Subscribe via RSS Feed Connect on Google Plus Connect on Flickr

Hitchens on Hillary: The case against drama

Wednesday, 11 March, 2015

Hillary Clinton went on a First-Lady tour of Asia in April 1995. Along the way, she visited Nepal and was introduced to Sir Edmund Hillary, of Mount Everest fame. Thereupon, she announced that her mother had actually named her for the great mountaineer. This assertion ended up a decade later in her husband’s memoirs.

Fact: Hillary Clinton was born in 1947, and Sir Edmund Hillary and Tenzing Norgay did not climb Mount Everest until 1953. Jennifer Hanley, a spokeswoman for Mrs Clinton, put it like this in October 2006 after the fiction had been exposed: “It was a sweet family story her mother shared to inspire greatness in her daughter, to great results I might add.”

All of this, and more, can be found in “The Case Against Hillary Clinton” by Christopher Hitchens, which appeared seven years ago in Slate. His conclusion was devastating: “Indifferent to truth, willing to use police-state tactics and vulgar libels against inconvenient witnesses, hopeless on health care, and flippant and fast and loose with national security: The case against Hillary Clinton for president is open-and-shut.” And, as the 2008 campaign record shows, the primary voters responded accordingly.

Incidentally, the Slate sub-heading on the Hitchens article was “Why on earth would we choose to put the Clinton family drama at the center of our politics again?” and Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo places “drama” at the heart of his take on the latest Hillary theatre. In “The Joy and the Drama” he observes, wearily, “The Clintons are great. But there is always something. Always. Always a dance, always drama.”

The case against Hillary Clinton remains conclusive. Martin O’Malley offers less drama.


Comments are closed.