.

Well, no; but, we do have a nice rainbow flag to demonstrate how white is rended asunder as a colorful spectrum, less black and brown. Transphobic, selectively, exclusively.

tim in vermont said...

Your weird obsession with lying about me is genuinely sad.

Really. Is that what they teach you in troll school? When you get called out, claim it's lies? You didn't believe at least a couple of weeks ago that all of this stuff about Bill was all conspiracy stuff, right-wing fantasy? I never heard you once make a comment about Bill and Hillary's role in it. Not once. It was out there.

I never said that you specifically claimed that the stuff about Bill's "zipper problem" was a conspiracy theory, I said that when the subject came up, you would just remark about "crazy Conspiracy theories against the Clintons" not associated with any particular comment.

You don't think that sounds like you, maybe there are multiple trolls using your handle.

n.n said...

They need to find another religion. Pro-Choice offers an inconsistent progression and avoids reconciliation.

They need to find another faith. The twilight faith provided a thin veil of privacy, but has now been lifted to expose what... the lies beneath.

Chuck said...

Blogger Unknown said...
Sorry, that should have read, "for twenty years they and Chuck defended these scumbags"...

Who the fuck are you? Where exactly do you step off with a lie like that about me? I haven't ever defended the Clintons and I'm not starting now. How clear do I need to make it, for a dumbshit like you?

Earnest Prole said...

Like Alec Baldwin's podcast, David Axelrod's transcends politics.

AReasonableMan said...

Angel-Dyne said...
Because who ever heard of the energies of an unorganized rebellion of the put-upon being diverted to the purposes of the rather better organized?


No doubt this is part of the story but it worthwhile reading Gretchen Carlson's perspective on how this started.

"After I[Carlson] filed my case — and I describe that as jumping off a cliff by myself — I started hearing from thousands of women all across the country. That was astonishing to me, how this issue filtered into every profession and crossed every socio-economic line from waitresses to teachers to members of our military to lawyers to oil rig operators to sports executives to people in Hollywood, and other journalists. It’s an epidemic. These women had never had their voices heard ... 99.9 percent of them, after they had the courage to come forward over the last 25 to 30 years, none are working in their chosen professions ever again, which is outrageous. I really wanted to give them a voice in the book."

I think some of the Dems got themselves into an unwanted bind with their glee at the fall of the House of Ailes, but many women and younger men also view this as long overdue.

Part righteous crusaders, part mob and part cynical political operatives.

Fabi said...

Pavlov's dog bite lawyer, Chuck.

YoungHegelian said...

I'm not surprised that Gov. Sebelius has belatedly "got religion" in the recent sex wars. But, I would also not be surprised if KS has some very bad memories from her time in the Obama administration as head of HHS, & that are some of her fellow Democrats she'd like to see fed to sharks.

Remember, that it was KS who was head of HHS when the ObamaCare web site debacle went down. She was the titular head of the agency in charge of that project. I say "titular", because I strongly suspect that the web site creation & roll-out was a Valerie Jarret/Michelle Obama co-production to grease the palms of some of Michelle's buddies, & that KS was frozen out from the get-go.

When the roll-out instantly blew up, thus showing to all the world the structural incompetence of the Obama administration that couldn't administer the basics of one of its central legislative accomplishments, it wasn't the higher ups in the WH who took the fall, it was KS.

My guess is that KS knew about the train wreck coming her way, & reached out to every Democratic ally she had to avert the disaster, but all for naught. Now, she'll be perfectly happy to publicly fuck them over, just like they did to her.

Bay Area Guy said...

These Dem women are funny. It takes them 20 years to see what was plainly in view at the time.

I'm tempted to google Sebelius to see where she was in 1996, and what she was saying about Old Slick Willie Clinton at the time.

tim in vermont said...

I haven't ever defended the Clintons and I'm not starting now.

Let me explain this to you as if you were a small child. Whenever the subject of Clinton malfeasance comes up, something of which we have to rid the body politic, you change the subject to Trump. Maybe you are not intentionally trying to defend Clinton, but defending them is the effect of your comments. Notice that ARM and Unknown used the exact same tactics. Though now that the Clintons have been denounced. liberals are busy retouching the past to remove them, I notice.

Drago said...

"Accidental Leftist" and "Bowe Bergdahl Republican" Chuck: "Who the fuck are you? Where exactly do you step off with a lie like that about me? I haven't ever defended the Clintons and I'm not starting now. How clear do I need to make it, for a dumbshit like you?"

Note the almost seamless transition from the passive to over-wrought spittle-flecked aggressive.

Quite telling.

Drago said...

"Maybe you are not intentionally trying to defend Clinton,..."

LOL

"Accidental Leftist" accidentally leftism-ing.

Drago said...

Bay Area Guy: "These Dem women are funny. It takes them 20 years to see what was plainly in view at the time."

They knew it then too.

You have to understand, the very fact that EVERYONE knew Clinton was lying, and even lied under oath, is precisely what the lefties and their LLR allies liked BEST about the entire episode.

That they could twist the rules to their will and there was absolutely nothing any of you little deplorables could do about it.

tcrosse said...

As quickly as the Clintons have been repudiated, they can be rehabilitated when the politics demand it. The trip from Hero to Bum and back again can happen in the twinkling of an eye.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

NPR had a "long time Clinton supporter" (some asshole who worked w/Bill & Hillary for decades) on this morning.
The host lobbed a bunch of softballs in there but did actually mention Juanita & Monica.
SOMEHOW didn't get around to mentioning Paula Jones nor the $850k settlement...funny ol' oversight I guess. Nothing about Wiley or AK state trooper claims, either. Probably cut for time, innocent mistake.

The guy's main thesis was little more than MoveOn...and he was only on to rebut Gillibrand's too-little-too-late mealy mouthed criticisms. It's all very sad, in a way; pathetic.

Angel-Dyne said...

ARM: Part righteous crusaders, part mob and part cynical political operatives.

I wouldn't disagree with that summation.

walter said...

Axelrod knows a thing or two about smear campaigns.
Show should be called "The Axe Hole"

Darrell said...

You have to cut Chuck some slack.
He's on the speculum.

buwaya said...

There is, as always to a paranoid like me, the smell of organization here. Though much seems confused, with several teams operating at cross-purposes.

I doubt very much that a person like Sebelius would essay some comment like this spontaneously, of her own volition. Someone gave her instructions, or permission.

AReasonableMan said...

"Pressure is mounting on congressional leaders to release the names of lawmakers who have secretly settled sexual harassment claims at taxpayer expense."

A safe bet is that there will be more women in Congress after the 2018 election.

AReasonableMan said...

buwaya said...
Someone gave her instructions, or permission.


Her mother?

tim in vermont said...

I wonder if James Carville of the "$100 bill" and the "trailer park" comment will ever been seen on television again? The Clintons poison everything they touch.

tim in vermont said...

That comment was a twofer. Attacking the victim, and beginning the party's drift away form representing working class whites. And, as they say, "That's how you get Trump."

walter said...

Turning to the camera, pointing at lens:
"You're entering the Axe Hole!"

Pookie Number 2 said...

A safe bet is that there will be more women in Congress after the 2018 election.

That's possible, but hardly a given. Hillary's sulfurous womanhood certainly didn't help Bill's victims any.

DanTheMan said...

In the spirit of the season, I am thankful that President Obama did not put Hillary on the Supreme Court.

I'm with buwaya.... why now?
Once, happenstance. Twice, coincidence. Three times, enemy action.

iowan2 said...

A safe bet is that there will be more women in Congress after the 2018 election.

11/22/17, 5:05 PM

What platform are they running on? "Vote for me I dont have a dick?" Or maybe "The guy I'm running against is a molester, just because he has a dick"
I imagine there are some that can sell that swill, but the women out here in fly over country, are very leery of accusations without proof, and painting an entire group with the same brush sounds a lot like bigotry.

walter said...

tim in vermont said...I wonder if James Carville of the "$100 bill" and the "trailer park" comment will ever been seen on television again?
-
If not, it would be a true gift to the vision unimpaired.

Bay Area Guy said...

@Drago,

Maybe Sebelius and her Dem gal pals will recently discover that Sen Ted Kennedy killed a woman (not his wife) in Martha's Vineyard 50 years ago. Hope springs eternal.

walter said...

That was Bridge Violence..

DanTheMan said...

> That was Bridge Violence..

It was mostly peaceful. And the trip was mostly uneventful.

>>(not his wife)
It was Ted and four other men, all married, with 5 young female campaign workers, none married.
Just a coincidence, I'm sure.

Rob said...

I wonder if James Carville of the "$100 bill" and the "trailer park" comment will ever been seen on television again?

Oh God, I hope so. With networks reluctant to show male body parts, Carville's head is the closest we're going to come to broadcast of a circumcised penis.

bgates said...

Pressure is mounting on congressional leaders

I hope Pelosi and Schumer decide to let Ryan and McConnell do that. Even better if the Republicans did the right thing without asking permission.

As quickly as the Clintons have been repudiated, they can be rehabilitated when the politics demand it.

The Comeback Kid!

Drago said...

ARM: "A safe bet is that there will be more women in Congress after the 2018 election."

Lets hope they are there because they were elected, and not just "invited".

tcrosse said...

ARM: "A safe bet is that there will be more women in Congress after the 2018 election."

Then we will find if women are really immune from scandalous behavior. Judging by Mrs Clinton and her myrmidons, I would bet not.

AllenS said...

How about electing to a higher office a fake Indian woman.

Elisa Berg said...

I found myself washing my hands next to Sibelius in a resort town in western Michigan. She was remarkably diminutive, not like I'd imagined her to be from TV. My husband chastised me for not beating the s**t out of her, shoving her in the toilet stall, and returning to my dinner, but I'm not a violent person.

tim in vermont said...

Yeah, I think that an affirmative action cheat who took a minority spot on the Harvard faculty with less than sterling credentials, and who could easily pass as a native in Copenhagen, should be the new face of the Democratic Party! At least she's not rapey, unless you count taking a job intended for a minority as a kind of rape.

Michael K said...

"It started with Gretchen Carlson, not with any Democrat, to their great discredit. Carlson got this bus rolling."

Does anyone remember that Carlson's career was over when she it the jackpot ?

Anybody seen her since ?

I'm not defending Ailes but without him, 90% of those FoxBabes would have been unknown.

This is an age-old story.

Achilles said...

buwaya said...
Hmmm.
Obama gang vs Clinton gang?


National Socialists vs. International Socialists.

To be clear, at least the cabal that had Obama as front man.
He never struck me as a leader.


He tapped into the natural inclination of his followers to attack the other. The violent thugs of the left just need permission, not motivation. Taking peoples stuff does not require any sort of moral or normal courage, just a mob.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Clintons in prison. Justice.

Achilles said...

Chuck said...
But Trump threatened to sue his accusers!

Is Trump's reaction less serious because so many of his litigation threats are so impotent?


He is talking about suing liars for defamation. There is nothing wrong with suing liars for defamation. He might not win but he is entirely within his rights morally and legally to sue liars for defamation.

wildswan said...

The sexual assaults entitled liberals have been committing have created a monster, a FrankenStein, trampling wildly through the Democratic party. Now, in its reaction to the situation, the Democrat Party seems to be the Bride of Frankenstein. Naturally The Bride of Frankenstein is an abused woman and so we hear from the Bride all the usual excuses made by abused women e.g. "He is a good provider" and so the Democrats, in their character as Bride of FrankenStein have taken to saying "He [Weinstein, Franken, whoever] is a good progressive." And abused women say: "He loves me and he's sorry; it won't happen again" just as the Democrats are saying that they can take back Harvey Weinstein and the others who have spent a week in sex therapy and "learned their lesson". The Democrats think they can't survive without their monster and that his abuse is a small price to pay for getting control of the Senate but really they can't survive as the Bride of FrankenStein since they will again lose many suburban women voters as they did in 2016 when Bill Clinton's enabler-bride ran.

Drago said...

AllenS:"How about electing to a higher office a fake Indian woman"

I'm praying that its Pocahontas, but we will never be that lucky.

Perhaps the Republicans should nominate a real Indian woman, Nikki Haley.

You want to see a bunch of lefties go full racist? Just nominate her. In about 15 seconds we will be hearing all about how she isn't a real woman of color, or even a real woman, or even a real human. And her kids better watch out. The lefties and their LLR allies will be targeting them immediately.

tim in vermont said...

Well, I am tired of looking for the exact post from ARM, but here is how he responded to charges that Bill Clinton was a rapist:

He was not fit to be president. That doesn't make him a rapist. - ARM

It's only reasonable to be the last man defending Clinton. It's not like ARM is partisan Democrat, or anything. It's poor form to defend a rapist against all the evidence, especially when that rapist, that forcible rapist, declined to defend himself!

Achilles said...

Drago said...

Perhaps the Republicans should nominate a real Indian woman, Nikki Haley.

You want to see a bunch of lefties go full racist? Just nominate her. In about 15 seconds we will be hearing all about how she isn't a real woman of color, or even a real woman, or even a real human. And her kids better watch out. The lefties and their LLR allies will be targeting them immediately.


Does Haley have any kids? Did she really have those kids? There will be all sorts of leftists demanding to look up her fallopians. And I bet Haley said she could see Cuba from her house too.

The LLR's would acknowledge immediately the seriousness of the charges against Haley. Accidentally.

tim in vermont said...

How many witnesses would it take for ARM to believe them? The were all under threat of prison for lying! Bill Clinton could have. ended this easily at the time simply by providing the logs of his security detail, for example, and proving he was somewhere else! What a risk for a person to take when Bill Clinton, at any time, could have proven they were liars just by producing a few records, that, pointedly, nobody ever asked for!

Lem said...

After all is said and done, it may turn out that under Trump women will end up better off than blacks ended up under Obama.

I know that is not how the narrative is being laid out, but it would be, if Obama was president.

As some of you may recall, Obama's moment was "when the rise of the ocean began to slow and the planet began to heal".

exiledonmainstreet said...

"Attacking the victim, and beginning the party's drift away form representing working class whites"

Tim, I think that shift started happening in 1968. It happened very gradually, contrary to the leftist myth that there was a huge, sudden shift of blue collar southern whites to the GOP because of racism. The Democrats just started being more open about their contempt for the "deplorables" during the Clinton era. Ironically, Bill Clinton's political career (and thus Hill's) would never have gotten off the ground without the support of those Arkansas blue collar voters the Clintons have such disdain for.

CWJ said...

"It's still too little, too late. Too easy to say this now when it's convenient. Nevertheless, good to hear."

Coming from an incompetent duplicitous waste of skin like Sebelius, "good to hear" is extremely generous.

Drago said...

exiled: "Tim, I think that shift started happening in 1968."

Sort of. Between Humphrey and Wallace the dems held on to their base, but by '72 with that lunatic lefty McGovern the dems went "round the bend".

It's hilarious hearing TTR and the rest of the left describing the nefarious "Southern Strategy" in a year where Nixon won 49 states!

I mean, it could just as easily have been called the Boston Harbor Strategy, or the San Francisco Strategy, or the Motor City Strategy!

steve uhr said...

Wishing everyone a peaceful and happy Thanksgiving.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Happy and healthy Thanksgiving, everyone.

Comanche Voter said...

Now that someone has belled the Billy Jeff Big Cat, all the Obama mice and other munchkins will come out to play--and snipe--and virtue signal.

What I'm waiting for is the time when someone has hung a great big stinking corruption necklace around Obama and his Justice Department and his IRS. I'll see then who comes out to virtue signal.

bgates said...

It's hilarious hearing TTR and the rest of the left describing the nefarious "Southern Strategy" in a year where Nixon won 49 states!

Yeah, but if you look at the elections for the House for that year, the Republicans picked up seven seats in the south, and only thirteen seats elsewhere.

Ray said...

Agree with the enemy action comment.

I’m not sure if the Bernie wing or Obama.

The attacks have a Chicago smell...

Unknown said...

Oh, Sebelius is angling for a slot in the Obama Machine.

Is OM what will take over once the Clinton Machine emits its last "honest graft" puff of filth?

$2G was advanced auctioned into The Foundation for stolen goods after the election... Those despots and regimes aim for an ROI on their bribes...

IE "How am I losing to this guy?"

FBI better talk about Manafort's foreign nominee companies possible "need" to file FBAR forms instead of how the FBI and JD gave Clintoon a pass on everything.

Look, over there!

tim in vermont said...

Democrats and the media have been gaslighting us on this stuff for decades, which they are beginning to admit. Now they are still gaslighting us on the Clinton corruption, and that is going to be a tougher bit of sledding to get them to admit that.

Chuck said...

Blogger tim in vermont said...
Democrats and the media have been gaslighting us on this stuff for decades, which they are beginning to admit. Now they are still gaslighting us on the Clinton corruption, and that is going to be a tougher bit of sledding to get them to admit that.

I know that I haven't been "gaslighted." The media that I consume -- the National Review, the Weekly Standard, the WSJ editorial pages -- were never fooled by the Clintons. Nobody has done a better job of taking apart Clinton and Obama untruths.

Of course, my media heroes weren't gaslit by Donald Trump, either.

exhelodrvr1 said...

"liberals are busy retouching the past"

Those aren't good touches.

tim in vermont said...

Sebelius also refused to take a position on whether Sen. Al Franken, a Democrat, should step down in response to allegations of groping. She drew a distinction between Franken's reaction and those of Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore, movie mogul Harvey Weinstein and several others, who have denied accusations of sexual assault and sexual harassment.
"Franken has done something different than some of the other males involved," she said. "He first of all admitted behavior and apologized


Of course it's different with Democrats! And BTW, Franken never admitted it all, did he?

Chuck said...


Blogger Achilles said...
Chuck said...
"But Trump threatened to sue his accusers!

"Is Trump's reaction less serious because so many of his litigation threats are so impotent?"

He is talking about suing liars for defamation. There is nothing wrong with suing liars for defamation. He might not win but he is entirely within his rights morally and legally to sue liars for defamation.

Right I get mad when the other commenters in this page lied about me. I might talk about suing them, if I thought it was worthwhile.

But Trump has this amazing history of bullshitting about suing people. So his threats to sue the women making allegations about Trump is best seen as more personal nastiness from Trump, and not any serious vindication of legal rights.

Trump threatened to sue Lawrence O'Donnell; he never did.

Trump threatened to sue the comedy club patrons who roughed up Don Jr. but he never did.

Trump went through the laughable motions of a lawsuit against Bill Maher, and it went nowhere.

Trump really did bring a defamation action against the author of "TrumpNation" (Timothy O'Brien) for five billion-with-a-B dollars. And it was thrown out before anybody had to even prepare for trial. (But not before Donald gave a hysterical discovery deposition; much like his deposition in the Trump University fraud case.). Trump lost them all.

This year, before threatening his sexual misconduct accusers, Trump's lawyers threatened US Weekly for reporting on others' claims that Barron Trump was autistic; but never did.

So all of that is why I suggest that Trump has a remarkable history for threatening litigation that is actually meritless and impotent. It's just a problem for anyone who associates with Trump, and who doesn't enjoy a reputation for being in the courts and in the tabloids just for the sake of publicity.

PB said...

I want to thank Ross Perot for giving us Bill Clinton. If Ross hadn't had a bug up his butt about the Bushes, Clinton wouldn't have won his first term and would still be in Arkansas dicking local bimbos. Hillary would have divorced him by now and she would be doing public interest legal work as a paralegal after having served prison time for her cattle futures and Whitewater work. Chelsea would be a greeter/cashier at Cracker Barrel in Little Rock after having graduated from UA Little Rock with a BA in sociology.

exiledonmainstreet said...

And BTW, Franken never admitted it all, did he?

11/23/17, 6:17 AM

He denied behavior which was not captured on camera. He couldn't very well deny the boob grabbing incident after that picture was all over the Internet and TV.

I have read that BLM no longer wants cops to wear body cameras because the evidence tends to show that the police very often have a good reason for shooting a suspect. BLM and the media can't fall back on witnesses who say young Deshawn was just sitting there, trying to decide which Ivy School school he wanted to go to become a nuclear physicist, when the cracka cops just walked up to him and blew him away for no reason whatever. Reality is interfering with the narrative.

Maybe all women (and attractive young men as well) who work with Congressmen or Hollywood and Silicon Valley types should start wearing body cameras to work.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Chuck - the pro-Clinton media (the media) pimped Trump because they thought he'd be easy to beat.

Bad Lieutenant said...


PB said...
I want to thank Ross Perot for giving us Bill Clinton.


Yeah, with a chain mace.

Mac McConnell said...

On a personal level I like Kathleen, but we have to believe she didn't know about Bill Clinton's problems before he became POTUS. The truth is that the media and Democrat political insiders all knew years before Clinton ran. Less we forget, Clinton was to announce his candidacy four years before he actually ran, but pulled out because of "Bimbo Eruptions". So began the Arkansas Clinton machine gearing up of bimbo intimidation as battle space prep for the presidential run four years later. Kathleen has been involved in Democratic national politics since she was a kid, her father was Democrat Governor of Ohio. So if I knew about Bill Clinton from sitting in the Bar of the Excelsior Hotel in Little Rock Kathleen knew this as a Dem insider, the media knew this. They all knew Clinton's history when they jumped on his band wagon when he ran. Kathleen was not just some house wife in Topeka, Kansas who decided one day to enter politics.

So now this is just shear political hypocrisy and battle ground prep.

Amadeus 48 said...

"Chelsea would be a greeter/cashier at Cracker Barrel in Little Rock after having graduated from UA Little Rock with a BA in sociology."

There is nothing wrong with any of those things, except maybe the sociology degree. Those can be quite soft.

Paco Wové said...

"He first of all admitted behavior and apologized"

If accused, you must be guilty. No defense is possible. Denial is proof of guilt.

Mac McConnell said...

I was at my older sisters house last night and we watched a couple of Hallmark movies. I know, but they were actually romantic and sweet. My point is that in every one by today's new standards every film was loaded with "sexual harassment".

BobJustBob said...

This one is my personal favorite...

Every leader (and each of us) is human and flawed and makes mistakes, but there is a difference between those who are flawed who work for the common good and those who are flawed who could care less about the common good. Huge difference.
— Matthew Dowd (@matthewjdowd) November 22, 2017

Chuck said...

Blogger Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...
Chuck - the pro-Clinton media (the media) pimped Trump because they thought he'd be easy to beat.

I regret to say that I have an awful lot of agreement on this. Bill Kristol had the guts to say as much to Joe Scarborough live on national tv. Joe didn't like it.

As for "the media" being an anti-Trump (or pro-liberal) monolith, what do you say about Fox & Friends, Cavuto, Hannity, Carlson, Ingraham, Limbaugh, Savage, Breitbart, Drudge, Steyn, the American Spectator, the Washington Times, Malkin, Coulter, etc., etc.? There's a world of slavishly pro-Trump media.

And, there's an even larger world of pro-conservative media who deal with Trump fairly without supporting any liberal narratives. The Journal, the National Review, the Weekly Standard. Etc., etc.

Drago said...

Thread Topic: Democrats/Leftists/LLR's finally coming around to the obvious conclusions everyone else made 20 years ago.

"Accidental Leftist" Chuck comments: nothing about Clinton, Trump once threatened to sue people but didn't follow through.

Many more very easy and obvious conclusions may be drawn.

Drago said...

"Accidental Leftist" and "Bowe Bergdahl Republican" Chuck: "I regret to say that I have an awful lot of agreement on this...."

Things LLR Chuck never writes when agreeing with lefty narratives: "I regret to say that I have an awful lot of agreement on this....."

Many more very easy and obvious conclusions may be drawn.

Drago said...

Terms LLR Chuck never uses when describing leftist/dem/MSM/LLR media sources: "slavishly anti-Trump"

Many more very easy and obvious conclusions may be drawn.

SGT Ted said...

"It's still too little, too late. Too easy to say this now when it's convenient. Nevertheless, good to hear."

Not really, because it's all still politically convenient bullshit. If Hillary were president, they wouldn't be bringing this up at all. They'd be blaming Patriarchy, or possession of a penis.

Folks like these are still actively defending those in power that are on their team, like Frankengroper. They are only going after Bill and Hill because they no longer effectively wield power for their team.

Unknown said...

“As for "the media" being an anti-Trump (or pro-liberal) monolith, what do you say about Fox & Friends, Cavuto, Hannity, Carlson, Ingraham, Limbaugh, Savage, Breitbart, Drudge, Steyn, the American Spectator, the Washington Times, Malkin, Coulter, etc., etc.? There's a world of slavishly pro-Trump media.

And, there's an even larger world of pro-conservative media who deal with Trump fairly without supporting any liberal narratives. The Journal, the National Review, the Weekly Standard. Etc., etc.”

That’s not good enough. Rachel Maddox should be kissing the hem of his garment!

Chuck said...

Blogger SGT Ted said...
"It's still too little, too late. Too easy to say this now when it's convenient. Nevertheless, good to hear."

Not really, because it's all still politically convenient bullshit. If Hillary were president, they wouldn't be bringing this up at all. They'd be blaming Patriarchy, or possession of a penis.

Folks like these are still actively defending those in power that are on their team, like Frankengroper. They are only going after Bill and Hill because they no longer effectively wield power for their team.

When you write something like this, is there no sense of irony about Trump's own history? The multiple allegations, the Access Hollywood tape; any of it.

Because "Drago" is such a relentlessly ignorant and insulting commenter toward me in particular, I need to say this in the most clear and unequivocal way possible: I am not excusing or defending Al Franken. I don't like Al Franken. I wish Nirm Coleman had beaten Franken. Just maybe, Voleman did beat Franken and Franken's first term was stolen. Anyway; is that clear enough? I am not excusing, defending or supporting any Democrat. Not Franken, not Bill Clinton, not the aged joke Conyers; NONE of them.

I am also not excusing Trump. And that seems to be the big difference in this blog. Some have consistent standards. Others want to excuse/ignore/minimize/rationalize Trump's depredations.

Drago said...

"Accidental Leftist" and "Bowe Bergdahl Republican" Chuck is very very upset that there are conservative voices in the media that are not reflexive anti-trumpers.

Many more very easy and obvious conclusions may be drawn.

Bill Carran said...

To late lizard lips.

Paco Wové said...

"it's all still politically convenient bullshit."

Word. Like that Dowd quote above, where "work for the common good" means, as always, "does stuff I like". The inability of a grown man to realize that he is making this childish conflation of personal desire with public policy would have shocked my younger self, but the older more cynical me realizes this is partisan trousered-ape world we inhabit. "Jerks on my team are OK, jerks on your team (i.e., all of them) aren't".

Christopher said...

It's still too little, too late. Too easy to say this now when it's convenient. Nevertheless, good to hear.

It's not good to hear. It's self-serving garbage.

On a happier note, thanks for the blog, Althouse, Happy Thanksgiving!

Chuck said...

Blogger Paco Wové said...
...
... "Jerks on my team are OK, jerks on your team (i.e., all of them) aren't".

Your use of quotation marks; was that merely rhetorical, or was that an actual quote from Trump's Wednesday press gaggle on the South Lawn where he endorsed Roy Moore?

Drago said...

"Bowe Bergdahl Republican" Chuck: " I am not excusing or defending Al Franken. I don't like Al Franken."

LOL

Drago said...

Kathleen Sebelius, by her recent (cynical and self-serving) public comments, has offered more criticism of the Clintons in one fell swoop than LLR Chuck has in years.

Many more very easy and obvious conclusions may be drawn.

Mac McConnell said...

"Your use of quotation marks; was that merely rhetorical, or was that an actual quote from Trump's Wednesday press gaggle on the South Lawn where he endorsed Roy Moore?"

Hell if I was Resident Trump I'd be in Alabama campaigning for Moore every week till the election. Christ, The media and the Democrat party convinced us decades ago that character doesn't matter and before that they just covered for their side or made myths of Camelot.

Henry Hansen said...

I'm waiting in anticipation for the apology from George Stephanopoulos for coining the term "Bimbo eruptions".

I fear my wait will be a long one.

Chuck said...

Blogger Drago said...
Kathleen Sebelius, by her recent (cynical and self-serving) public comments, has offered more criticism of the Clintons in one fell swoop than LLR Chuck has in years...

Look at that, dear readers. How would Drago even know all of what I've said or wrote about the Clintons?

One thing that distinguishes me from Ms. Sebelius and all other Democrats is that I don't have any previous support of them to walk back. I've never shown a molecule of support for either Clinton.

Drago is just insanely, obsessively determined to try to undermine me, because I criticize Trump. That is how it works. Althouse puts up a post, I point out how it directly or tangentially relates to Trump, and then the Drago wing of the Althouse commentariat attacks me personally. Et cetera, et cetera.

Drago said...

"Bowe Bergdahl Republican" Chuck: "Look at that, dear readers. How would Drago even know all of what I've said or wrote about the Clintons?"

Feel free to go back several years and present the specific criticisms you made of Clinton.

Very simple.

Very very simple.

So simple, in fact, that it's quite telling that you, a self-described lawyer, would fail to do so.

Almost as if you already know there won't be any so, since the facts are against you, you begin to pound the table!

Obvious conclusions may be drawn.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Chuck, I can demonstrate one difference. You would always call HRC Secretary Clinton or Senator Clinton or just Mrs. Clinton. You showed her, the leading enemy of the country, a respect that you resolutely deny President Trump, who was our champion, our only salvation from the forces of evil. You don't care who you hurt.

Jason said...

Chuck accusing normal people of “insanely, obsessively” doing anything = lulz.

Drago said...

Still waiting for self-described barrister and "Bowe Bergdahl Republican" Chuck to hit us with all that meaningful and specific criticism of Clinton over the years.........

No we aren't....lol

Martin said...

Where was Sibelius in 1998, or 2008 or even last Spring?

"Good to hear," I am not so sure. She talks as if it was only other people who excused what the Clintons did. She needs to take responsibility for her silence, and then explain why she was silent then but speaking out now. Honestly, and that means admitting her partisanship overruled her morals.

If she admits to her own craven actions I might grant her the time of day.

SGT Ted said...

"When you write something like this, is there no sense of irony about Trump's own history? The multiple allegations, the Access Hollywood tape; any of it."

Of course. But the irony lies in the fact that Democrats were still glossing over, ignoring and actively supporting Hillary Clintons "nuts and sluts" attacks on the women accusers in defense of Bill Clinton to save his Presidency, while now turning around and clutching their pearls over Trumps words and the women who accused Trump, as if no one can see the obvious politically convenient double standard.

But, as we saw last year, it backfired on them because Trump supporters could quite fairly point out 20 years of lefty excuse making for Bill Clintons sexual predation as "only about sex" and "it's a private matter", which simply confirmed that Democrats alleged concern for victims of sexual harassment has always been politically based and not based on principles or morality. The confirmation of this is that now the Clintons are being thrown under the bus because they are no longer politically useful.

Look, the Democrats playbook of weaponizing the religious morality of GOP supporters against GOP candidates has stopped working.

And yes, my own feelings on this matter is that as long as Democrats make excuses for their own sexual predators and continue slut shaming women accusers of Democrats, I could give two shits about 40 year old accusations aimed at GOP politicians by Democrats seeking to win elections. Why should I care? It's all political bullshit.