Substantively, there are good reasons to object to Hillary Clinton as president, even if her opponent is Donald Trump.  Barack Obama was apparently good enough for Mrs Clinton, despite his lack of experience.  But not good enough for former president Bill "awful legacy of the last eight years" Clinton.

That the package is aesthetically unpleasant is of secondary importance.  But I'm going to have fun with that all the same.

Birch twig broom wipe server clean!

You'd think, natural politician or not, somebody would have coached her to act like she's winning when she's winning, and not to yell over her applause lines.
Like many other people, Hillary’s voice becomes less engaging the louder she speaks. And for some reason she frequently gets angry when giving victory speeches. Even Donald “I Insult Like An Emotionally Scarred 3rd Grader Who Misses His Mommy” Trump usually, if not always, switches to “somewhat decent” during his victory speeches.

Some of the millions of people watching Hillary last week noticed that she seemed angry while claiming victory.
That's the way it is, despite what the palace guard thinks.
Hillary likes to emphasize the fact that she’s a woman as a reason to vote for her for president. Fine. But noticing that she does not have the dulcet tones or speaking ability of an NPR host is not sexist. Neither is noticing that Bill and Hillary Clinton have legendary problems telling the truth. It’s not sexist. It’s not even that observant. It’s just obvious and true.
What also ought be obvious and true is that the Democrats are pushing the same technocratic-Four-of-Five-Experts-Agree Fatal Conceit that has worked so well from the Great Society to Hope and Change.

No comments: