Top Menu

Follow Taylor on Twitter

New Reporting Adds Pieces to the Hillary Clinton Puzzle

New reporting reveals the strengths of Hillary Clinton that will challenge the country to embrace a fearlessly relentless woman.  [State Department photo/ Public Domain]

New reporting reveals the strengths of Hillary Clinton that will challenge the country to embrace a fearlessly relentless woman.
[State Department photo/ Public Domain]

THE SCOOP in the Washington Free Beacon is spectacular reading not to be missed. There’s no reason for anyone to get defensive about the pieces of a portrait surfacing through the newly discovered papers from her late and closest friend Diane Blair. It’s part of the new reporting that has begun to appear on Hillary Clinton.

In 1992, as the Washington Free Beacon piece opens, Stan Greenberg and Celinda Lake released a confidential memo on Hillary Clinton while working for Bill Clinton’s presidential campaign. The findings: “What voters find slick in Bill Clinton, they find ruthless in Hillary.”

Ambitious feminists are fierce bitches. Deal, America.

“She’d make a tremendous president.”David Petraeus [HRC, new book by Jonathan Allen and Aimee Parnes, due out Tuesday]

Petraeus joins former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates who had laudatory things to say about Hillary Clinton in his own memoir. Stanley McChrystal is another who respects Clinton, and one of the many military allies she has, which extends to many hallways throughout the Pentagon, as well as the C.I.A.

William Jefferson Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama never enjoyed such respect.

The papers of Diane Blair add proof, as more and more information surfaces that Hillary Clinton, that she is not her husband’s appendage when it comes to politics, and she won’t be Barack Obama’s either.

One of the things Hillary Clinton brings to the White House is that she won’t try to change Washington, instead she’ll work it. In doing so she will not suffer many fools, which is how she gets the “ruthless” title. America hasn’t shown a readiness for a fierce feminist leader yet, but it might be an idea whose time has come or at least a moment when it’s time to test it.

“HC says press has big egos and no brains,” wrote Blair on May 19, 1993, during the White House travel office controversy. “That [the White House is] just going to have to work them better; that her staff has figured it out and would be glad to teach [Bill’s] staff.” [Washington Free Beacon]

It’s not the first time Hillary Clinton has told people to stop whining. In a response to Anne-Marie Slaughter’s article bout women not being able to have it all, after she quit her State Department job, a position Secretary Clinton created for her, in a conversation in Marie Claire about work-family balance, Clinton said the following.

“I can’t stand whining,” Clinton said. “I can’t stand the kind of paralysis that some people fall into because they’re not happy with the choices they’ve made. You live in a time when there are endless choices. … Money certainly helps, and having that kind of financial privilege goes a long way, but you don’t even have to have money for it. But you have to work on yourself. … Do something!” [Huffington Post]

It’s the section in the Washington Free Beacon on Bill Clinton’s sexual dalliances that is particularly interesting to me, as you can imagine. Since 1998, I’ve been saying, most recently on Sunday in a tweet to Brian Stetler, that former President Clinton’s affairs were consensual, specifically talking about Monica Lewinsky. One of the things that the media and others simply cannot face and never has been able to deal with is Monica Lewinsky’s own culpability in the l’affair.

America doesn’t like to think of a 22-year-old female on the prowl for a hot power male to seduce. As I’ve written innumerable times, Bill Clinton was an idiot to fall for a young woman, but it’s the oldest story of mankind.

This quote from Hillary Clinton is exactly correct, and this is a subject on which I’m an expert.

“HRC insists, no matter what people say, it was gross inappropriate behavior but it was consensual (was not a power relationship) and was not sex within any real meaning (standup, liedown, oral, etc.) of the term.” [Washington Free Beacon]

Like John F. Kennedy and a lot of men before him, in the White House and punching a clock, some guys like a little strange, no matter the risks. The more powerful, the more entitled to it they feel.

In 2008, one of the biggest raps against Hillary Clinton was her husband. By the end of the campaign things had shifted dramatically, with the interview with the HRC authors shedding more light and space between the power couple.

“While she had been on the mock stage at the convention center, Bill had delivered edits. He had ripped up the structure and added some of his own poetic flourishes,” wrote authors Amie Parnes, of The Hill, and Jonathan Allen, of Bloomberg News. “But Hillary was having none of it. Bill and the set of advisors she had hired from his 1996 campaign had proved disastrous at developing her message and strategy for the campaign. She was the one in the hot seat now … ‘It’s my speech,’ she declared as she left to find [Bill].” [The Hill]

The only way to understand Hillary Clinton is to accept that she’s a fierce woman who fell in love with a man who would become her partner in all things, including changing the world. She stepped aside, because she was a mom and he was on his way to the White House. This partnership was formed by two people caught in the shift between the feminine mystique years and the feminist revolution, a time when old-fashioned marriages were falling apart, because women wanted more. The Clinton marriage is traditional in the 1950s sense, where boys will be boys, and girls are supposed to ignore it. Hillary’s independence added a new twist on the expectations, however. Navigating these contradictory components in the public eye remains difficult.

Today we’re caught in a country fighting to break free of the traditional stereotypes of women and men, but also relationship and marriages. The policies of Bill Clinton caught colliding with his personal behavior proving that he’s just as human as everyone else. The only person who finds this news is Senator Rand Paul who hopes to put Clinton on the defensive.

Into this void will step Hillary Clinton. To the extent she will succeed will be seen through her ability to embrace her life and his, warts and all. No reason for apologies and no one should bother erecting a facade of someone that no one can recognize through reporting that reveals lives lived in the cauldron of American life.

Every man who ever ran for the presidency has had his life dissected. Hillary Clinton knows the drill.

It’s just beginning.

The Clinton Files

, , , , , , , , , , ,

16 Responses to New Reporting Adds Pieces to the Hillary Clinton Puzzle

  1. mjsmith February 10, 2014 at 11:39 am #

    One thing I found interesting in the Free Beacon article is Hilary’s favorable words for Senator Bob Packwood.

    Senator Bob Packwood was a “serial philanderer” and he was also a great Senator. He resigned when he was forced to turn his personal/professional diaries. His farewell speech is worth listening to.

    “Hillary Clinton’s blunt assessments were not confined to Monica Lewinsky. In a Dec. 3, 1993, diary entry, Blair recounted a conversation with the first lady about “Packwood”—a reference to then-Sen. Bob Packwood, an influential Republican on health care embroiled in a sexual harassment scandal.

    “HC tired of all those whiney women, and she needs him on health care,” wrote Blair. “I told her I’d been bonding w. creeps; she said that was the story of her whole past year. Fabio incident—sweeping her up, sending her roses.”

    Privately, the Clinton White House was acutely sensitive to public perceptions of President Clinton’s treatment of women.”

    • Taylor Marsh February 10, 2014 at 12:17 pm #

      Hillary Clinton is a practical politician who has the gift of compartmentalization that men are so good at employing.

      HRC needed Packwood for the health-care legislation. Political versus personal, what impacts more people wins with her.

      One reason Blair’s papers are interesting, though Clinton insiders hate their release, is that it reveals HRC as capable of being non-emotional on highly personal issues. While devastated and furious, because she’s a wife in love with her husband and keep of the family flame, as all women are in their relationships, Hillary always had a larger role, which was to save her husband’s presidency & make sure Dems didn’t mutiny.

      A consensual affair, even serial episodes, means nothing. It’s just sex and not that important in the scheme of the Clintons’ partnership.

      It’s a very modern viewpoint inside a marriage founded on traditional values.

      • mjsmith February 10, 2014 at 1:35 pm #

        “A consensual affair?” I do not think HRC consented to any of her husband’s affairs.

        • Taylor Marsh February 10, 2014 at 1:52 pm #

          HRC? um… That’s not what consensual affair even refers to.

          • PeggySue February 10, 2014 at 1:59 pm #

            LOL!

          • mjsmith February 10, 2014 at 2:41 pm #

            adjective: consensual – relating to or involving consent, esp. mutual consent.

            I do not think that Bill had Hillary’s “consent” when he had his affairs. If he did, that would be news to me.

            Am I missing something here?

          • secularhumanizinevoluter February 10, 2014 at 8:33 pm #

            “I do not think that Bill had Hillary’s “consent” when he had his affairs. If he did, that would be news to me.

            Am I missing something here?”

            No….just indulging in your usual disingenuous concern trolling. Please…you and the rest of the repugnantklan,teabagging wingnutesphere keep harping on this nonsense. It will be nice to see Hillary beat the pants off of whatever crazed wingnut manages to out crazy the others for the nomination.

        • newdealdem1 February 10, 2014 at 3:46 pm #

          Good grief. What Taylor is saying is that the affair between Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky was consensual and they were both adults and knew what they were doing. Not only that but Ms. Lewinsky pursued Mr. Clinton. She was almost obsessed with him and certainly in love with him. And, Clinton didn’t resist.

          There was NO harassment here unlike what Rand Paul has been deliberately distorting for his own surmised political gain (as he prepares for a 2016 POTUS run) with his base because the lunatic part of the GOP base – which is almost all of them – loathes Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton.

          He’s throwing that “rancid red meat” out there for two reasons: one, to indirectly harm Hillary Clinton by association. And, two, because of the war on women coming from the GOP which is real and continuing with oppressive legislation to control women’s basic right and freedom of reproductive choice/bodily autonomy.

          And, then, perversely/cleverly turning that GOP war on women on it’s head by pointing a finger at Bill Clinton’s infidelity and that that makes him an oppressor of women, thereby trying to silence Hillary Clinton from using the actual GOP war on women as a legitimate political strategy in the general election. And, Rand Paul has surely been part of that war since he was elected to the Senate. With the larger American population, this political tactic of his is going to backfire if it hasn’t already done so.

          Most Americans (those who were alive at the time of the impeachment) thought the GOP leadership had gone too far when they actively pursued Bill Clinton as they did. So, it backfired then and will again.

          The consensual affair between Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky had nothing to do with Hillary but it doesn’t surprise me in the least that you would interpret “consensual” as Hillary giving Bill permission to betray her. Your cockeyed view of her taints all your responses about her whatever the topic. And, that’s unfortunate because it prevents most of us from having a dialogue with you.

          One more thing:

          I was on vacation in Paris at the time of the impeachment in 1998 and met up with several Parisienne’s and to a person none could understand why President Clinton should be subjected to an impeachment because of an infidelity and blamed the American people. I told them it wasn’t the majority of the American people who wanted him impeached but his political enemies who had pursued him for years and found the opportune time to “get rid of him” which had they been successful would be tantamount to a coup.

          • mjsmith February 11, 2014 at 2:12 pm #

            As poor character that a person who has sex with an intern in their office is, that is not why Bill Clinton was impeached. He was impeached for lying under oath, perjury. The way George W. Bush and now Governor Christie is attacked, it is hard for me to take your complaint that somehow President Clinton was treated unfair.

            In the 60 Minutes interview with the Clinton’s, Hillary said “I am no Tammy Wynette…”, meaning that she will not stand by her husband while he cheats on her and disrespects her. Bill said in the same interview that all of his cheating ways are behind him.

            The affair was wrong. First of all he was doing it in the Oval Office, which in most cases, having sex with an intern especially in the office/workplace would get anyone fired. Second he clearly lied under Oath. It is not 50% or 100% Monica Lewinski’s fault as you suggest. It is 100% Bill Clinton’s fault. How very wrong it is to blame a woman when a man does something wrong. Now there is interpretations of this Free Beacon article that Hillary Blamed herself for her husband cheating on her. Sad.

          • secularhumanizinevoluter February 13, 2014 at 9:25 am #

            First….for the imbecilic ass monkey posting here who has screamed BENGHAZI,BENGHAZI……..

            http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/02/12/fox-host-finally-accepts-the-truth-about-bengha/198030

            even your primary source of talking points has finally been forced to admit the truth…they and their campaign against Rice and Clinton are LIARS and LIES.

            Second

            “The affair was wrong. First of all he was doing it in the Oval Office, which in most cases, having sex with an intern especially in the office/workplace would get anyone fired”

            Nice display of your complete ignorance of reality. A consensual affair between an intern and a CEO would cause ZIP unless there was a stated policy barring it. Cheeze you clowns are stupid when it comes to the real world!!

            third.”. Second he clearly lied under Oath.”
            About a consensual blowjob….so IMPEACH THE PRESIDENT of the most powerful nation on earth?!!!! And a repugnantklan controlled Senate couldn’t even get a simple majority let alone the 60 needed to convict.

            fourth. “Sad.”

            Yes….you make about the saddest excuses for arguments I have read in a long time…not surprising…but sad.

  2. lynnette February 10, 2014 at 12:19 pm #

    The beauty of aging a bit is that you begin to not need others’ approval for who you are. I think Hillary is who she is and that’s what we will get. We kind of want to see our famous figures up close and personal anyway – the media should do a bang up job of that. ;)

    • Taylor Marsh February 10, 2014 at 12:23 pm #

      Absolutely. HRC’s prowess affords her the grace to let other people worry about the dish, while she stays focused on changing the world through US power.

      A strong, confident woman like Hillary who’s been through this all before no longer has to get down into it.

      This is fascinating stuff.

      What a woman like Clinton can do with the charge of “ruthless” will be FANTASTIC.

  3. Pilgrim February 10, 2014 at 1:23 pm #

    The charge of “ruthlessness” may not hurt her, may help her. It suggests strength, one to be respected. Respect is much more important, and more lasting, than frothy adulation.

    • Taylor Marsh February 10, 2014 at 1:53 pm #

      It just sounds ridiculous 20 years later.

      Absolutely, adulation does a disservice to the citizenry when applied to a politician in a potential position of such immense power.

  4. PeggySue February 10, 2014 at 1:58 pm #

    “Slick in Bill Clinton, ruthless in Hillary Clinton.”

    That about says it all regarding male and female assessments–two powerful people for whom the descriptives shift strictly on gender lines. Ambition = ruthlessness for women, yet those same qualities are admired in men. The word ‘slick’ was always used in terms of Bill Clinton in an attempt to diminish his uncanny political skills. Never really worked because he beat his political enemies at their own game.

    The American press is about to get a schooling, methinks.

    Meanwhile Rand Paul is screeching that HRC is disqualified as a POTUS candidate because she refused to send reinforcements to Benghazi. Did he read the bipartisan Senate report???

    This correspondence will undoubtedly be rich fodder for all sorts of op-eds and pundit musings. I found it interesting that Hillary Clinton has received recent praise from no other than General Petraeus. This folds into Gates’ comments about HRC’s competency. She knows how to play with the big boys, the brass, something that will drive progressives wild.

    What we now have [and I understand these letters/correspondence have been around since 2010] is an inside look at Clinton’s personal life. It’s dishy and gossipy but Hillary Clinton stands in the middle with the same sort of independent, fierce point of view that she shows in public. Are there moments of regret and anger? Of course.

    As Taylor notes: Just the beginning of a long, long slog.

  5. giantslor February 10, 2014 at 2:29 pm #

    I refuse to visit right-wing websites, so I’ll just take your word for it.

.... a writer is someone who takes the universal whore of language
and turns her into a virgin again.  ~ erica jong