The Clinton Brand

Thank God I have a co-worker who brings sanity into an office filled with love-sick liberals who adore every syllable that comes from the mouths of President Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Last week, Pat walked into my office and asked, "Did you watch any of the testimony by Clinton over the Benghazi thing?"

To which I responded, "Not a chance I'd waste my time watching that circus."

As usual, he was fired up, air-punching my door and shaking his head.  "To show you how desperate I am, I watched her testimony on C-Span," he confessed, then added, "You wouldn't believe the lies she was telling."

"Yes, I would," I answered.  "She's a Clinton."

                                                            *                     *                    *

Outgoing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave a "typical Washington performance" this past week while defending her department (and by bureaucratic fiat, herself) against any criticism in the Benghazi murder of four innocent Americans.

By "typical" I mean 1) weeping, wailing, pounding the desk, obfuscating and lying, 2) taking responsibility, but denying any accountability, and 3) blaming it on unrelated factors, like 1.43 million emails, which make ignorance acceptable behavior.  When Hillary's melodramatic performance was finished we had NO new information and NO one to hold responsible for this administration's failed foreign policy.

A lot of things bother me about Washington, but one of the biggest is the pompous attitude these politicians have and the lies they are able to get away with.  Hillary has a long history of lying, beginning with her defense of her husband against numerous affairs with Gennifer Flowers, Sally Perdue, Paula Jones and Juanita Broaddrick back in Arkansas.

Her lies continued once they got to Washington, claiming some "vast right-wing conspiracy" was trying to take down her husband.  Hillary and Bill would do anything to protect the Clinton brand, often blaming others along the way.  Hillary has used it to embrace greater political advancement, including becoming a senator and now the Secretary of State.

I don't know if there was ever an honest bone in her recently expanding body, but it's clear to see that Hillaryis used to getting away with it.  As soon as someone -- insert your favorite Republic or Fox News contributor -- she becomes indignant and swoons to the press for support.  This response was on full display during her committee testimony on the Benghazi situation.

This time however, the press not only bought her performance, they reveled in it.  They rolled in it like a dog digging up dead fish in the garden -- they couldn't get enough.  Their deification of Hillary is matched only by their reverential praise for Obama.

The Washington Post unashamedly reported, "For Hillary, the testimony was a triumphant capstone on her term as the chief U. S. diplomat.  If Hillary had not dealt with the Benghazi affair before she left office, she could have been viewed as a failure and a weakling.  Instead, she came blazing onto Capitol Hill in true Hillary style, concluding the Libya drama on her terms and exiting Washington to regroup for her next adventure -- a new book, global speeches or a presidential run."

The New York Times declared, Clinton was "professional and authoritative for hours in the witness chair."  She "stood up to the raging bulls with grace and fire of her own," gushed Joan Walsh.  She "served up a potent brew of righteous outrage," breathed Dana Milbank.

Unfortunately, the Republicans questioning of Hillary only made matters worse.  The Secretary of State should have been relentlessly grilled over her involvement, yet the closest anyone came to questioning her authority came from the inexperienced senator from Wisconsin, Ron Johnson.

"What caused the intelligence failures at the State Department," he asked,  "which said the attack was initiated by spontaneous protests stemming from an anti-Muslim video?"  He then asked why she didn't pick up the phone and get some answers.

"With all due respect," Hillary sobbed, "the fact is we had four dead Americans."  Raising her voice, she continued, "Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk last night who decided to kill some Americans?  What difference, at this point, does it make?"  Translation, "Don't question me.  I am above reproach and will not answer your question!"

For months the Obama administration, and that includes Hillary, have been obfuscating and stalling.  Let's blame the video, let's blame the CIA, or let's blame poor communication between our diplomats and Washington.  Now, because she has been delaying for months, she 's going to use the excuse that too much time has passed for this question to matter any more.

Seriously, what difference does it make?  That's her answer?  As if misleading the press and the American people isn't reason enough?

Maybe we should be asking what difference did you make when you found out the Benghazi embassy was under attack?  Isn't that the question?  What was Hillary doing to keep our citizens safe, and at a minimum -- when asked -- what did she do to help them out of a deadly situation?

Clinton claims she takes responsibility for what happened in Libya.  Really?  Has someone been fired?  Has a single person been arrested?  Does anyone have a better idea what happened on September 11, 2012?  Why were the emails voicing concerns for their safety ignored?  Is Hillary stepping down from her position in disgrace?

It's politics as usual.  In typical Washington fashion, "taking responsibility" means saying something that shows concern, but doing nothing that indicates that you HAVE taken responsibility for your actions.  Other than the Kennedys and Obama, can you think of another political family that gets a pass every time they step in it?

                                                                 *                  *                 *

Clinton's response has got me thinking.  From now on, every time the press questions a Republican on some issue, they should respond with "What difference does it make?"  Remind the press -- and those supporting her answer -- that if refusing to answer the question is good enough for Hillary Clinton, then it should be good enough for our side.

     . What's the Republican position on the fiscal cliff?  Look concerned and say "At this late date, what 
       difference does it really make?  We're screwed!"

     . Who's responsible for the shooting of innocent children in our schools?  Slam your fist on the table
       and say somberly "Well, what difference does it make?  They're dead, aren't they?"

     . What should be done with the 11 million illegal immigrants currently in the United States?  Angrily
       answer how unjust the situation is, but then say with remorse "Well, at this point, what 
       difference does it really make?  They're here, right?"

     . Don't the melting ice caps signal global warming?  Spread your arms wide and plead "What 
       difference does it make?  We can't stop it now."

Sports athletes like cyclist Lance Armstrong and Baltimore Raven's linebacker Ray Lewis could put it to good use, as well.

    . Lance, did you cheat in winning your seven Tour de France titles?  "Seriously?   And besides, even 
      if I did, what difference does it make?  That was like 13 years ago."

    . Mr. Lewis, did you use deer antler spray (HG1) to help overcome your latest injury?  "What are 
      you talking about?  I wouldn't even know where to get the stuff.  And if I did, what difference does it 
      make?  I'm better now and playing in the Super Bowl."

It gets easier the more you say it.  Try it sometime -- just not when four Americans lie dead in the streets of Libya.