Newly Released Emails Reveal The Hillary You (Still) Don’t Know
http://www.nationalmemo.com/newly-released-emails-reveal-the-hillary-you-still-dont-know/Joe Conason
Newly Released Emails Reveal The Hillary You (Still) Don’t Know
July 2, 2015 4:28 pm
snip//
According to the New York Times – a “liberal” newspaper that no longer attempts to conceal its longstanding animus against the Clintons – this initial batch of 3,000-plus emails is “striking” in its “banality,” because so many of the messages from her early months as the nation’s third-ranking official deal with daily problems like scheduling, fax machines, and snow days at Foggy Bottom. Seeking to embarrass her whenever possible, the Times account leads with her apparent concern over possible press comment on a 2009 joint interview with her most notorious predecessor.
snip//
Still, if these emails offer no hint of titillating scandal or slander, they cannot be said to offer no insight into America’s best-known female leader. While the Times grudgingly concedes that these messages reveal “hints of personality,” Time magazine found a woman in full – and someone whose very existence may surprise voters more familiar with the secretive, imperious, self-centered figure so often caricatured in American media over the past 25 years.
Time informs us that the “complex portrait” of Clinton emerging from the emails shows “a management style that is efficient under pressure and reflective in the late hours of the day,” with “bursts of thinking” that sometimes erupted during “sleepless nights circling the globe.” Nothing new there: Everyone knows she is sharp, thoughtful, and driven to get stuff done. But Time describes her with adjectives rarely used in conventional profiles: “humble,” “self-deprecating,” “concerned,” “generous,” and “one of the best bosses” that members of her staff have ever had.
Humble? She usually went out of her way to meet with friends and colleagues, rather than insisting they come to her. Self-deprecating? She joked constantly about herself and her foibles. Concerned? She repeatedly sought ways to help a young girl she had met in Yemen — and she admonished John Podesta, an old friend who now serves as her campaign chair, to “wear socks to bed to keep your feet warm.” Generous? She often expressed gratitude to staff and kept close track of births, illnesses, and other milestones affecting friends, acquaintances, and employees.
Does any of that sound familiar? Not unless you’ve spoken with people who know Hillary Clinton well. The point isn’t that she is any kind of paragon. She is simply a human being, whose friends and former staffers might also mention her flashes of impatience and temper, her wariness toward the press, her efforts to protect family privacy that can sometimes seem excessively secretive.
The question is whether major media outlets, often hostile and suspicious toward Clinton, can yet draw a fuller portrait of a candidate who is so well known; a candidate whose true character, in all its complexity, has been obscured by negative coverage for so many years; a candidate who, despite those persistent distortions, may yet make history again.
= new reply since forum marked as read
How many times was Hillary accused of being "ambitious", "power hungry", etc.? I guess that men can run for president, many with far less experience and know-how than her, but it's OK because they're male. Their motives are not in question, even if they're fools, like Trump for example. People may question the idiotic remarks that come out of his mouth, but not his right to run.
Powerful women like Hillary are also accused, alternately, of either being whores or lesbians. Regardless of whether there's even a shred of evidence of any salacious conduct.
Women are always held to a different standard. The physical seems to take precedence. Comments about their hair, make-up, clothing, age, weight, etc. are used as weapons against female candidates in ways that are never used against men. And let's not forget the sexist remarks about hormones and what happens "once a month". Male politicians can cry in public and no one bats an eye, but let Hillary's voice crack one time in NH and both sides were up in arms, accusing her of faking it or of using her femininity to inspire sympathy.
We still have a long way to go before we reach equality.
The one lesson I learned from the 2008 election was that the Left can be as sexist as the Right. Quite a disappointment to find that out.
It reminds me that in Victorian times women suffering from depression or dissatisfied with the confines of their limited possibilities within society were often labeled as being "hysterical". Some of these women even ended in mental institutions.
"But it was during the 19th century that hysteria became a major medical preoccupation. At this time, physicians who studied the specific nature of women and their differences from men became increasingly concerned with hysteria. Hysteria was so fashionable a topic and of such huge concern that even famous 19th century writers wrote about this female disease. Authors such as Gustave Flaubert, Honoré de Balzac, Henry James, George Eliot, Thomas Hardy, and William Wordsworth described the phenomenon of hysteria and linked it to internal and emotional disorder, quite often associated with repressed sexual desires. Flaubert’s Madame Bovary (1857) and Charlotte Brontë’s Jane Eyre (1847) link hysteria to the repression of sexuality.
http://paulturnbull.org/?q=node/34
"Female hysteria was a once-common medical diagnosis (distinct from male hysteria), made exclusively in women, which is today no longer recognized by medical authorities as a medical disorder. Its diagnosis and treatment were routine for many hundreds of years in Western Europe. Hysteria of both genders was widely discussed in the medical literature of the nineteenth century. Women considered to be have it exhibited a wide array of symptoms, including faintness, nervousness, sexual desire, insomnia, fluid retention, heaviness in the abdomen, muscle spasm, shortness of breath, irritability, loss of appetite for food or sex, and "a tendency to cause trouble".[1] In extreme cases, the woman might be forced to enter an insane asylum or to undergo surgical hysterectomy."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_hysteria
Consciously or subconsciously, they see a woman who seeks power as emasculating. In some men's view, a woman who is not satisfied with being a wife and mother is to be treated with suspicion and derision. IMO, they fear such women because they refuse to conform to what is expected from them and do not meet the preset parameters that these men were brought to believe is the role of women and men in society. The male as the provider and the female as the caregiver.
In Hillary's case, not only do they disagree with her political views, they fear that she will influence "their women". This dilemma was faced by all women who spoke against the mores of their times. Depending on the era, they were burned as witches, incarcerated or shunned. These women were deemed dangerous and the men were afraid that their "crazy" ideas would contaminate the other womenfolk. For centuries women were treated as little more than oversized children who shouldn't worry their "pretty little heads" about matters of import.
As for the Left, in 2008 listening to idiots like Chris Matthews and some of the other sexist remarks from several of the MSNBC pundits, I came to the realization that they may not have hated Hillary with a passion like the Right, but nonetheless the sexism was clearly present. It got so bad that many Hillary supporters stopped watching that network altogether, including myself.
director-producer. She got used to being called a bitch. All the men at her level in Hollywood were admired as bold, ballsy, forceful, assertive, powerful, commanding, but when she did what they did she was regarded as a bitch. Pushy. Not feminine - whatever that is. And worse. And don't forget uppity, too. Started with this film "Yentl" that she directed. It was her first directing assignment AND she played a very challenging title role, and MAN did she get shit for it. Who the hell did she think she was, anyway, directing herself and taking the lead role and blah-blah-blah.
I thought she was magnificent!
Hillary's faced the same shit.
It IS sexism. They want us in One Place that they're most comfortable having us in. You're spot-on, Beacool. We do indeed still have a long way to go before we reach equality. Dammit!
[img]
[/img]
[img]
[/img]
received the same treatment as Barbra Streisand. The complaints have been similar, regardless of their field of endeavor.
I found it profoundly disappointing during Hillary's last run for president that the party leaders mostly ignored the sexism. Any whiff of racism and the leadership was out in full force to recriminate the miscreant who uttered the racist remark. Any sexist remark against Hillary was greeted mostly with crickets.
That's why I have zero use for women like Pelosi and McCaskill. Pelosi addressed the sexism issue only after Hillary was no longer in the running. McCaskill had the gumption to say that she wouldn't trust Bill with her daughters. She also said that she had endorsed Obama at the urging of her daughters. Now they are both Hillary's biggest supporters? The hell with them!!!
At one event after the nomination had already been won by Obama a group of activists confronted Howard Dean and asked him why hadn't he ever spoken against the sexism that Hillary had faced. His answer was that he hardly watched cable TV and was unaware of it. What?????
Why does she inspire such loyalty among her staff? Because she's a good person who truly cares about people. Hillary has a wicked sense of humor and likes to laugh. Off the record she's charming and caring. The wall that goes up in public is for self-protection. She's been burned too many times to count. Why should she trust the press? They are nothing short of vultures.
Seriously, as we all know, even some couples that have been together for months and sometimes years don't truly know their partner well.
One or even 100 articles is certainly not enough to completely evaluate a human being.
We all do the best we can. 
including me sometimes. 
Humble? She usually went out of her way to meet with friends and colleagues, rather than insisting they come to her. Self-deprecating? She joked constantly about herself and her foibles. Concerned? She repeatedly sought ways to help a young girl she had met in Yemen — and she admonished John Podesta, an old friend who now serves as her campaign chair, to “wear socks to bed to keep your feet warm.” Generous? She often expressed gratitude to staff and kept close track of births, illnesses, and other milestones affecting friends, acquaintances, and employees."
What an absolutely wretched excuse for a human being! EEEUWWWW!!!
You GO, Hillary! I'm with ya!
Untold History of the United States and I don't think I can begin to describe how betrayed I feel. I've known that Obama was tied to Wall Street when he accepted funding from them when he ran against McCain, but it REALLY hit home like thousand WET dish rags!
There's no way I can begin to put into words all that was presented, but having watched it all I I CAN SAY I now know FULLY & CLEARLY why I support BERNIE SANDERS for POTUS!
I'm not posting to start any nasty fight nor am I willing to respond to a multitude of comments, I simply want to say to any here IF you have any way of watching it, PLEASE do. It was not only heart breaking, but it's left me feeling very afraid for this country if we don't WAKE UP and do something to STOP Wall Street's total influence on this country, our path forward looks very grim!
Agree or disagree, it's worth watching then maybe you can decide for yourselves!
The message was well received. The fact that no one has been jailed for the financial and home crisis should tell you everything you need to know about Obama. He did help pass meaninful legislation (gotta give credit where its due) but by passing weak Wall Street reforms, mediocre health insurance reform, and trying to shove TPP down our throats its apparent who he is going to bat for. We need a candidate who doesn't have ties to the banksters and big (insert industry here).
And I'm with you that Bernie Sanders is that man!
If he wins the nod I hope he picks Elizabeth Warren as his running mate.
