Madame President 2008?
Published 18 November 2004
Hi! You've stumbled upon a blog post by a guy named Ryan. I'm not that guy anymore, but I've left his posts around because cool URIs don't change and to remind me how much I've learned and grown over time.
Ryan was a well-meaning but naïve and priviledged person. His views don't necessarily represent the views of anyone.
R. Emmett Tyrrell and Mark W. Davis love the Clintons. They love
their egos, they love their escapades, and they love their
sordid secrets. In Madame Hillary: the Dark Road to the White
House, Tyrrell and Davis dispense their intimate
knowledge
about whom they consider the most dangerous liberal in
the Senate. Or perhaps Republicans throw this moniker at any liberal
running—or with potential to run—for high office.
Tyrrell and Davis discuss Senator Clinton's political beginnings at
Wellesly college and her liberal mentors, analyze in-depth HRC's own book, and her
political strategies. Luckily for Tyrrell and Davis, they are
unfettered by responsible writing. They need not rely on competant
and responsible quotations, and often favor anonymous sources.
Tyrrell and Davis were lucky to score exclusive interviews with a
whitehouse insider
, a senate aid
, and even a senate
colleague
. Not to imply that the writers are dishonest, but by
quoting people without providing their name, they are not restricted
by it.
Tyrrell and Davis do perform an amazing job with language.
Madame Hillary is soaked with pre-packaged language,
analyzed and polished in order to inflame Conservatives and
Conservative-leaning moderates. Tyrrell and Davis recycle phrases
coat-and-tie radicals
, pennyloafer conservatives
and
the infamous culture smog
to the point of obnoxiousness.
These phrase fit well within frames that help establish distrust
between progressives and the rest of the world. The word
radical implies violence and change, while adding
coat-and-tie adds a dishonest tinge, not unlike a
wolf-in-sheep's-clothing. In contrast, Conservative implies
cicumspection and wisdom, and pennyloafer qualifies this
person as down-to-earth and casual. Which seems more appealing?
A quick reading of Madame Hillary would seem to be a
frightened analysis of HRC's character and
politics, but its language attempts to hide her incredible
accomplishments. Tyrrell and Davis describe her warlike
manner, and simplifying spin and mistakes into lies
. What
they are describing, however, is Senator Clinton's strong education,
empathy for the less fortunate and common person, and her maturation
from Arkansan first lady to New York Senator. While listening to
Madame Hillary, I couldn't help but be impressed by the
Senator's intelligence, political savvy, and drive. It takes an
intelligent reader to see through the propaganda.
Hindsight is what they say it is, because many of the problems Tyrrell and Davis foresaw Clinton causing in 2003 where actually prepetrated by the Bush White House. Her politiking and aggressive political strategies would only be acceptable if she were a member of another political party. No one can aspire to the highest office in our country without getting their hands dirty, but if you can wade your way through the intentional and poorly supported character assassination attempt, Madame Hillary offers excellent reason to vote for Rodham-Clinton in 2008.