Well, I don't know that about the vomit for a fact, but it's a good guess given the tone of her remarks in a NYT interview published today.
For instance, consider this remarkable neurotic loop:
And in a blunt reflection about the role sexism played in her 2016 presidential campaign, she said women were the voters who abandoned her in the final days because she was not “perfect.”She blames women voters for demanding the impossible of her. This is her latest avoidance of reality, after she first blamed the scary Russians and their obvious agents of influence consisting of two female candidates in 2016, Green Party nominee Jill Stein and Democratic Representative Tulsi Gabbard.
(That's particularly rich about the Green Party. I mean, they're even more minor than the Libertarians. It's a fourth party at best. Stein got 1.07 percent of the popular vote and no Electoral College delegates in 2016. But Hillary, in her obsessive need to blame anyone else for her own failure, accuses even Stein of being a willing tool of Putin in his nefarious schemes to keep Hillary from being elected President.)
She accepts no blame for herself, needless to say. Watch her "Russians! Russians! Russians!" interview here.
Hillary's mental health crisis will be on full display as we enter the final stretch to election 2024. So long as she has media access and there are wine stores that deliver, she'll be treating her fans to prize displays of blame-shifting such as the New York Times saw today.
14 comments:
The gift that keeps on giving!
She IS relentless and obsessed. I have to give her that.
Thursday May 30th we witnessed the recreation of Robin Hood II!
Robin Hood ... an army of yeoman bowmen ... humm.
Those middling peasants could take down armored knights with their bows, you know. That is indeed a prospect to consider.
The longbow was a terrifying weapon. The crossbow was supposed to replace it but didn't!
The crossbow was supposed to be such an inhumane weapon the Catholic Church banned it, which meant everyone went out and got it as fast as they could.
Personal arms play a critical part in the development of political freedom. It's a line from the cannon (making the castle vulnerable) to the bow ("F-you, mounted knights") to the Brown Bess musket to the Second Amendment.
"The Social History of the Machine Gun" - probably now out of print - and "The Gun" about the era of automatic firearms, are two great books about guns driving history.
This is sorta on topic and I couldn't resist:https://youtu.be/kdW6oBPao4Y?si=6o_oT2UH5dwjmhJn
Now that's where Hillary's whole personality puts her at a disadvantage. She'd never have two friends loyal enough to carry her carcass out to a wine bar.
You're right about arms and freedoms. In essence all rights have been gained and maintained by arms.
One of the last Royal Governors of the colony of Virginia wrote basically that same thing to King George (from memory but very close): "There is no creature so miserable as a Royal Governor who must enforce unpopular laws in a colony of land-owning freemen every one of whom is armed."
Or as one of my co-workers puts it in a poster on his cubicle wall: "George Washington didn't fight the British with his right to free speech - he shot them."
Last one, promise! https://youtu.be/8yS0rJDxLbo?si=pDTX3f-fNyA9UuEg
I always enjoy hearing about the Ledbetter clan.
I still promise but I gotta go fix some brakes!
Post a Comment