Since the first of the year, we have seen Hillary Clinton only twice. Both appearances were at inaugurations of candidates for public office who had worked for her in the past and whom, out of loyalty and friendship, she had endorsed and campaigned for: N.Y.C.Mayor Bill de Blasio and Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe. There should be nothing surprising about that support. She knows who her friends are even if staffers perceived the political field to be so complex that they needed to develop a nuanced spreadsheet.
She has been keeping a very low profile for weeks to the infinite frustration of the media. News outlets appear to be convinced that without Hillary somehow in the spotlight print outlets will receive no traffic and cable channels no viewers, and so Hillary’s fate, at present, is to be ever-present even while she very likely works hard on the draft of her book behind closed doors. Her “shadow campaign,” her “hit list,” and, of course, “Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi” currently dominate the rumor mill that perpetually spins thanks to a stream swollen with concern, rumor, and possibly fear. What’s she up to? Why isn’t she speaking out? Where is she? etc. etc. etc.
At some point in the future we may read what she considers to be her ultimate statement on Benghazi which is unlikely, given her consistency, to differ much in substance from this one in October 2012.
QUESTION: You say you don’t want to play the blame game, but certainly there’s a blame game going on in Washington. In fact, during the presidential debate, Vice President Biden said, “We didn’t know.” White House officials calling around saying, “Hey, this is a State Department function.” Are they throwing you under the bus?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Oh, of course not. Look, I take responsibility. I’m in charge of the State Department, 60,000-plus people all over the world, 275 posts. The President and the Vice President certainly wouldn’t be knowledgeable about specific decisions that are made by security professionals. They’re the ones who weigh all of the threats and the risks and the needs and make a considered decision.
What exactly is it that the media wants from Hillary Clinton? What is it that the public wants? Certainly her critics appear to want their pound of flesh and blood. Among her fans, there are those who similarly would exact additional blood, sweat, and tears beyond what she has already donated over 40+ years of public service whether or not she decides to take up the standard once more. (Others more patiently await her deeply personal decision to be made in her own good time.) And then there is the press.
Their blonde obsession with Hillary, no matter what the story, sells, brings on traffic and viewers. So it should come as no surprise that keeping her in the headers and on the covers becomes the story in the absurdist world that is called mainstream media.
Can Anyone Stop Hillary?
Why Clinton’s 2016 candidacy-without-a-campaign dominates the political galaxy
The truth is that this life as a private citizen is eminently distinguishable from life as a candidate. Through her Clinton Foundation outlet she does, in fact, keep us informed of her issues and initiatives. Her public speaking events provide her a platform on current events as she chooses to address them (or not, as is her prerogative since she is neither a public servant nor an announced candidate for anything beyond grandmotherhood). Yet the media continues to focus, not on what she actually says and does, but rather on the issues she selects not to address (e.g. the Iran deal) and the initiative she has not resolved to assume. There is only one possible outcome to this media frenzy, and that is invention. Reportage becomes a creative process and fiction ensues.
Clinton has not decided whether to run for President because to do so would only slow her down. Indecision serves her well by preserving flexibility in her schedule, by shielding her from answering every Internet controversy and by allowing the Republican opposition to take shape and draw fire.
Really? Mr. Von Drehle knows why she has not yet decided? File under “fiction.” Stop her? From what?
Sometimes I think media tries to push the “she’s running in 2016” story just to incite criticism – which will inevitably come from those who fear her power, her popularity, and her sheer ability. Media has rarely been a friend to Hillary. They had no choice but to feature her in a positive way during her stint as SOS when her approval numbers were skyrocketing and her stellar performance could not be completely ignored- although they never gave her credit for all of her accomplishments.
We Hillary supporters who lived through their Obama love fest in 2008 know never to trust the MSM. We already knew FOX was no friend. They pretended for a while, as they tried to snipe at Obama and the other news networks who were basically doing PR for him. But, again, we knew. IMO, one of the best lessons we Hillary supporters learned in 2008, was – don’t expect fairness from the Dem Party, media, and certainly not the Republicans.
Hillary has taken more undeserved criticism than any politician or government servant in memory. The fact that she can still have an enormously positive attitude and a great desire to work for the good of her country, in various capacities, is a testament to her strength of mind, spirit and body, and to her courage.
I hope she knows that so many of us continue to believe in her and support her regardless of whether she runs or not.
LikeLike
I think she knows. While she was SOS, though, the media never gave her half the coverage they give Kerry. So while they may have grudgingly credited her, they did very little to cover her accomplishments.
LikeLike
Exactly. Obama received the credit when her effort was successful, and she received blame when he screwed things up.
It’s so disturbing to see what’s happening now with Benghazi, with the distortions and lies being circulated as truth.
LikeLike
Well, Hillary is not one to dodge (unlike Christie). She has faced up to Benghazi in the past and will not dodge it in her book. Her side will be heard, and it will not be in conflict with anything she has already said. We have her words as weapons in this battle. What can they lob at her when she has taken full responsibility?
LikeLike
I totally agree. The media was enamored with Obama in 2008 and treated Hillary poorly. I’m still angry about it.
LikeLike
The media has lost all legitimacy when it comes to Hillary and many other things.
LikeLike
Here’s the bipartisan Benghazi Report and it does not indict Hillary.
Click to access senate-intelligence-committee-report-on-benghazi.pdf
There is a petty and partisan opinion section at the end and wingnuts are making much of it on the InterWebs.
I think the reason they all publish negative material about Hillary is because it’s lucrative. They will get more clicks, dollars, viewers, fans, likes, followers, whatever if they have a provocatively negative title involving Hillary. That’s what being most admired Woman SO MANY TIMES gets you.
LikeLike
Sorry. Comment above is two separate things…I meant to place a line between the two.
LikeLike
It’s OK. We understood.
LikeLike
This is a perfect example of how they use negative headers (your point above) to capture attention. Many people read only headers. I see this all the time on Facebook. They argue about the header without reading the content. This header causes one to think that Hillary was in favor of this idea. When you read the article you discover that she was being as circumspect as possible, offering the idea but not actually favoring it. She correctly thought that a thorough discussion needed to include that possibility, and she never endorsed it.
LikeLike
[…] apparently absence makes the heart grow curiouser and curiouser and the brain softer and softer. The media’s blonde obsession with her that generated Politico’s “shadow campaign” and “hit list” […]
LikeLike