"That’s a kind of buck-passing that excuses their spouses from having functional consciences and limited self-control. And marriage is a special kind of relationship, one where we make unusual commitments to love and support the other person that we might not extend to others. That devotion inevitably interferes with objectivity. If Hillary Clinton, or any other woman, is privately angry at or blinkered about another woman who comes forward to say that she had an affair with Bill Clinton, or that Bill Clinton sexually harassed her, I’m willing to allow Hillary Clinton that private fallibility and cruelty, that momentary lack of solidarity. We should all hope we find such forgiveness in moments when we’re faced with astonishing personal pain and respond in ways that demonstrate the limits of our strength.... I respect Clinton’s personal religious faith and the depth of her belief in forgiveness. What I can’t accept is the idea that forgiving [Burns] Strider means minimizing the consequences he faced for his behavior, especially when doing so put him in a position to offend again. Other women bore the cost when Clinton tried to focus on redeeming a man who worked for her rather than protecting the woman who did."
From "Hillary Clinton and I are done" by WaPo "pop culture" writer Alyssa Rosenberg.
I'd never noticed the big "forgiveness" theme in the story of Hillary Clinton, but I have heard people justify her behavior as a special "wife" privilege. It's good to hear one of her proponents say now she's gone too far, but I think that's only happening because Hillary missed in her grasp at the presidency, so there's no partisan drive to defend her and because the #MeToo movement is so strong right now that it's just embarrassing to try to work out an exception for her. I see nothing but politics here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
40 comments:
How about chairing the nuts and sluts hit team?
Wow, what a profile in courage! Breaking up with Hillary - after Hillary's decades of enabling, after her political career is over.
Tank (Johnson) is right!
Hillary did a lot more than stand by her man. She actively threatened and attacked women who told the truth about Bill.
The trial balloons are coming out to see if Hillary is finally disposable.
Bullshit. Leftwing females love HIllary, the corrupt money grubbing money whore who lies and is corrupt to her core.
Funny how easily these “feminists” completely disregard Juanita Braoddrick’s accusations, and the five contemporaneous witnesses, including the woman who found her bleeding, crying, and with torn clothes in the hotel room.
It’s just astonishing to me.
Except none of them cared about Mary Jo suffocating in that submerged car while Teddy Kennedy worried about his political career. So it’s not surprising at all.
Suffocated over four hours, per the diver’s testimony at the inquest.
What could possibly be more painful than watching Alyssa Rosenberg try to think? This is the woman who declared that "Romeo and Juliet" is a terrible play because it's not feminist and it glorifies teen suicide. She's a frickin' dunce. Moving on ...
"Clinton tried to focus on redeeming a man who worked for her" Funny stuff. Clinton rewarded loyalty in a team player and meant to keep guys on the reservation, women's tender feelings be damned. She didn't have any; why should they?
Hillary's problem isn't that she didn't rein in her man. It's that she didn't do it and then had the gall to run for President while asking everyone to forget about it.
Had she left the White House at the end of Bill's second term to stay home and bake cookies, it wouldn't have been a problem.
But that wasn't her style. She knew what she wanted to do and she needed Bill to do it. And so the public rightly judges her for her choices.
Bill and Hillary's relationship was always strictly business. Wifely emotions never entered the picture. Even Mafia wifes had more feeling and dedication than Hillary had for Bill. Has anyone seen them together since Hillary lost the election? Except maybe on a "business" trip?
So calling your husband's victims "nuts and sluts" is fine. Defending you rapist husband when confronted with his crimes is fine.
But not punishing a man badly enough is just one step too far.............
At least Lady MacBeth felt guilt, when she went around crying “Out, out damned spot” You know, the blood stain of guilt that would wash away, it was from shame. Hillary feels no shame.
I respect Clinton’s personal religious faith and the depth of her belief in forgiveness.
Okay, maybe, just maybe, HRC is a believing Christian whose faith shapes her life. I doubt it, but maybe I, too, should be more charitably Christian.
But, forgiveness! HRC & forgiveness? According to everything I've ever seen on that woman in the public record, HRC & forgiveness have never even been in the same room. The woman holds a grudge like a character out of a Conan the Barbarian novel.
Both the WAPO and the NYT have now sanctioned “throw her under the bus” pieces. The Clintons are truly finished. When the whip comes down over the fake dossier, they’ll both have clean hands.
For some reason, Forgiveness and the Clintons make me think of staged photos of the couple dancing on the beach with Don Henleys "the Heart of the Matter" playing in the background in some PR media clip put together by a friendly news agency to run on a morning news-tainment shows. Did that happen? Jeez. Sorry for the image if it didnt.
Although, thinking about Clinton and Don Henley (on Althouse) leads me to remember when Lazlo did a great send up of Lindsay Buckingham and Don Henley for a few posts. Did that happen? I think I laughed, reading it.
Proving that the good can be found (tangentially) in just about everything, as long as you go in the right direction.
I see nothing but politics here.
You aren't the only one. What is it about, specifically, Hillary Clinton that nominally honest and intelligent people fall for her crap over and over and over?
It's funny; as I began to read this post, I actually didn't think that Althouse was going to use it as another chance to take a shot at Hillary Clinton on grounds of hypocrisy/weakness/craven opportunism.
I had imagined that Althouse had already beaten that one to death.
I actually thought that Althouse was going to turn the argument; to something along the lines of, "Since Hillary is not assigned to govern her husband's behavior, Melania is not assigned to govern her husband's behavior, either."
When the Clintons were in power, I thought their marriage was creepy and phony and even ugly. Just like the Trumps now.
https://img.thedailybeast.com/image/upload/c_crop,d_placeholder_euli9k,h_1439,w_2560,x_0,y_0/dpr_2.0/c_limit,w_740/fl_lossy,q_auto/v1492115397/articles/2016/03/17/the-wedding-that-explains-the-election/160316-daly-trump-clinton-tease_dpubuo
Only you, Chuck. Only you.
Marriage is a special relationship. It interferes with companionship and involves the gummint and lawyers in your private life. A friendship or unmarried partnership can be better and help you maintain your privacy and dignity.
Why would any rational person want to do anything the Pope favors, for Chrissake?
Wow...Chuckles comes to the defense of a Democrat and attacks Trump...who would have thunk it?
You can’t even fucking read, can you, Gabriel? I wrote not one kind word about the Clintons, much less did I “defend” either one of them.
You just seem to want to pretend that Trump is somehow not as bad as Slick Willie.
Both Silck Willie and The Donald are serial philanderers and liars. They’ve both been credibly accused of sexual misconduct and even sexual assault. Trump, perhaps more than Clinton. They’ve both demonstrated contemptible behavior including lying under oath. Trump, maybe more than Clinton. They’ve both led sham marital lives; Trump maybe more than Clinton. At least Clinton is still on marriage #1. And I’m not aware of Clinton making any payments to porn stars.
"They’ve both been credibly accused of sexual misconduct and even sexual assault. Trump, perhaps more than Clinton. They’ve both demonstrated contemptible behavior including lying under oath."
Do tell.
And I’m not aware of Clinton making any payments to porn stars.
Why pay when you can have your wife go on TV and tell everyone there's nothing there but a political conspiracy against you?
And it would have worked if Monica just had her dress cleaned.
Melania is not out defending Donald. I don't think we'll ever see her defending Donald.
I think any interview will put those questions off limits. And if she never does another interview because they won't agree, she's not going to care.
And the reason is that unlike Hillary and Michelle, Melania's future is not tied to Trump's successful presidency. She's not hoping to get rich after he leaves office. She's not trying to leverage his administration into a political career for herself.
She's just a wife, who doesn't feel that her future is tied up in the public perception of her husband.
That's the subject here, Chuck, the actions of the wives not the allegations against the husbands.
If Hillary Clinton wants to forgive, accept, or ignore her husband's serial philandering, that's her business. But when she acts as an accomplice after the fact to rape and sexual assault, that's our business.
You just seem to want to pretend that Trump is somehow not as bad as Slick Willie.
No real Republican would say that Donald Trump is anything close to being as bad as William Jefferson Clinton. You thought you were baiting a trap from Trump supporters, but the trap has closed on you. No honest person would say that the allegations against Donald Trump are believable, much less credible, least of all after a $750,000 slush fund turned up to be used to pay women to make allegations of sexual harassment against Trump.
Both Silck Willie and The Donald are serial philanderers and liars. They’ve both been credibly accused of sexual misconduct and even sexual assault. Trump, perhaps more than Clinton.
Do dismissing a credible charge of forcible rape, in which Bill Clinton lured a supporter into a hotel room and forcibly raped her, leaving her bleeding and crying, with torn clothes, as described by a witness in her statement to federal investigators, In fact there are six statements to federal investigators backing this charge up. Dismissing the Broaddrick rape charge as if it doesn’t even exist, is that what a lawyer calls “not defending” somebody.
You should think about that over and over Chuck, and possibly it will sink into your thick skull that you ARE defending Bill Clinton.
Clinton was kicked out of Oxford for rape, most likely, and had an incident at Yale too, not #MeToo incidents either, this was way before that.
You don’t help your case when you ignore facts on the record Chuck.
Here, read what Federal investigators were told and the Clinton. machine’s responses here:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/1999/03/is_juanita_broaddrick_telling_the_truth.html
I wrote not one kind word about the Clintons, much less did I “defend” either one of them.
You should get out a dictionary and look up “defend” again.
#metoo is a hit job on the Clintons for 2020.
I wonder what the texts between Donna Brazielle and Oprah look like?
it’s just embarrassing to try to work out an exception for her.
“Out, out, damned spot!”
Dismissing the most serious accusations as “nutjob conspiracy theories” comes under the hading of “defending.”
Granny just won't get off the stage and she's ruining the play for the rest of us.
Jeez, Chuck. Give it a break, will you.
At some point Chuck, assuming he’s real and not some paid-for troll, will begin to understand that the readership here is either skimming past his comments, or reading them purely for the entertainment value of watching a man (if Chuck is a man) make a public fool of himself.
And by the way, where IS Lazlo?
Hillary was just trying to rehabilitate and save the soul of her sexually abusive campaign worker, it didn't work for the Catholic Church either.
Althouse, I think you need a new tag that reflects the Hillary-gets-thrown-under-the-bus as a tactic to triangulate against Trump with regards to #MeToo. It isn't working, and likely won't work -- but it's long overdue and entertaining to watch the writers tie themselves up into knots.
Sorry, Chuck, I can't understand you with that big dick in your mouth.
I noticed Ms. Rosenberg's labored effort yesterday. Judging by her photo, she was just a tyke when Slick Willie was getting his willie slicked in the Oval Office, so maybe we should cut her some slack. Of course, one of the chief advantages of being a journalist is that they age slowly, if at all. At least, judging by their byline photos.
The problem with Hillary is not that she "stood by her man". The problem is that she viciously attacked his accusers, knowing that they were telling the truth. At the time, one could imagine that she was defending her husband, but it is now evident that what she thought she was doing was advancing her own career.
Post a Comment