What Happened: Grit and Gratitude (It took grit and I’m not grateful) by Amanda S. Green

What Happened: Grit and Gratitude (It took grit and I’m not grateful) by Amanda S. Green


Grit and gratitude is the title of the next section of Hillary Clinton’s book. She’s still trying to figure out “what happened” and why she lost the election. Poor Hillary is without a clue, unlike most of the rest of the nation. If there was any question before that she refused to admit, much less accept, she had anything to do with losing the election, this chapter seals the deal.

She picks up the story one day after the election. It seems her team had to scramble “to find a hall for my concession speech.” As I read that, I figuratively, if not literally, scratched my head. They had the Javits Center atrium all set up for her acceptance speech. Who can forget the pictures of what she was going to do that night? The image of the US map on the floor and the glass ceiling over her head. But they didn’t have a place for her to say she’d been beaten. Wasn’t the Javits Center good enough?

Oh, I know, they hadn’t reserved it for the next day. Maybe that was it. I bet they planned to have the election watch, party and acceptance speech all done by the next morning, complete with clean up. And, yes, my tongue is firmly planted in my cheek right now. But wait, here’s an article showing the area being cleaned up and put to rights the next day. So why couldn’t she use the same venue, sans the map and glass ceiling?

The truth is probably much simpler than all that but it doesn’t fit with the image she is trying to give in the book. As noted in this article, Hillary apparently didn’t have a concession speech prepared. So, when it became clear she wasn’t going to win the election, she first had to pout and rant and rave about how the country had let her down. Then she had to concede, first with the call to the new President-Elect and then in a speech to the country. I have no proof of this but I have a feeling her campaign had no idea when or even if she would give that speech. So, they had to find something once she let them know Bill, or someone, talked her out of her room to give the speech.

As she writes about that morning, she describes how she’d decided not to wear white “the color of the suffragettes”. Instead, she chose to wear purple, “a nod to bipartisanship (blue plus red equals purple) . . . We had really gone the distance on the symbolism.” Perhaps that was part of the problem. She relied on symbolism instead of listening to what the voters were concerned with. She went with ideals and not needs.

Her ego shines through again with this comment, “My job was to get through this morning, smile, be strong for everyone, and show America that life went on and our republic would endure.” (emphasis added) Is there any doubt she saw herself as our great savior? I’d say as our “great white savior” but that would be so politically incorrect of me. VBEG. In that one statement, she proves in her passive-aggressive way that she felt no one, not Trump, not Bernie, no one could “save” our country, that she was our only hope.

I guess it shouldn’t surprise any of us to see Donna Brazile, DNC chair for the latter part of the campaign, throwing Hillary under the bus – sorry, clarifying at least some of what happened:

He [Gary Gensler, the chief financial officer of Hillary’s campaign] described the party as fully under the control of Hillary’s campaign, which seemed to confirm the suspicions of the Bernie camp. The campaign had the DNC on life support, giving it money every month to meet its basic expenses, while the campaign was using the party as a fund-raising clearinghouse. . .

Right around the time of the convention, the leaked emails revealed Hillary’s campaign was grabbing money from the state parties for its own purposes, leaving the states with very little to support down-ballot races. . . Yet the states kept less than half of 1 percent of the $82 million they had amassed from the extravagant fund-raisers Hillary’s campaign was holding, just as Gary had described to me when he and I talked in August. When the Politico story described this arrangement as “essentially … money laundering” for the Clinton campaign, Hillary’s people were outraged at being accused of doing something shady. Bernie’s people were angry for their own reasons, saying this was part of a calculated strategy to throw the nomination to Hillary.

Maybe Hillary should have asked members of her own party what happened. I’m sure they would be glad to tell her. Instead, she said, “I also stew and ruminate. I run through the tape over and over, identifying every mistake – especially those made by me.” (pg. 20). Funny, she’s had a year and she’s written a book and she still doesn’t know what happened and she still hasn’t identified any mistakes she made, at least not publicly.

Her ego shines through like a spotlight pointing out the failings of the rest of us poor peons. “I doubt that many people reading this will ever lose a presidential election.” Wow! Full of herself much? She does “wave” to Al, John and Mitt. Lucky them. LOL. I’m sure they would be happy to sit down with her and discuss the failings of her campaign and what she could have done differently.

She did allow herself a day to “lay low” before she started reaching out to people. “Everyone was so upset – for me, for themselves, for America.” There she goes again, putting herself first. If she hadn’t already established a pattern, I wouldn’t have thought much about it but she has made it abundantly clear in the opening pages of the book that she is only concerned for herself and her wants. Just as she’s made it clear that she was going to be the savior of the country.

“The White House is sacred ground. . . I hope [John] Adams would have been okay with a wise woman. I can’t imagine what he would say if he could see who was walking those halls.” (pg. 24)

Pardon me while I laugh hysterically. That statement is wrong on so many levels when you consider either of the Clintons. First, for the White House to be sacred ground, Slick Willy did his best to debase it and Hillary aided and abetted. Can any of us forget “I did not have sexual relations with that woman”? Or can we forget the way Hillary attacked the women who accused Bill of sexually assaulting them. But, according to her today, that’s been litigated and in the past. How she can say that and keep a straight face, all the while condemning Weinstein and the others is beyond me.

But Slick Willy’s escapades aren’t the only laughable things when looking at the above quote. She hopes John Adams wouldn’t have a problem with having a “wise woman” in the White House. Obviously, she means herself. Answer me this: if she is so wise, why can’t she figure out what happened during the electoral season that caused her to lose the election? Why can’t she see that she, herself, was part of the problem?

She goes on for page after page describing what she did to recover from the loss. When asked how she was, she either answered honestly or said she didn’t feel like talking about it. She let people do things for her. (Hmmm, considering how she now says she didn’t know what her campaign was doing re: Russia, etc., I would have thought she was letting them do things for her BEFORE the election). She spent a lot of time thinking about her mother. She did yoga. She drank her “share of chardonnay”. She went to Broadway shows and caught up on TV. She prayed (which is the last thing she notes having done during this time).

I prayed that my worst feast about Donald Trump wouldn’t be realized, and that people’s lives and America’s future would be made better, not worse, during his presidency. I’m still praying on that one, and I can use all the backup you can muster.

Remember, this from the woman who said she didn’t speak negatively about him after the election, who said she wanted everyone to give him a chance. This book was published September 12, 2017. The book deal was announced February 1, 2017. So, despite her claims that she wanted everyone to give Trump a chance, she was ready to throw him, and everyone else, under the bus less than a month after he took office. Way to prove we have to think twice about believing anything that comes out of your mouth, Hillary.

But she realized her “task was to be grateful for the humiliating experience of losing the presidential election.” (pg 34). All I can say is that if what we’ve been seeing from her since the election is her gratitude, I’m thrilled beyond words that we haven’t seen her really angry. We might all melt into a waxy mess like the Nazis at the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark. Of course, that wouldn’t hurt her feelings – or those who supported her. After all, most of them think we’re Nazis anyway.


I’m going to finish up the book in a series of weekly posts over the next month or so. I’ve taken a more in-depth look at the opening chapters because they really do set the tone for the rest of the book. Unless you’ve read it for yourself, you can’t imagine just what a love letter to herself this book is turning out to be. What is going to be fun is seeing just how far Brazile throws her under the bus with her book (which comes out this month). If you promise to give me much good booze, I’ll take a look at that book for you. Consider it my way of taking one for the team.

*Hi, this is Sarah.  Part of me thinks that we shouldn’t continue letting Amanda do this.  I mean… the things my friends do!  But part of me thinks we should buy her enough booze that she finishes this and does the Brazille book too. If you’re a similarly twisted individual, this is her paypal link. Send her the price of a drink.  UPDATE: Paypal link should work now.  Sorry, I should have verified last night, but I was derp.*

334 thoughts on “What Happened: Grit and Gratitude (It took grit and I’m not grateful) by Amanda S. Green

      1. So maybe it would be better to call her a Twunt and say America decided against dining at the Y?


        Brain bleach…brain bleach….gotta be around here somewhere….

      2. I also stew and ruminate.

        2. (of a ruminant) chew the cud.

        Cow. The kind that is so tough and stringy the only way to extract any nourishment is stewing.

    1. There are, admittedly, some rather ill-mannered and unattractive cows. I submit that even for non-ox/minotaur folks they are still preferable company compared to HRC. For one, they are better conversationalists, even if silent.

        1. For many years American comic books (supposedly) were not permitted to use the word flick because the cheap ink and paper, coupled with the genre’s use of all caps made it too lilely that the ink between the L and I in FLICK would merge into a single, different letter.

          So, yes, Her Royal CLINTONESS might be … problematic.

      1. More people are killed by cows (being stepped on) than snakes, spiders, and sharks…

        But then, there’s the whole Clinton thing even before she started sniffing the White House paint, Benghazi, and so on, so maybe that’s not the best metric.

    2. Actually, she’s not a cow, but an old stewing chicken with small breasts, huge thighs, and an outsized left wing.

    1. Well, that’s what happens when you’re being fed a prescription for Bimbo eruptions: saltpeter

      1. I wonder why they stay together? Just because it’s advantageous to their careers – divorced politicians seem to be somewhat disliked – or because they have so much dirt on each other that both could totally destroy the other totally if they decided to bring it out, a sort of MAD situation?

        Or because they still do have some sort of co-dependency thing going on, healthy or not?

        1. My guess is it’s the latter. Not to mention the both know the value of keeping your friends close and your enemies closer.

                1. They probably stay married because in most states, a wife can not be compelled to testify against her husband, and vice versa.

                  They were good enough lawyers to delay any action in the Whitewater mess until the statute of limitations had run on all of the lesser crimes committed by their accomplices, so that none of them could be flipped and forced to testify about the very major crimes the Clintons had committed and facilitated in Arkansas. see e.g., Barry Seals, etc.

                  Missing records are a Clinton trademark.

                  When Reagan tossed her out as head of the Legal Services Corp,, the first docs her replacement, Prof. William F. Harvey, wanted to see were records Reagan suspected contained info on Hillary’s diversion of money intended for legal services to American poor to and for the benefit of the Nicaraguan Sandanistas.

                  When Prof Harvey was taken to that file room the day after Hillary lost her suit to remain in charge, the only thing in the room were the marks in the wax where the file cabinets had been removed during the night.

        2. 1. Their appetites are still congruent, and they are still more efficient predators together. (It was a match made in Hell, before it was made on Earth.)
          2. But what would happen to the children strike-through cronies? The governor and mayor behind Charlottesville were Clinton cronies. How would they split the Clinton machine and penumbra? Splitting could wreck the machine, destroying years of carefully cultivated plausible deniability.
          3. Bill has to entertain the possibility that his wife’s feminist admirers are who are keeping him out of prison. What would happen if he alienates them? Hillary, deep down, may wonder how much she would have without Bill. Her drive for the Presidency betrays some level of insecurity, and she may fear losing access to the greater part of the machine.

          You know, if a forgery were created, purportedly based on confidential comments from Bill claiming that he always knew Hillary would lose, because she was a woman, that he’d only gone through the motions of helping her win, that he much preferred Trump as President, and so forth, published, and heavily promoted, Hillary might become so unstable that she leaves, and thereby brings the whole house of cards down.

      2. Or here’s a more sinister thought: The Hillary campaign had had enough of Bill’s constant interference. Every time they had the candidate on message, he tried to get her to change something. They had the data – they knew they were right. Then one night, after Bill tried to tell her to spend more time on Wisconsin, of all places, when he’d left, Hillary was drinking yet another Chard (who’s counting, right?) and said, “Bill, again. Will no one rid me of this troublesome… no, nevermind.” And the staff knew what to do.

        Just a little something in his food to tone him down, make him draggier and less meddlesome. And if they overdid it, well, Hillary would get the sympathy vote as the widow of a loved ex-President. A win-win!

        1. They had the data – they knew they were right.

          They had the computer models, they had “massaged” the data. The science was settled.

          1. I guess it’s a short step from “massaging the data” to lie, to expecting the massaged data to influence reality.

            An even shorter step past that, and you’re moving phantom divisions around in your Fuhrerbunker…

            1. The thing I get from the reports that continue to leak out from inside the H campaign is the absolute and unshakable faith in “The Models” – any time anyone (esp. Bill) challenged something eth campaign was doing, the response was “But The Models say…”, as if that computer model was itself the irrefutable answer to any report from out there in reality.

              The ability to adjust models, whether mental models or codified computer models, when reality does not conform to their predictions is the mark of a reality-based style of management.

              When the other path is taken, insisting that reality be adjusted to match the models, is when you end up filling mass graves – hey, the model/theory/doctrine/received-wisdom have to be correct, so it must be the wreckers and saboteurs and heretics keeping the actual results from matching – we just need to purify the omelet by breaking a few eggs.

              Hey, this seems like a recurring theme.

        2. Hey, there’s a reason Bill eats at McDonald’s: they make what he likes and there’s so many of them Hillary’s staff can’t predict which one he’ll eat at.

  1. So full of herself it paints a picture of somebody you wouldn’t invite to dinner, would just HATE to work for, and has no business being in charge of as much as a taco truck.

    1. From what has leaked out about how she behaved to the White House staff and the Secret Service agents when she was the First Lady, she is absolutely horrible to work for.

      1. At least she didn’t swim naked in front of them, like some other potential presidential candidates……

        1. Swimming in the birthday suit God gave her would have been too honest.
          I don’t mind nudity; but I prefer to know when I’m going to be seeing any beforehand. Humans are both fascinating and funny looking. Pose naked in front of a mirror every day, and laugh at yourself. It helps keep you humble.

          1. “Humans are both fascinating and funny looking.”

            Also, absent a hormonal haze, fairly unattractive. Admittedly most of us experience some degree of hormonal haze for a substantial part of the population…

            I really think this is something the various gender and sex-preference activists miss; that if you aren’t primarily attracted to one or more of the participants, erotica (porn, visual depictions of sex acts, however you want to put it) is kinda creepy, in the ‘short film of insects mating’ sense. A haze of arousal changes that, but if you aren’t aroused, the best you can hope for is ‘this message is not being delivered at my address, and it’s sort of annoying’.

            So, parading your bedroom play-clothes in front of the squares may be a lot of fun, but since you are pushing them to imagine something they would rather not, it’s counterproductive.

            In fact, I will go farther;

            Any human being who makes a public fuss about his/her/its sexuality is a jerk. Teens are SUPPOSED to be jerks; it’s in the programming. Late on, you are supposed to know better.

            1. Alas, age is not a sure cure for silly behavior. And there’s something to be said in favor of certain (not all!) childish behaviors and mental outlooks. Otherwise, people tend to lose their ability to wonder, as well as their sense of humor.

              1. All of that I will grant you, but I’m sick of the same group(s) saying one the one hand “what we do in our own bedrooms is none of your business” and on the other coming to Pride events dressed in a way that makes what they do in their bedrooms next to impossible to ignore.

                Look, sweethearts, I’m fat, fifty, and hetero. I assume you don’t want to imagine MY sex life, please don’t make me imagine YOURS.

                1. Now that’s almost funny seeing as I use to say the same thing about the issue of gays in a Boy Scout organization that was supposed to be celibate..

                2. Same here. Also fat, sixty and hetero. Don’t wanna be forced to know what y’all practice, especially when you are advertising it in the street. Think of the horses… they are so easily frightened.

            2. Mostly sort of ugly, yes. I don’t have much of a reaction of any kind to nudity, due to having gotten used to seeing a lot of it as a child – Finland and sauna, and having been born into that part of population who really does go there together as a family (not every Finn, there are also ones who are nearly as shy about the whole thing as Americans seem to be), and after it, for example while my uncles did kind of halfheartedly hang onto their towels once they were out and sitting on the porch drinking a beer they’d drop them often enough that as a child I had seen plenty enough middle age to old family jewels as well as my mom’s and aunts less than perky racks and behinds.

              And no, if it’s something you see as a matter of fact from toddlerhood to your teens (I did get shy around early teens and after that usually stuck to going by myself and avoiding the family gathering part afterwards when it was in some sort of, well, family gathering time, like haymaking season when most went to help on my uncle’s small farm) it’s not shocking or disturbing in any way. More likely it will make you somewhat averse to the whole thing as an adult, you know what nekkid people look like well enough and unless they happen to be, well, somebody you are attracted to while you may not be disturbed by it neither are you interested or try to search those scenes out, just accept them when they happen due to whatever reason (often enough has to do with time, lots of people, one sauna, unless you want to spend the whole night with it while people go by one or two or small groups…). Because most people look better clothed.

              1. Anyway, yes, generally speaking most of us Finns also think it’s more or less rude to parade naked in front of strangers, especially ones who aren’t there seeing that because they chose so, on purpose.

              2. There was one particular acerbic writer (Fran Liebowitz, if memory serves) who said that clothes are given to us to hide your figure flaws, of whom the average person has at least fifteen …

          2. More than one Secret Service agent commented on LBJ’s tendency to shed his clothes when partying…

    2. no business being in charge of as much as a taco truck
      Accckkk! That would be ‘cultural appropriation’!

      1. Not really. Based on her history, if she WERE in charge of a taco truck it would shortly be producing mainly bratwurst and jelly sandwiches, on hard tack. Which is NOBODY’s culture (or if it is, they’re keeping damned quiet about it).

        1. Bratwurst I could take. Knowing Hillary, she’d be pedaling overaged, dry, tasteless beef liver on stale crumbly white bread, with no onions or bacon.

    3. Can we not refer to Hillary and any type of food that we ever want to eat again in the same paragraph? TIA!

        1. Peas are fine. I can’t actually remember the last time I ate them.

          Since I usually eat Mexican food at least once a week I’d rather not have that ruined.

          Btw, going to be in Fort Collins tomorrow with some time to kill. Anybody from around that area with recommendations on places to try? Dungeons & Drafts looks really interesting!

          1. I find I now have to parse the rice to de-yuck it, which is irksome. I suppose that would a low-carb advantage: no grains so no rice, so no caring what all might be hiding in the rice.

            1. P/R/PO is only slightly higher on my list of “never again, please!!” than cream cheese and pineapple sandwiches.

              Cream cheese and chopped black olives, on the other hand…

        2. Those desiccated round green things are not peas; they bear much the same relationship to real peas as those slices of red round fruit bear to tomatoes. True peas, like home-grown tomatoes, are only available freshly picked, taken before their sugars can convert to starch.

          I gather the same is the case with corn, although the conversion process is not so rapid, allowing certain versions of the canned or frozen product to remain tolerable.

          One of the great losses of our age is the pristine taste of fresh produce.

  2. Amanda has the bit between her teeth now, so we might as well let her get it out of her system… I’ll send her a drink or two when I can. (She is going to be washing it out for quite a while, I do think.)

    One realization I had the other night was that the main reason that Hillary lost was that she acted just like a prototypical Latin American dictator. One of those, whether they are a left-wing dictator, a right-wing dictator, or a military dictator, only needs the support of the people that count. It all depends on who counts in their particular hell-hole.

    Hillary had the support of those who count. The MSM. The DC bureaucrats. The vote-fixers in California, New York, and elsewhere. The RINO Establishment. So, she could blithely discard (what passes for) moderates in the Democrat Party and the far left wing of the Sanderites.

    Saw a claim by POTUS today that he got some of the Sanders supporter’s votes in the general. I think that is probably true, although not for the reason he thinks – they simply wanted to stick a thumb in Hillary’s eye.

    1. Not necessarily. I know one of those who was so repulsed by Hillary, he started looking at what the candidates actually said, then examining the results. (Now, he’s FAR more intelligent than the average bear, and no, not one of my boys.) Before the election, even, he was a full hearted Trump supporter and has become even more so, to the point it’s a little embarrassing. Now, his personality might be “follower” leading to this, but well… He’s actually supporting the president.

      1. Sounds like a very thorough fellow. To wade through what all the candidates actually said is a major undertaking. Digging up what they’ve actually done (and why) for the past 10 years would be an overwhelmingly gargantuan task better suited to a team where one or more are assigned to investigate each individual candidate, and then pool their results. Which oddly enough, is what a lot of us used to expect out of our news media in a fantasy world where said news people were honest, dedicated, and indefatigable in their pursuit of the truth.

        1. Years ago, I listened to the legendary/infamous progressive(!) country station, KFAT, in Gilroy. Their news guy was equally infamous (going under the nom de mic of Travis T. Hipp), but a piece of wisdom hit me and stuck. He was doing a piece on Paul Harvey and praising him, though their politics were about 90 degrees apart.

          Paraphrasing from 30 years memory: “All reporters are biased one way or another. If the person is honest, he’ll let you know his biases so you can account for them. If he’s dishonest, he’ll profess to be objective and non-partisan.”

          Can’t see much honesty in the MSM lately. The biases are evident, but still.

          1. I’m surprised that KFAT only ran (in their original mode) for eight years. It seemed longer up in Morgan Hill where we lived (about 15 minutes away back back roads). You can still hear how it used to be at kfat.com.

            Some of the original staff relocated over the hill to Freedom, CA, and started up KPIG-FM there, and KPYG-FM in Cayucos a ways south, where they continue the job.

        2. Problem is, these days you have to do a lot of the digging yourself. Not so much because there are no opposition writers out there, those are reasonably easy to find – but because they have been missing the target.

          Remember all of the books that came out in 2007/8 detailing why Hillary Clinton should not be President? I still have them, as I bought them when she was “fated” to be the Democratic nominee, I was going to be all ready for the campaign. Oops.

          (They came in somewhat handy last year, although they of course didn’t have anything that people actually remembered, except for her covering up Bill’s antics.)

      1. Remember how much attention Lena Dunham’s biography got from the Left after people realized that she wrote about molesting her sister?

        Brazile’s book will likely get a similar amount of attention.

        1. I actually had a college acquaintance (film school, in CA) try to libsplain to me she was speaking metaphorically.

          1. Lena flat out admitted in public that she did it once people noticed what she’d written (i.e. after the National Review writer actually read the book for the assignment he’d gotten saddled with). Said that there wasn’t anything wrong with it. Said her sister doesn’t think there was anything wrong with it, either.

            1. Funny how Progressives are so attuned to what people really meant to say that they pay no attention to what folks actually do say.

        2. I’m not sure. There is a schism in the Democratic Party right now and some of those leaning toward Bernie or the Greenies or the more socialist/communist side are already jumping on the bandwagon to support Brazile. It is going to be interesting.

  3. I prayed that my worst feast about Donald Trump wouldn’t be realized, and that people’s lives and America’s future would be made better, not worse, during his presidency.
    Well, it seems G-d is answering your prayer, on that one, Hillary!

    Instead, she chose to wear purple, “a nod to bipartisanship (blue plus red equals purple) . . . We had really gone the distance on the symbolism.”
    Likely you also remembered purple as the color of Ceasar and of kings.

    I really hope the media doesn’t continue to feed her self-centeredness. She needs – no, we need her – to go curl up in a dark corner somewhere. She needs to get over herself, if she ever wants to be a semi-healthy person.

      1. And now a chance for me to be quite rude and not be too far from.. er.. something.

        A Non-Ode to Hillary

        Blood is red.
        Cyanosis, blue.
        Some people are dead.
        Alas, not you.

          1. I’m conflicted.
            As a Christian, I have to hope that nobody has something bad happen to them.
            As a patriot, I would consider Hillary having a stroke to be divine intervention for the preservation of America.
            As someone who has had personal friends damaged by her actions, I would dance on her grave if I weren’t afraid of it collapsing from shoddy workmanship.

            1. Based on her appearance, and her health issues during the campaign, I expect she’s overdue for a stroke or a heart attack. In any case, I will borrow a line from the Tyrone Power Zorro let us ask God to rewad her “according the (her) merits”

            2. I am not the least conflicted. I can truly hope for Hillary’s realizing the horrors she has perpetrated and repenting them.

              Alas, my lack of faith that such will happen is only partially ameliorated by the thought of her burning forever in Heck.

            3. She’s seventy, immortality isn’t in the cards, a long period of public and obvious dementia would be the best object lesson to the overambitious about when it is best to fold and drop out.

              1. a long period of public and obvious dementia would be the best object lesson
                You mean like this?

                Daniel 4:28-
                At the end of twelve months he was walking on the roof of the royal palace of Babylon, and the king answered and said, “Is not this great Babylon, which I have built by my mighty power as a royal residence and for the glory of my majesty?” While the words were still in the king’s mouth, there fell a voice from heaven, “O King Nebuchadnezzar, to you it is spoken: The kingdom has departed from you, and you shall be driven from among men, and your dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field. And you shall be made to eat grass like an ox, and seven periods of time shall pass over you, until you know that the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will.” Immediately the word was fulfilled against Nebuchadnezzar. He was driven from among men and ate grass like an ox, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven till his hair grew as long as eagles’ feathers, and his nails were like birds’ claws.

                If even Nebuchadnezzar could humble himself to say, “At the end of the days I, Nebuchadnezzar, lifted my eyes to heaven, and my reason returned to me, and I blessed the Most High, and praised and honored him who lives forever”, there’s some hope for Hillary. (But I’m not putting my money on that particular possibility.)

                1. Heh. I had something of the same in mind, to tell it true. Folks around here really do have a knack for picking up such things, and making them more clear.

                2. She’d probably take her recovery as a sign that she was destined to lead the US, and help those deplorables overcome their problems and stop being so deplorable.

            4. Hrm.

              As a Christian, hope for the best in people is laudable, and that good things happen generally a nice thing. But goodness, in general, is not exactly a nice thing.

              It would be a *good* thing, generally speaking, if she were to fully realize the *effect* of all her various actions in grasping for power. Both on those around her, and those who merely felt the ripples at a distance. To know, unequivocally, what careless acts, what conscious arrogance on your own part caused suffering, pain, deaths- and to fully understand those costs- would be a kind of hell on earth. It would be the sort of thing to break one’s sanity, but at the same time realize the horror of the sane.

              But it would be a good thing, generally speaking, for a great many people.

              Understand me this, I’m not advocating some sort of Utilitarian moral calculus. The one thing does not balance the other. The ethical point here is accepting responsibility for one’s actions. We would all be better off for doing that. And, I believe, if she *were* to fully recognize what she has done, she would be a better person for it. More humble, most definitely.

              Is such a thing likely? Well, I do believe in miracles. But also, I’d have to *see* this one to really believe it. And even then, I have to admit, there would be not a sliver, but a massive chunk of doubt. I’ll admit it, I am a flawed man after all. *chuckle*

      2. I’d recommend cremation, but Hillary’s likely pickled herself to the point that it would take three days for all the alcohol to burn off.

        1. Perhaps a chemist among us could suggest a good oxidizer, maybe something a little more aggressive than 90% hydrogen peroxide?

          1. If you want something made in industrial quantities then you want Chlorine trifluoride (ClF3) which is a stronger oxidizer than oxygen itself “That means that it can potentially go on to “burn” things that you would normally consider already burnt to hell and gone, and a practical consequence of that is that it’ll start roaring reactions with things like bricks and asbestos tile” (quote from the post “Sand Won’t Save You This Time” By Derek Lowe google it for a wonderful article on the stuff including links to a 1 TON spill back in the 1950s)

            1. I generally default to the Monster Hunters’ Guide To Monsters advice: “Willy Pete Is Your Friend, His The Fire That Will Never End.”

        2. Considering some of the reports I’ve seen about how drunk she was during the election returns and after — another explanation for why she had to find a new venue. She’d been too blottoed to speak before then — I wouldn’t doubt it.

      1. The things, they know they have to jigger some of the battleground states now. If Trump and the Republicans don’t manage to get a serious handle on the vote fraud issue, they might be able to steal the next one for her.

    1. Yeah, I picked up on the royal purple also. There isn’t anything Hillary wouldn’t do for personal power. I swear she’d cut out Chelsea’s heart on national TV like an ancient Aztec priest if she thought it would win her the Presidency.

      1. I’m not sure. I’ve wondered if she isn’t hoping to find a way to take over Chelsea’s body so she has another lifetime to win her beloved presidency.

        1. Uh oh. Shades of Darkship Thieves! Hillary does seem to have the predisposition of many of Earth’s “Good” Men. Who has the medical technology to do brain transplants successfully?

    2. My semiconductor experience is going to show. Purple Plague was a problem that caused wires to disconnect from the circuit they were supposed to run to. Hmm.

    3. Hillary is the gift that keeps on giving. Her total meltdown is not going to help the Democrats or her in 2018 or 2020. The Leftist are feeding into her crap and it is not going to do their chances of winning new ground any good. I’m fine with that. My main concern is that the stupid party doesn’t have a credible threat to oust them and most of them really need a swift kick to the nuts.

      I’m going to worry if she gets prison time because that means that the Left is starting to remove its head from the current dark and aromatic cavity within which it currently resides.

      Hillary would make a great sacrifice because she’s a) really annoying and b) not really useful. The Left could make a lesson of her to show that they still have some (very f*ing little) respect for the rule of law.

      1. Removing Hillary would tilt that party even farther to the Left. Already the Bernies and Lizzies are decrying a stolen election. While demanding the party move harder Left is possibly not the best strategy but it is the one they’re determined to try. They just need to yell louder at those damned paleolithic hicks and remind them to get back in their assigned places.

        That’s the ticket.

        1. Never interrupt the enemy when they are making a mistake 🙂

          The Left can make all the strategic blunders they want as long as it keeps them far far far far far far away from the levers of power.

          They can yell all they want. I’ve got moron canceling headphones and I’m already using them 🙂

      2. Hillary is still the beacon of hope for a great many lefty women. I happen to know some of them, so I’m more than a bit aware of how blind they are to her flaws.

  4. First, I just want to say that you’re a brave woman, Amanda.

    Second, I wanted to make certain you have 911 on speed dial. If you drink as much as you’re going to need to in order to get through this book, alcohol poisoning strikes me as a very real risk.

    Finally, just had to comment on this bit:

    “First, for the White House to be sacred ground, Slick Willy did his best to debase it and Hillary aided and abetted.”

    Besides Slick Willy’s escapades with his…er, willy, it’s also worth remembering that the Clinton’s essentially turned the White House into a motel, renting out the Lincoln bedroom to high-dollar donors. And after that, Hillary wants me to believe that she sees the White House as “sacred ground”? If she does, I would hate to see how she would treat the Wailing Wall or the Church of the Nativity. Probably charge a couple million for the full “birth in the stable” experience.

    1. If Trump does the whole “rent out the Lincoln room” when re-election time comes around like Bill Clinton did, what do ya bet that suddenly the Democrats will start crying that it’s the worstest thing in the whole universe. Completely not remembering that Willie did it first.

      1. I find that unlikely. Despite several intensive (and expensive) remodels over the years, the White House is still a nearly two century old building.

        If he really needs the money, a nice modern suite in a Trump Tower is far more likely as a “rental” (besides being perfectly legal). Not that his needing the money is all that likely, either – I think that one reason he keeps poking the MSM with a sharp stick is that he looked at the “dollars per vote” from last year – and realizes quite well that the MSM hatred gave him a multiplier of at least two on his investment.

      2. I don’t have a problem with a President renting out rooms in the White House. I am concerned about what happens to the money from that venture, and any political favors attached to it.

      3. If Trump does the whole “rent out the Lincoln room” when re-election time comes around …

        I would not be surprised if Trump gives the appearance of doing so, only to reveal it is not that at all, simply as a way of trolling Dems.

    2. the Clinton’s essentially turned the White House into a motel, renting out the Lincoln bedroom to high-dollar donors.

      But that’s why she considers it sacred ground. The only think the Clintons revere more than power is money. To her the White House isn’t a temple to America, it’s a monument to the pinnacle of her personal wealth and achievement.

    3. Anything Bill Clinton did in the White House, JFK had already done decades before. (Except, I think, for renting out the Lincoln bedroom, though I’m not 100% on my knowledge of the Kennedy administration and would welcome corrections if I’m wrong on this point).

        1. See, that’s what bothered me about Clinton. She couldn’t steal the furniture without getting caught that last time she lived in the White House, hwy on earth would anyone want to give her a second chance at it?

      1. JFK or any number of others. But funny how the Dems never think to point to Saint Jack or the others when they talk about how presidents “sully” the White House.

  5. “I hope [John] Adams would have been okay with a wise woman.”

    Oh holy hell! I really hate that whole “Wise Woman” bullshit.

    The last person I heard refer to herself as a “Wise Woman” was a family member. 30(something) years old, and we get a call saying she, and her family, had nowhere to go. SO, being family (and partly because the house we are living in is still technically my Grandmothers, we moved in to help her – and Granddad before he died – and Grandma couldn’t – or wouldn’t – say NO). So, this grown woman shows up with her two young kids in tow. Minus husband (apparently in jail, not sure if I ever got the real story but it would take WAY more than a comment to write the epic of what I was eventually told). PLUS two grown “kids” (early and mid 20s) that she had “adopted” somewhere along the way (completely unrelated to us). The day they arrived she was so strung out on drugs, she couldn’t piece more than a few words together, none of it anything close to a coherent sentence (so much so that I looked into having her committed to a mental hospital). This lasted for DAYS. As far as I know, she didn’t bring drugs with her to do at my house (and I did watch for that) so yea… she was likely THAT tanked when she arrived (disclaimer, I don’t know a whole lot about drugs, I might be wrong). As soon as she snapped out of it, she was walking around like she owned the place, When the 20 something girl decided to go home to REAL mother rather than sponging off of strangers (and being treated like a servant by her “adopted mother”, This woman ranted about how she should be listening to the counsel of a “Wise Woman” (meaning herself) and not stabbing her mother in the back (Also meaning herself… not the girls “Real” mother…) She continued to refer to herself as a “Wise Woman” for the entirety of her stay, which lasted far too long, and eventually packed up the whole crew and ran off to North Carolina (because she had driven through there once and liked the area). I believe she managed to hook up with an “abused women” help center who helped her get established (while she was with us, she never claimed her husband was abusive.).

    Yea… Wise Woman my ass…

    Note, this does NOT in any way mean that I don’t think that women can be wise. I’m just inclined to think that ANYONE; Woman, Man, non-gender specific, or even quasi-gendered girlymanwomanboys that refer to themselves as a “Wise Whatever” are generally quite the opposite and usually trying to con you.

    1. It’s a flag for me too. The Wise Latina on the Supreme Court, seems to be rather than Wise Rock Bottom Dumb. She might be stupid enough — from what I can tell from observation — to compete in the Obama leagues.

      1. Remember, these are the people who internalized the idea that intelligence means parroting back the answer the teacher wants to hear.

        1. What other definition would they use? After all, they’re the ruling class, so they’re obviously the most intelligent.

          The engineers, auto mechanics, and garbagemen don’t need *real* intelligence, just enough for the trades and to acknowledge their betters.

          1. Of course, historically speaking, the Ruling Class of any system has tended over time to degenerate into a bunch of self-centered vermin.

            Which describe Her Shrillness to a T.

              1. The collectivist Left goes back a ways. The Fabian Society dates to 1844, and the impulses doubtless go back farther still. Transcendentalism, which had some of the seeds, was a force from the early part of the 19th century. And not all of what both movements did was bad. But by the early 20th Century the rot was spreading. Woodrow Wilson was a Progressive and an utter swine.

                Since then the Liberal Intellectual Radical Progressive has tended to be a plague on the land.

      2. There is no such thing as “wisdom.” There is wide experience (coupled with contemplation). I’ve done a fair amount of that, and consider myself somewhat wise. Certainly more so than forty years ago, when I was seventeen.

        But I would consider Sarah to be “wiser” than I am, although we are essentially the same age. Wider experience. I haven’t switched entire cultures, political systems, etc. (“Wiser” than both of us was RAH, or Jerry Pournelle – although, if you read about their early lives, before experience and contemplation taught them more about the world…)

        1. Wisdom comes from good judgement, and good judgment comes from bad judgement. Or, so sayeth my father. *chuckle*

          Whether you call it wisdom, wide experience, or good old fashioned horse sense, it is a thing both rare and extraordinarily valuable these days.

          1. I could call you father a wise man. He’s apparently had a fair amount of bad judgement from which to learn.

            He’s quite right, of course. I personally am hoping to acquire no more wisdom in the years ahead (although I’m sure I will…)

        2. There is wisdom. Of course, as we all know, the wisest woman in the world is the one who realizes how little she knows.

      3. My thought on hearing that was, “Show me a wise Latina woman, and I’ll have no objection to her sitting in with the Supremes. Unfortunately, sweetheart, you ain’t her.”

      1. Dresden refers to himself as “one of the Wise” a few times. Of course, WE know that he’s referring to wiseassery, but it’s apparently also an appellation applied to wizards. Mind, he also tells Hades that the older he gets, the more he realizes how little he knows, which is a sign of wisdom. Sometimes.

    2. Almost equaled by the idiocy of ‘strong woman’ – we had a fellow here shoot his two women neighbors dead because after they moved in next door they not only verbally harassed him but came on his property and cut his hedges they didn’t like flush to the ground.
      All their relatives lamented he couldn’t tolerate ‘strong women’ like they could strong men.
      The truth is no man could have treated this fellow that way and lasted as long as he put up with them. Any reasonable man would have been afraid to treat anyone that way. Their idea of being strong like a man was to act like insufferable asses. They have no idea of what quiet restrained male strength is, all it meant to them was doing anything you please and assuming you’d never get called on it.

      1. “Strong Women” is a hard one.

        What that phrase SHOULD mean is a competent, self sufficient woman, who gets what she wants because she works for it. That is what many that use that phrase pretend that they mean. However, you are right, all too often when that phrase is used, it is used to describe a woman who acts like an a-hole who is too busy being a “Strong Woman” to care about anything but themselves, and who gets what they want because they bully people into giving it to them.

        I LIKE competent, self sufficient women. A-holes and bullies, regardless of gender, not so much.

        1. That phrase used to be used of frontier women. That is, competent, able to do more than was expected of them*, busting through obstacles that would prevent her from caring for her children and her man.

          (* I like that better than “self-sufficient” for this, since no one could really be self-sufficient if taking care of children – it needed two in that environment. IMHO )

          1. Single parenting in a frontier environment (or any other environment for that matter) is possible, just much less than an optimal solution.

        2. “Strong woman” and “alpha male” are both phrases that are occasionally accurate labels but are far more often used as euphemisms for “asshole.”

            1. It crosses species. I’ve seen claims that the “alpha mare” (yes, horses have a female leader – the stallion hangs back of the herd. No guesses as to why that might be) might be the one with all the show and busybody… but a quieter mare will be more followed by the herd.

              Sometimes being the ‘strongest’ only means one needs a better deodorant.

              1. The interesting thing is the guy that did that research on wolves and coined the ‘Alpha’ term has since come out and said it’s total crap. There really is no such thing!

                Hmm, I wonder if the stallion hangs back to protect stragglers? I haven’t really studied equine behavior in the wild.

                I’m pretty sure one of my current co-workers refers to himself as an ‘Alpha’. The funny thing is he manages to mix being stupid, motivated, and lazy all into one.

                1. Hmm, I wonder if the stallion hangs back to protect stragglers? I haven’t really studied equine behavior in the wild.
                  It’s so he can check out the asses.

                2. “refers to himself as an ‘Alpha’. The funny thing is he manages to mix being stupid, motivated, and lazy all into one.”

                  One of the many reasons I don’t get along with over-done Type-A personalities. Usually the over-done-ness is there to cover for their stupid, lazy sort comings.

                  1. Agreed. In his case he’s using it to cover the fact that he’s stupid AND lazy.

                    There have been very few times in my life that I’ve been tempted to try and get someone fired but this guy tempts me every time I have to interact with him.

                    I’m pretty sure if you look under Webster’s for ‘California Millennial’ there is a picture of him right there.

                3. what they came out and said was apparently that particular pack structure was only in captivity.

                4. “Hmm, I wonder if the stallion hangs back to protect stragglers?”

                  Yep. The boss mare leads the herd away from danger- she’s the one who remembers all the safe spots, watering places, etc- and the stallion brings up the rear to make sure no one gets left behind and fight off whatever’s chasing his ladies.

                5. He studied a bunch of wolves in a zoo. Turns out that artificially packing unrelated adult wolves together with no escape produces some odd behavior.

                  In the wild, you don’t have alphas. You have a Mommy and Daddy. And their not-grown young, to form the pack. When the young grow up, they don’t challenge their parents, they leave, find another wolf, and start their own pack.

              1. Have you ever read the book Influence?

                It’s kind of scary. The person that seems most confident can have an out-sized impact on a group they are involved in, even if they are completely wrong.

                1. I haven’t read the book, but I’ve definitely used that effect myself. Any sufficiently advanced bullshitting is indistinguishable from competence.

                2. A guy I worked with years ago was an overbearing a-hole. Also working with us was his best friend since grade school. According to the friend, at some point during middle school the a-hole read a book called “Winning Through Intimidation” and that was the point he turned. Before that, he was nice.

                  Half of me wanted to track that book down and read it for myself. The other half wanted to stay a nice person.

                  1. One of the few ways to automatically and immediately lose my friendship is to try and manipulate me.

                    Influence is pretty much required reading in the InfoSec field to get an understanding of Social Engineering.

                    Being familiar with the techniques helps me make sure I’m not using them!

                    1. Hmmm… working in the industry, maybe Influence is one that I should read. A better understanding of Social Engineering is always a plus. It’s mostly a training issue, but it’s not a bad idea to keep it in mind when designing systems anyway.

                  2. Stuart,
                    It’s an interesting read and I like the examples he uses to make some of his points. Even if you weren’t in the field I think it’s good information for everyone to have. Much like learning the actual critical thinking process instead of thinking ‘I’m smart so I’m already thinking critically’.

                    Another good one is https://www.amazon.com/Social-Engineering-Art-Human-Hacking/dp/0470639539/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1509742427&sr=8-1&keywords=social+engineering+the+art+of+human+hacking

                3. Can confirm. There have been volunteer groups *I* have ended up in the lead position simply by making decisions (rather than dithering). Had very little clue what I was doing, but knew who *did* know… and told them to be about it. Very strange. Usually I try *not* to take a lead position, and actively avoid it when I can.

        3. It tends to be used mostly referring to women who try and exemplify the worst characteristics of both gender stereotypes.

        1. ‘Strong female character’ seems to translate roughly to ‘overbearing, foulmouthed, manipulative bitch who’d get punched in the mouth if she were a man’. Never likes those sort of people in real life, like them even less in fiction because all too often when I encounter them in fiction I wasted good money on a book, movie or videogame to do so.

            1. Yeah. I want to punch her in the mouth only occasionally. The frequency of the urge seems to be a function of her age.

        2. LOL! I’m doing NaNoWriMo this year (finally talked myself into it) 🙂 and each Thursday in October our local group had various classes (plotting, character etc.) One of the people giving some of the classes handed out business cards, and right there on the front… in RED… were the words “Strong Women, Strong Stories”… Oh bother… Interestingly, much to my surprise she was fine. I didn’t detect any bias in her classes or anything. Still trying to figure that one out.

          1. Somehow, if someone describes themselves as some high-status adjective (Wise|Strong|Alpha), that tells me that they’re not.

            1. I think it was Margaret Thatcher who said “Being powerful is like being a lady. If you have to tell people you are, you aren’t.”

        3. Mary Catelli’s book Madeline in the Mists is the exemplar for a strong woman. Really enjoyed it by the way, “medieval magical realism” is my new favourite genre 🙂

    3. John had no problems with a “wise woman in the White House” — he had married in Abigail, after all. A self-centered narcissistic pathological liar, OTOH, might have annoyed him.

      I suspect Abigail’s ghost would be heard telling Hillary, “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

      Somebody needs to follow Hillary around reminding her “You’re obnoxious and disliked, you know that’s so.”

      1. During Hillary’s time as First Lady/Co-President, she got involved in “channeling”.

        This involved thinking about a person (no longer alive) that you looked up to and imagining “what advice that person would give you”.

        Hillary “channeled” Eleanor Roosevelt and Eleanor’s “advice” IIRC was to “ignore your critics”.

        At the time I thought, “yep, Eleanor told Hillary what Hillary wanted to hear”. 😈

        1. A track on Rich Little’s The First Family Rides Again is an encounter between Reagan and Lincoln’s ghost. After a short conversation, Reagan asks him for advice, and Lincoln tells him something ridiculous. Reagan exclaims “I’ll do it!” and hurries off.

          Lincoln chuckles. “I finally got even with an actor.”

        2. Hmm, Denbeste would tell me, more or less, that he talks about what he wants to when he wants to. How do I know this? Standard boilerplate on his comment box.

          Bunch of other people who would ask me who I was, or would have language difficulties with.

          Jesus might advise me that the exercise is generally contraindicated for a reason.

      2. Ooooh, I love the image of the ghost of Abigail Adams following her around, haunting her and doing all sorts of things to “remind” her of her place.

        1. That actually sounds like an awesome short story, Hillary meeting an actual wise, or strong, or whatever the going term is, woman that she cannot ignore and, because this is Hillary we’re talking about, rather than recognizing her own inadequacies and working to rectify them, she’s driven to madness in her efforts to deny reality.

      1. It’s like Weinstein. You cover up for the powerful, you throw them to the wolves once they lose power.

    1. Adding popcorn to the shopping list. Watching the Democratic Party implode may be interesting. Brazile sounds like she’s pissed off (on?) everyone.

      I better send Amanda some money. 😀

        1. I was stocking up on survival supplies in the Obama years. Come to find out, I should have been stocking up on popcorn. (Buying Orville Redenbacher stock, too…)

    2. it’s fake indignation, in the vein of: “well I NEVER!”

      They feel like they HAVE to at least go through the motions until this blows over. Then it will just go back to business as usual.

      1. When I saw the line, “it’s fake indignation, in the vein of: “well I NEVER!”” a Churchillian voice in my head answered “of course you have dear, you just weren’t getting paid for it then” – I don’t know why, but there it is.

    3. I do love how a number of these articles refer to Hillary’s “secret” control of the party. If an intervorted Republican mathematician/would-be writer thought it was perfectly obvious that the DNC was in the tank for Hillary, how much of a secret could it have been?

      1. It reminds me of how Mark Russell summed up the Falklands thing:

        The most media-covered ‘armada’ in history (up to that time) and the Argentines explaining their loss as “It was sneak attack!”

          1. Hah! As if they would believe anything simply because it was on television. They know full well how easy to manipulate that is!

        1. At the moment, the “shock” is all about her control of the DNC and the fact that it was preordained that she was going to be the nominee before the first primary.

          If I were to list everyone who was obviously in the tank for Hillary, I would need my own blog post.

    4. As if many of them didn’t know it. It’s like the “outrage” over the sexual harassment in Hollywood. Everyone knew it was there. Everyone turned a blind eye until someone with enough name recognition got the media involved. In this case, it’s Donna Brazile. We need much popcorn and booze before we sit back to watch these two go after one another.

  6. In my experience, it is only dim bulbs who walk around telling everyone how ‘smart’ they are. It is something to do with their brain trying to protect them from harsh truths.

        1. I doubt it, since the claim is it was removed in/after 1903, at least as primary ingredient. Traces might have been still there even using “spent” coca leaves, but nothing of significance since then.

        2. In the basement of my Grandfather’s house, after his death (late 70s, I don’t remember exactly what year, I as a kid) We found a couple very old bottles of Coca-cola dating back from when there was still cocaine in the mix. One was still unopened and intact. It must have been near-perfect conditions for it to have lasted that long. The adults joked about opening it and drinking it. I have no idea what became of them, I think one of my aunts ended up with them.

  7. Hillary’s complete inability to really critique herself is a sign of psychopathy or narcissism or ….. certain people are unable to be honest appraisers of self and they also can’t stand to hear criticism from others.

    1. I think part of it is having been lied to for so long that her reality really is different from real-reality, part of it is medical problems that are interfering with her ability to reason and adapt, and a large slug of sociopathic narcissism.

    1. You are not alone. I already poured the wine… and this is a whiskey post. Or brandy. Or rum. It hasn’t *quite* hit tequila level… but that’s a fearsome thing, it is. And the absinthe shall remain corked, for reasons of safety.

        1. Absinthe is very.. polarizing. Offer it, sure, but be ready to have it rejected. A preference for single malt scotch has already been mentioned. Now as to what sort.. Islays can also be somewhat polarizing. A Highland is likely a safe bet, but one doesn’t know for sure.

            1. One must be careful with “anything” as that could include rectified spirits (190 proof). There is good reason I keep that bottle well away from the main collection. It is an ingredient or medicine (to be used in very low dose) at best.

              1. When it gets THAT bad, I turn to Stroh Inlander Rum, an Austrian spiced “rum” (sugar whisky) that, at 80% alcohol,tastes somewhat like a Capt. Morgan on steroids.
                When it is not yet that bad, like tonight, I have a pineapple infused Plantation brand rum, or a good smooth Highland malt scotch.

                1. Pretty much, yes.
                  It’s used as an ingredient when a large amount of something sans alcohol is to have a neutral kicker (so it’s sort of an overpowered vodka in that regard).

                  As medicine.. ever have a canker sore or such? Dip a Q-tip in this stuff and dab it on the sore (it WILL sting like a sunova[BLEEP] – which is why Q-tip and NOT ‘use as mouthwash’) and in a day or two it’s knocked down. Pharmacist that looked to be Truly Ancient pointed this out (with a different product, but also a potent astringent) when I had a sore on the bottom of my tongue and had been resorting to soft cookies that I could let dissolve as that was the only way I could eat without too much pain. Yup, it stung like a sunova[BLEEP] (3x a day) but the next day I could eat real food again. The pharmacist’s warning was “If use it like a mouthwash… you’ll jump in the air and click your heels like a Hessian if you do!” I have no doubt that that was the Voice of Experience.

                  1. EvaClear plus a trash can full of juice; it eats the coating off the trashcan. (Just ’cause I don’t indulge doesn’t mean I’ve never been around people who do.)

      1. I don’t drink because reasons, so I could only handle a fraction of Donna Brazile’s snippet in Politico. 25 years ago and the Jim Beam would be depleted…

        1. I’d let you off the hook, too. Reading that [REDACTED] is a punishment fit for Bergdahl and no decent person.

  8. By the time anybody fits in socially with the ‘important people’, the movers and shakers and money makers, and has any chance at all of even being nominated, it should be obvious they have to be villainous scum to be celebrated by that crowd. It’s a bucket of vipers hissing over which has bigger fangs.

  9. Thank god you are reading this Amanda and not I. If I had tried it probably would have been hurled so hard it would have achieved escape velocity.
    Will see what I can scrounge for your alcohol poisoning fund.

  10. Perhaps I am having something screwy, but that “Buy her a drink” link doesn’t work for me. I get to a notice about leaving Facebook (which I wasn’t looking at in the first place) and then a PayPal page that says basically, “Oops.”

    Is ox that slow?
    Or is this some automatic system to protect Amanda from ethanol poisoning?

    1. Not sure why it’s working. When I get home, I’ll check it out. In the meantime, the email addy associated with Payal is amandagreen1957 at the google mailing site gmail which is in the .com realm. Yeah, yeah, but I don’t need no more ‘bots coming to my email.

      1. Is this a thing where one needs a PP account, or can one simply send (via CC via PP)? I’ve been avoiding joining up for some time. It’s been a while since I’ve heard any new horror stories, but that doesn’t mean I’ve forgotten about the old ones.

        1. Looks like you have to create an account. I have some pre-paid Visa cards from target I use for stuff like that. At least then my credit card isn’t potentially at the mercy of PP.

          Btw, I get the same thing about the link being expired.

            1. My try using the link said my donation had already been completed, but I was able to go into my PP account and send booze money that way.

                  1. If you’d prefer, go to my site — nocturnal-lives.com — there is a donate button there. It should be set up so you don’t have to join paypal.

                    1. Dog Namn they make it a heinous painus in the anus.
                      After turning ALL anti-crapware stuff off, still had to resort to the backup browser. And then a second card as the first was “not a valid card”(?!?!)

                      PayPal delenda est!

        2. When PP wanted my checking account number so I could sell on eBay, I quit PP. When eBay started to insist on PP (rather than a credit card), that was the end of eBay for me. No idea if they changed their policy; I don’t miss it.

            1. Only if you don’t have already have paypal account. Because I do, even though I haven’t used it in years, it won’t let me check out with credit card… So when I want to paypal something, I ask my husband to do it.

        3. The fewer PP and CC accounts you have, the easier it is to discard spam email as fraudulent. Paypal seems to be especially subject to phishing.

    2. No. I also had bizarre effects. I’ve now gone to her blog and fixed that link. Sorry, I shouldn’t have put up the link I asked her to give and she gave me AFTER writing this.

  11. Poor, poor Amanda. I will get you completely schnookered at the next con if you finish this crap and the Brazile book! I really admire your tenacity!

  12. Apparently there is is evidence Manhattanites are dumber than Californians:

    New Yorkers are loving Hillary’s memoir
    New Yorkers are still asking “What happened?” but other parts of the country just don’t give “a f–k.”

    That’s the result of a new study of the most popular author in every state by e-book library Scribd, which found Hillary Clinton’s election memoir was the most read in New York, Maine. and Massachusetts in October — but Mark Manson’s self-help guide “The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F–k” dominated seven states, including California and Texas.

    1. I guess it’s a good thing that they’re not reading Hillary’s BS, but I have to admit that I’m not terribly impressed by the intelligence of anyone who requires a guide to figure out how not to give a f–k.

    2. > e-book library Scribd

      “A claim from a pirate warez site *totally* meets our standards for journalistic investigation…”

  13. Isn’t grit that annoying stuff at the beach that gets under your bathing suit and chafes and irritates and annoys, with no polite way of removing it?

  14. Damn, Amanda – way to take one for the team….

    I don’t think I could have gotten through it

          1. the most obvious one is the 9-11 event where she “stumbled” into the van to be whisked away by her handlers.

            but there were a couple of different events where she seemed overly “startled” by the lights and commotion around her.

      1. I want to read your post when you finally get to the point of flinging it into a fire.

        Odds, do we want to start a pool on whether she finishes before that, or not? 😉

  15. A better place to ask “What Happened”? is with Bergdahl’s walking away nearly scot-free. *smfh*

      1. There are good and sound reasons to avoid vigilantism. I cannot endorse vigilantism. There are some interesting legal decisions that have done interesting things to rule of law. Vigilantism is an alternative to rule of law, and the choice is one largely outside of the control of judges and lawyers. I would like legal decisions to be such that there is no significant widespread reason to support vigilantism.

        1. As pointed out by others, the law exists to protect lawbreakers from mob justice. If authorities stop fairly enforcing the law, the mobs will start.

          1. Yes. I’m looking for a way to avoid the mobs. Forecasts are a bit gloomy, and I haven’t found a truly reliable path to improvement. Guess I’m going to have to rely on the better nature of my fellow Americans.

    1. I saw one person saying that he was let go as a big F U to Trump. After I recover from my upcoming steak coma I’ll see if I can find the article (Townhall?)

      1. The President does sometimes have a responsibility to keep his gob shut, lest things happen. Look at how Obama nearly screwed up fraudulently passing women through Ranger School.

        1. If we’re expecting this President to keep his gob shut we might as well call it done and shut the lights off.

          I’m not sure we could keep his mouth shut using a combination of duct tape, staples, super glue, and a blow torch. (Mix and match as it amuses).

          1. “Silent Cal” (Coolidge) he ain’t.

            I’ve been searching off and on for a copy of “The Man Who Never Was” to give him as a clue x 2 on OPSEC. (I remember it being a thin book (so x 2, not x 4), but maybe I read a condensed “younger reader” version in junior high.)

            1. The book is about Operation Mincemeat in WWII, a British spy caper which came off beautifully. Do an Internet search for “Mincemeat swallowed whole” FYI.

      2. The so-called judge pretty much laid the groundwork for that when he offered to let Bergdahl withdraw his plea a week or two ago. He addressed the “undue influence” issue then. I did a post about it for Victory Girls the day (maybe the day after) it happened.

        1. The JAG corps is apparently miffed that Trump has turned war management over to the fightin’ gen’rals and now denies the JAG the privilege of spending our troops’ lives to demonstrate the JAG’s virtue.

  16. Unfortunately, I think women in politics are starting to take after Hillary or, at least, starting to parrot the feminist lines. One city near us has two female candidates for Mayor (plus a male write-in candidate) and the two women are cheering because “now the city will finally have a voice for the women” and one city council candidate here in my city is claiming that “finally there will be a voice on the council for 51% of the residents”. So my vote for a guy means he doesn’t speak for me?? That one statement struck her from our list of viable candidates to vote for.

      1. At least assuming that your race and sex make you think like a Democrat. I heard very few of these people cheering for Condi Rice, Tim Scott, Sarah Palin, Herman Cain, or any of the women in important positions in the Trump administration.

        1. Elizabeth Dole, former US Senator and Transportation Secretary for President Reagan and candidate for US President and the reason the third brake light on automobiles can be called the “Liddy light,” comes to mind as well.

    1. Yep. They are following Hillary’s cry that those who didn’t vote for her were traitors to their sex. Nope, Hill, I respect my sex enough to know that just because a candidate has a vagina and not a penis doesn’t mean she is more qualified for anything other than carrying a child to term. I abhor women — and men — who claim we should vote based on a candidate’s sex or sexual orientation and not their qualifications and stands on the issues.

      1. Someone informed me that if I didn’t support Hillary! I was self-hating. I said, “No, I just don’t agree with her ideas.” Judging by their expression, apparently that possibility had never entered the small space housing their cerebellum.

      2. They do tend to be selective in their outrage. A man who votes for the penile endowed candidate is a sexist misogynist retrograde deplorable, but a woman who votes for the candidate who seems most likely to defend her liberty and rights (above that of aborting the byblow of an interaction with Hillary’s hubby or good friend Harvey) is a gender traitor.

        I stopped falling for the “Heads i win, Tails you lose” gag by 1st Grade, and there were kids in Kindergarten who were far subtler in their playing of it than was Hillary.

      3. If you are a traitor to your sex for failing to support Clinton, am I a traitor to my sex for failing to support Weinstein?

    1. No, just foolish enough to have made a promise and believe it is important to keep my word. I owe Sarah, you see. Besides, it is a small enough price to give her a day she doesn’t have to worry about the blog and can concentrate on writing Guardian or the next book in the queue.

      1. Never bet to clean someone’s hog parlor when playing checkers unless you know how many hogs they have. (Lots and I got let off for being too young.)

        Also, kobolds are (or were under AD&D rules) “giant class” creatures. I still owe someone a dollar for that one.

    1. What happened? The DNC found a candidate even more repulsive than Red Bernie, and its own supported gagged on her.

      I cheered every time she made a speech; it was like the John Kerry scenario all over again – every time she opened her mouth, hardcore Democrats said “Whoa, dude, WTF?” she she lost votes.

      A big dose to STFU and she would probably have made it, but she wouldn’t stop talking about how great she was and how she was going to stick it to her enemies, which were apparently everyone not in her immediate field of view…

  17. *trots in pulling popcorn cart* *adjusts reading glasses* OK, I’ve got eight bags of light butter-light salt, eight bags of plain, three hot cinnamon, three cheese, two double-butter, five bags of kettle corn, three caramel corn – no nuts, two bags of the fancy stuff with dark chocolate drizzled on it, and a sack of mice crispies. Oops, sorry, that one’s mine. *removes bag of mice crispies* The kosher cart will be loaded and ready in a few minutes.

    1. Oooh, mice krispies? I seriously need to keto, if not straight fast, after the halloween candy was brought to work. Because those of us who stress-eat should not be working a full-moon with chocolate freely sourced nearby!

    2. The aardvark trundles in with a cart of bonbons. The ones hidden on the bottom are the ant-flavored ones, so you probably don’t want those. You don’t need to worry about the brimstone and seaweed ones, either, since the aardvark dropped those off in a handy location for Fluffy and the sea serpent in the minion pool.

  18. I’d say as our “great white savior” but that would be so politically incorrect of me.

    Great woman saviour.

  19. “I doubt many of the readers will know what it’s like to lose a presidential election…”

    We also don’t know what it’s like to order the “suicide” of disloyal or inconvenient assistants, or to crush rape victims who are inconveniently complaining about one’s husband, or to sell out our national interests for personal gain…

  20. Just a minor point, but I’m wondering why she’s wondering what John Adams would have thought about “a wise woman” in the White House? Maybe this would be clear to me if I actually read her book. But it seems strange that out of all of the presidents she could have named, she chose one of only two who never lived in the White House.

  21. Gracious!

    Donna Brazile’s book accidentally reveals what the Democratic Party really thinks about women
    by Charlotte Hays

    OPINION Contributors
    Donna Brazile’s book accidentally reveals what the Democratic Party really thinks about women
    by Charlotte Hays | Nov 7, 2017, 2:42 PM
    This July 26, 2016 file photo shows former head of the Democratic National Committee Donna Brazile speaking during the second day of the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia. (AP Photo/Paul Sancya, file)
    This July 26, 2016 file photo shows former head of the Democratic National Committee Donna Brazile speaking during the second day of the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia. (AP Photo/Paul Sancya, file)
    Recommended for You
    Byron York: Spinning in circles on the Trump dossier
    Trust Donna Brazile, Democrats: You’re better off without Clinton and Obama
    Donna Brazile fires back at Hillary Clinton staffers: ‘I’m not Patsy the slave’
    Trump readies executive order to unravel Obamacare’s individual mandate, GOP senator says
    Everyone understands Trump’s reaction to the New York terrorist, even if the media don’t
    Most Read Articles
    Byron York: Spinning in circles on the Trump dossier
    Trust Donna Brazile, Democrats: You’re better off without Clinton and Obama
    Donna Brazile fires back at Hillary Clinton staffers: ‘I’m not Patsy the slave’

    Although there has been no shortage of commentary on former Democratic National Committee head Donna Brazile’s bombshell new book, Hacks, I want to zero in on one aspect of Brazile’s revelations that has been overlooked: Brazile inadvertently lifts the lid and shows what her party really thinks about women.

    Embedded in the book is a paternalistic (or perhaps in this case we should say maternalistic) attitude towards women. Brazile writes that after Hillary Clinton collapsed at an event marking the anniversary of Sept. 11, she considered, as apparently can be done by the DNC, replacing Clinton and running mate Tim Kaine on the Democratic ticket with Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J.

    Brazile writes that she had already realized the Clinton campaign was “anemic” and that it had “the odor of failure.” Thus a Biden-Booker ticket, in her view, had a better chance of staving off what she viewed as the unmitigated disaster of a Donald Trump victory.

    Given the enormous stakes, why didn’t Brazile act?

    It is impossible to know whether Brazile could have really orchestrated such an unheard-of move, or even whether Brazile really seriously contemplated it at the time or if it is now just a convenient excuse for her part in losing the 2016 presidential race. But her stated rationale for not saving the world from Donald Trump says it all.

    “I thought of Hillary, and all the women in the country who were so proud of and excited about her,” Brazile now claims. “I could not do this to them.” Whatever else this says, it speaks volumes about the Democratic Party’s attitude towards women.

    Women are seen as poor innocents, so vested in the success of a female candidate that an argument about changing the ticket to create a better atmosphere for winning would be above their reasoning powers. They could never buck up and debate the merits of a ticket change because women are … wait … just so emotional. They are so innocently “proud and excited” about the lovable Mrs. Clinton, and it just wouldn’t do to break their little hearts. If only women were more adult, Donna Brazile might have been able to save the world from Donald Trump.

    Interestingly, Brazile sets herself above such typical women; she is different. You see, Donna Brazile is one of the guys.

    In a telling quote from Hacks in HuffPost, Brazile shows unmistakably what she thinks it takes to succeed in politics: cartoonish masculinity. “Gentlemen,” she challenges, “let’s just put our dicks out on the table and see who’s got the bigger one, because I know mine is bigger than all of yours.” Nice.

    Brazile also watched as her party used the gender card to bamboozle or guilt-trip women into believing they had to vote for Hillary Clinton. Prime among these attempts was one by former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who threatened women who weighed the issues and decided how to vote on their own, with fire and brimstone. “Just remember, there’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other,” Albright told us.

    You don’t talk to people you consider thinking adults this way.


    1. Oh good grief!

      Ignore everything between the byline and “Although there has been no shortage …”, please.

  22. She wrote no concession speech? She tempted the whatnot from high atop the thing? No wonder she lost. What a maroon.

Comments are closed.