“This is the fundamental tension of being Clinton’s chief speechwriter: How do you write effectively for a policy-driven candidate who is allergic to campaign-speak? …But it’s also deeper than just a speechwriting problem: It’s about how the most experienced person to ever run for the White House continues to struggle with one of the most basic parts of the job: committing to a message that helps establish a general sense of affection from the electorate.
—-Annie Karnie in Politico, in a post called “Has Hillary finally found her voice?”
The news media has become so biased, so incompetent, so arrogant and so dishonest that I could fill this blog every day with only posts aimed at exposing the horrific and damaging “profession” of journalism. The increasing boldness with which reporters and editors aim to manipulate public opinion and government policy by intentional disinformation is staggering. In focusing on Politico’s Big Lie about Hillary’s credentials, I chose not to write about several others, such as, for example, Cincinnati Enquirer reporter Jessie Balmert, who wrote that the number of murders in the U.S. last year was 15 times higher than it actually was. Another candidate was liberal website ThinkProgress, which headlined a story “GOP Platform Proposes To Get Rid Of National Parks And National Forests.” (It proposes nothing of the sort, but ThinkProgress’s false headline operates as both clickbait and confirmation bias fodder for its readers.)
I chose Politico’s bland statement as fact what is not a fact, but rather easily disprovable pro-Hillary propaganda, because this technique is so insidious. The biased news media repeats falsity over and over again until it is accepted as truth. No, Trump did not say that “Mexican immigrants were rapists.” No, equally qualified women do not get only 77 cents for every dollar paid to their male counterparts. Those two examples however, have some arguments, however unfair and warped, to justify them. By no possible interpretation can it be claimed that Hillary Clinton is “the most experienced person to ever run for the White House.” It is an unequivocal falsehood, perpetuated by the news media out of incompetence and ignorance, or in order to intentionally mislead the public.
Hillary Clinton was a U.S. Senator for eight years. She was Secretary of State, a poor one, but that’s not relevant here, for four. She gets some experience credits for being First Lady for eight years, though how relevant that experience is to being President is open to debate. That’s it. It’s not the least relevant experience a Presidential candidate has had, but it is notably short on elected executive experience: she never has served as a governor, which is perhaps the most relevant experience there is. Even avoiding such legitimate challengers as Dwight Eisenhower (Is overseeing the Allied Forces in World War Two as ideal a test of leadership an individual can have?) or anomalies like Grover Cleveland, who was the only non-incumbant Presidential candidate who had previous experience as President of the United States (from 1884 to 1888…Might being President for four years qualify as “more experience” than Hillary has had? I think so), there have been candidates that lapped Clinton in the experience department, such as…
George H.W. Bush: Four years in Congress, Ambassador to the UN, Envoy to China, Director of the CIA, Director of the Council on Foreign Relations, and Vice-President under Ronald Reagan for eight years.
Richard Nixon: Two terms in the House; two years in the Senate; eight years as the most policy-involved Vice-President up to that point, and who also served as President during President Eisenhower’s recuperation from a serious heart attack.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt: New York State Senator; Assistant Secretary of the Navy; Governor of New York
Theodore Roosevelt: New York State assemblyman, the U.S. Civil Service Commission; New York City Police Commissioner (and wouldn’t THAT be a useful curriculum vitae entry today!); Assistant Secretary of the Navy; Governor of New York and Vice President of the United States.
That’s just winning candidates in the 20th Century, and the most clearly superior to Clinton in relevant experience for Presidential leadership.
In summary, the statement that Hillary Clinton is “the most experienced person to ever run for the White House” is, to be blunt and crude, bullshit. But you will hear it repeated over and over by Hillary surrogates, and see it written over and over by pro-Hillary reporters and pundits, and consequently believed by millions of Democrats who are historically ignorant and believe what they are told, as long as it is favorable to Hillary Clinton.
A reporter can say that she has experience. A reporter can say that she has more relevant experience than Barack Obama had. A reporter cannot ethically and honestly state as fact that Hillary Clinton is “the most experienced person to ever run for the White House,” because it is factually false.
I recommend not trusting journalists that write lies like this, or publications that allow them to do so.