In Defense of Hillary Clinton

hillary-clintonHow many of you remember this? In 2000, when Hillary Clinton was campaigning for her first term in the Senate, someone came out with a book suggesting that she might be anti-Semitic, or at least that she made anti-Semitic remarks. At the time it seemed possible that this could deal a death blow to her campaign, given the large percentage of voters in New York State, and especially its largest city, that come from Jewish backgrounds.  However, she won the election and won again six years later.

The book, written by Jerry Oppenheimer, who specializes in unauthorized biographies, and published by Harper Collins, was entitled “State of a Union,” and professed to be a thorough analysis of the marriage of Bill and Hillary Clinton. It contended that in 1974, when Bill Clinton ran for Congress from Arkansas and narrowly lost, Hillary – not yet Mrs. Clinton — took out her anger on one of Bill’s campaign officials, calling him “You f—— Jew bastard!”

Hillary denied the allegation when it surfaced, and Bill, then in his final months as president, weighed in too, with the odd statement that “I was there and she didn’t say it.” Odd because if it didn’t happen, where was “there”?

I cannot believe that either Bill (“I did not have sex with that woman”) or Hillary (“I remember landing under sniper fire”) would speak an untruth, even if it meant protecting themselves politically.
I am particularly anxious to give Mrs. Clinton the benefit of the doubt, having just come off the publication of another blog on this site that suggested, satirically, that she might have staged the recent incident in Las Vegas, where a woman threw a shoe at her. A horde of mad dog liberals, hysterical females of both sexes, unable to recognize satire and taking the piece dead seriously, attacked me as a conspiracy theorist who should be wearing a tinfoil hat. I came of age in the Kennedy era, and seldom wear hats of any kind, so the suggestion went over my head.
So I am being careful to not seem unfair to Mrs. Clinton.

And yet, there is the indisputable fact that Mrs. Clinton is a volatile person, capable of eardrum-rupturing decibels. The anti-Semitic slur could have happened and she might have simply forgotten it. Can we really expect Hillary Clinton, of all people, to remember every profanity she has uttered?

Jews have been a favorite target of politicians for ages, but as the Clinton campaign demonstrated, their numbers are so few that you can say what you please about them, and it won’t cost you any elections. In the case of Hitler in 1930s Germany, it appears to have had just the opposite effect.

I don’t see that his attitude toward Jews has hurt Barack Hussein Obama. When he entered the White House, Israel was our most loyal ally. Five years later its prime minister has been defamed by our president and his country marginalized by U.S. foreign policy. And yet Obama won re-election in 2012, with Jewish Democrats falling all over each other to get to the polls and place a check beside his name. Many conservative goyim say they can’t understand that.

They just don’t appreciate that Jews — many of them, at any rate — seem as inclined as anyone to look down on Jews. Every Jew has a favorite Jewish joke, usually carrying the theme that Jews are moneygrubbers.

Q: How do you drive a Jew insane?
A: Put him in a round room and tell him there’s a quarter in the corner.

Q: Why do Jewish men like to watch porno movies backward?
A: They like the part where the hooker gives the money back.

(That one is said to have been told by Monica Lewinsky, a Jew, to President Clinton, during one of their timeouts in the Oval Office.)

Q: How do you stop a Jewish woman from having sex?
A: Marry her.

(Not a money joke, but obviously the creation of a married, or formerly married, Jewish man.)

If we were to question Mrs. Clinton today about the allegations of anti-Semitism leveled against her in 2000, she might shrug her shoulders and reply, loudly: “At this point what difference does it make? I won the election.”

Author Bio:

Arthur Louis spent more than forty years as a print journalist, with the Philadelphia Inquirer, McGraw-Hill, Fortune magazine and the San Francisco Chronicle, but he is not asking for sympathy. He is the author of two non-fiction books: The Tycoons, and Journalism and Other Atrocities, as well as a novel, The Little Champ. In retirement, he has decided unilaterally that he is a profound political pundit.
Author website: http://bernardgoldberg.com
  • Brian Fr Langley

    And speaking of anti-semitism, down through the ages (and usually prior to deadly pogroms) was the epithet “Christ killers”. I always found this odd in the extreme? First the Jews did not “kill” Christ, the Romans did. He was executed under Roman law, for a Roman offence. Pontius Pilate posted the following crime above his head. “This is Jesus, King of the Jews”. (Romans were quite intolerant of hereditary Kings, preferring to appoint their own choices, not surprisingly Americans and Canadians have done the same thing to aboriginal peoples, and have disallowed hereditary Chiefs, in favor of elected ones). The other oddity of the epithet “Christ killer”, is the fact that Christians believe he was raised from the dead. That very fact is central to their faith. So what was it the anti-semites were hoping for? That he would die of sickness, and then raise from the dead, or perhaps die of old age first? I mean really? If Christians are right, (and I believe they are) then happily for humanity, Yeshua (the name his mother called him) the “Christ” was crucified, thus ransoming an adjudged, (thus lost) humanity, back into a glorious reconciliation with their creator. This concept vindicated by his raising on the third day. With such a happy ending, from whence pours the anti-semitic filth, that so frequently followed on the heels of demonic mobs shreiking “Christ killer”

    • artlouis

      Immigrant Jewish kids in America a century ago used to receive the Christ-killer taunt, and often a beating, from Christian immigrant kids. As late as the middle of the 20th century, there still were many kids telling their Jewish classmates that they killed Christ.

      • Brian Fr Langley

        Since anti-semitism (and it’s modern kissing cousin anti-Israel)defies rational explanation, I think it’s excellent proof, of realms demonic.

        • artlouis

          Yes, I never met an anti-Semite who wasn’t certifiably nuts.

    • sgthappyg

      Since this is Easter it is a good time to address these attempts to re-write history. It was the Jews that had Christ killed but they had to convince the Romans to carry out the execution since they did not have any means of doing the deed themselves. Read John 19:38-40 “… He went out again to the Jews, and said to them, ‘I find no fault in Him at all. But you have a custom that I should release someone to you at the Passover. Do you therefore want me to release to you the King of the Jews?’ Then they all cried again saying, ‘Not this Man, but Barabbas!’”
      Matthew 27:24-25 reads: “When Pilate saw that he could not prevail at all, but rather that a tumult was rising, he took water and washed his hands before the multitude, saying ‘I am innocent of the blood of this just Person. You see to it.’ And all the people answered and said ‘His blood be on us and on our children.” Quotations from the New King James Bible.
      However, this should not be used to vilify all Jews. All of Christ disciples were Jewish. All the converts to Christianity on the day of Pentecost in Jerusalem were Jewish. (Acts Chapter 2) Christ had to be crucified for the atonement of all humanity so that we can have a relationship with the Father. “For God so loved the world that He gave HIs only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.” These Jewish leaders that crucified Christ only helped to implement God’s plan of salvation.

      • artlouis

        Are you sure you want to accept the New Testament, unquestioningly, as fact?

      • Brian Fr Langley

        I know this passage well. However I don’t believe it detracts from my point at all. He was killed by Romans under “Roman” law. Yet no howling mobs call their descendants “Christ killers” while pursuing murderous pogroms. While true some of the Jewish leadership desired his execution, as is clear from the passage, they did not have the authority to carry out this execution. Who is guiltier of an offense, some one egging it on, or someone actually doing the deed. Anyway the responsible party is clear. . John 10 16-17. Blaming Jews throughout history for the death of Jesus, is as ludicrous as blaming the descendants of Rome. Yet on this basis, much execrable anti-semitism prevails. I’m not rewriting history, I’m correcting it.

        • sgthappyg

          Roger that. I also stated there is no reason for anti-semitism. Since these Jewish leaders helped to implement the plan of salvation – they should be thanked. I also mentioned that all the early Christians were Jewish so any anti-semitism doesn’t make any sense there either.

  • Loyaltothecorps

    I have another Jewish joke for you. Do you know what “trust me” means in Jewish? F**k You!