Hillary is trying to walk back the "Don’t let anybody
tell you that corporations and businesses create jobs" line in her
Friday speech. On Monday:
“I shorthanded this point the other day, so let me be absolutely clear about what I’ve been saying for a couple of decades,” said Mrs. Clinton, who is widely expected to run for president in 2016.
“Our economy grows when businesses and entrepreneurs create good-paying jobs here in an America where workers and families are empowered to build from the bottom up and the middle out — not when we hand out tax breaks for corporations that outsource jobs or stash their profits overseas.”
Shorthanded? She would have done better to call it a "speak-o". I shouldn't need to point this out, but her Friday remarks are not "shorthand" for her Monday remarks.
Friday: transparently false left-wing demagogic bullshit.
With Hillary, as with her husband, dishonesty is the default setting. The late Christopher Hitchens nailed it years ago when he titled his book about the Clintons No One Left To Lie To. Except he was wrong. In low-information America, there are plenty of people left to lie to. And Hillary's taking full advantage.
Writing at Patterico's Pontifications, I think JVW
could be indulging in sarcasm:
So, dear reader, it’s really your fault if you didn’t understand the full context of Hillary!’s remarks in Massachusetts. It is most certainly not a case where Hillary! was caught pandering to a far-left audience which probably hopes to replace her with their own local sweetheart Elizabeth Warren as the 2016 nominee for President. This is just another instance where perhaps she slightly misspoke or where maybe her statement just needed a little bit of clarification.
The links will jog your memory, if your memory need be jogged.
I'm not the biggest fan of Jen Rubin, the WaPo's "conservative"
blogger, but she's
This latest gaffe confirms that when Clinton’s lips move she is telling us what she thinks her base wants to hear, not sharing any original or sincerely felt position of her own. Moreover, her utter lack of spontaneity has now become a primary characteristic. As one Capitol Hill Republican put it, “She overcompensates when she’s in uncomfortable territory.” Like trying to be a populist. Or trying to attack the corporations whose trough she has fed on for millions of dollars in speaking fees. Or trying to appear nonchalant about a challenger from her left, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who actually believes anti-business rhetoric.
As Ms. Rubin notes,
Hillary is trying, however ineptly, to tap into the "you didn't build
that" meme used by President Obama and Senator Elizabeth "Fauxcahontas"
Warren. It's wildly appealing to many of our "Progressive" friends,
but as Ross
Kaminsky notes, it shouldn't be so to anyone else.
As with so many liberal themes, it is easier to rile up voters with jabs at the rich (the irony of which, coming from Hillary who just took $225,000 from an irresponsible UNLV to give a single speech, is almost too much to take) than it is to explain why most of “the one-percent” deserve our praise for getting rich rather than our scorn for not sufficiently “giving back.” After all, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs and Jeff Bezos (and many thousands of others who aren’t household names) did not take anything from us.
Rather, they have improved our lives dramatically, lowered our costs for things we buy or tasks we must complete, given us access to more information than Encyclopedia Britannica’s editors could ever have imagined, allowed us to communicate, network, and even play with each other in fantastic new ways, and, pace Hillary Clinton, directly and indirectly created lots and lots of jobs.
On a lighter note, Wired has helpful advice
for cat owners: "Why
Your Cat Thinks You’re a Huge, Unpredictable Ape". And it's longer
than the obvious three-word answer: "Because you are."
And Iowahawk has your Tweet du Jour:
If you got an A in Questioning Authority, you flunked. #Berkeley— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) October 28, 2014