I wanted to highlight a post from Moyers & Company on the media’s longtime bias against the Clintons – especially Hillary. I have heard first hand one prominent news show host dismiss President Clinton as always being the least intelligent person in the room despite the fact that he has fourth highest IQ of any President and is widely viewed as one of the most intelligent men to sit in the Oval Office.
It gets even worse when it comes to Hillary. As detailed below and posted previously, I saw this first hand in New Hampshire in 1992 when reporters talked about Hillary being “ugly” within earshot of her.
She’s untrustworthy. She lies. She’s a pawn of the rich and powerful. This is “we-all-know” journalism at its worst
Clinton’s campaign is an object lesson in both these media tendencies. The MSM made up their mind on her decades ago and won’t budge. And the Internet isn’t about to come to her defense. . . .
The bigger point is this: whatever you may think of the Clintons, the scandals didn’t create the meme of untrustworthiness about them. The meme of untrustworthiness created the scandals. The media just kept hunting for those scandals as confirmation of what they had already determined. That is how so many in the MSM work — backwards from presumption to incident. It also happens to be the surest path to career advancement for journalistic opportunists.
So we still get stories harping on Benghazi, even though investigation after investigation, including one by the Republican-led House Intelligence Committee, exculpated Clinton. But why bury a story when you just know that the Clintons are always up to something?
It was February 16, 1992 – the Sunday before the crucial New Hampshire primary that would save the Clinton campaign. The final debate had just concluded and Hillary Clinton came to an after-party with several bus loads of volunteers (mostly students) before they boarded their red-eye buses back to Washington. I vividly remember standing in a circle of mostly women who were captivated as they spoke with Arkansas’ First Lady.
I had just spent the last forty-eight (48) hours with several of these women, all of whom were bright, idealistic and committed. Their excitement over seeing a woman political role model was evident as they spoke. I was on the opposite end of the circle from Hillary and noticed two male reporters walking behind and past her. As they did, one of them turned to the other and said in a stage whisper, “you’re right, she is ugly.” I was fuming and can only imagine how those closest to the reporters felt.
From the beginning the rules have been different for Hillary. She wowed audiences as she campaigned for her husband, with some asking, as future Ambassador to Holland Cynthia Schneider did before a packed fundraiser, whether she herself would someday make a run. She was not Pat Nixon, Nancy Reagan or Barbara Bush who upheld the image of a political wife that was trapped in the days of black and white television. This was the famous “Year of the Woman” and Dan Quayle’s battle with Murphy Brown and Hillary was breaking the mold — and for that she has paid a price.