Trump World Grab-Bag--A Collection

Friday, January 15, 2016

Carly the Incoherent

Given the general tone that 2016 presidential candidate Carly Fiorina has taken with respects to Hillary Clinton, her cheap shot that she, Fiorina, unlike Clinton, likes to spend time with her husband is not really shocking, just tacky and personal. But when interviewed on it by Chris Matthews, she went from tacky to just plain incoherent:

Now, this doesn't make sense:

“There are so many other things we could talk about like the fact that Mrs. Clinton wants to go to the White House — she’s qualified for the big house,” Fiorina said as she dropped all pretense of fake smiling for the camera.”She should be prosecuted. She has not been prosecuted for things that took a great warrior out of office, David Petraeus.”

Huh? So Hillary Clinton doesn't like being with her husband, because she stayed with him despite his affairs, but she is responsible for David Petreaus not being CIA Director....because he had an affair.

Fiorina should probably leave Hillary Clinton's personal life alone, and maybe give up her falsehoods about her various good general friends.

Maybe she should go spend more time with her spouse?


mikey said...

To be fair, the various forms of nonsense, gibberish and incoherence displayed by the Republican primary candidates are a certain kind of performance art, a kind of political dadaism that often serves as a tremendously effective way to avoid deeper questioning. Going back to the original sin, Sarah Palin word salad, and perfected by the right wing media who can say one thing while being clearly heard to say another, it's worthy of study in its own right.

Of course, it is entirely dependent on an audience that already knows what it wants to hear, and that will only believe people who tell them what they already believe. This kind of internally-facing echo chamber is what, more than anything else, has given us the politically stupid era we find ourselves living through.

Yastreblyansky said...

Vixen, I think she means Clinton is guilty of the same kinds of crimes as those for which Petraeus got the sack, that is of revealing secret information to people without security clearances, through the email "scandal". She can't say it straight because it's so obviously untrue to anybody not in the cult, so she alludes to it--it's a dogwhistle. They all, especially Rubio, keep saying Clinton is being investigated by the FBI, Bush did it in the debate, although that's not true either, because there are some actual facts that a sloppy-minded person could sort of honestly interpret that way.

Formerly Amherst said...

Vixen, I don't know what the outcome of the FBI's investigation will be. As an old military guy I know that the government takes classified material pretty seriously. However, the FBI will present or has presented their evidence to the Attorney General, and it is hard for me to see a Democrat and Obama appointee moving to indict Mrs. Clinton. It seems to me that there is a firewall with the Attorney General.

My hope is that should an indictment be forthcoming the powers that be simply allow Mrs. Clinton to bow out gracefully, citing health concerns or some other reason. I would prefer her to have the option of withdrawing from a position with dignity. I cannot really see how following through with an indictment of her would help the United States, and I doubt it will happen.

Frankly, I have never really understood why Hillary decided to run. I know that this has been a lifelong aspiration for her. But I understand that her lifestyle as a very wealthy and connected New Yorker was very pleasing to her. As part of New York's rich and famous, she had every desirable amenity laid at her feet, and her friendships and social actions were at the very top of society. I gather that Hillary took to this lifestyle. And so I don't understand why she would not simply choose to continue living it. She's not a kid anymore and running for President is gruelling.