Election 2016: Keith Ellison: ‘I would love to see Elizabeth Warren’ run
If you scroll down the front page of Newsbusters, you’ll notice that the mainstream national media has resumed its role of the protectors of all things Clinton, and in this case it’s former Sec. of State Hillary Clinton – whose name is floating around out there as a possible 2016 contender for President. Before I get to those, here’s the back-story behind the latest round of defense posturing from “unbiased” journos:
Karl Rove never explicitly said that Hillary Clinton had brain damage, the Republican strategist said Tuesday morning on Fox News.
“I never used that phrase,” Rove said when asked about a New York Post report that said he suggested the former secretary of state might have brain damage from a blood clot she suffered in 2012.
Rove defended most of his comments, though, saying that Clinton went through a “serious health episode” and that she will be forced to deal with many questions about her health and age if she chooses to run for president in 2016.
“I never used that phrase, I never used that phrase. But look, she had a serious health episode. And I don’t know about you, but if you go through a serious health episode, it causes you to look at life a little bit differently. This was a serious deal,” he said.
America’s Newsroom host Bill Hemmer challenged Rove on his timeline, saying his research showed that Clinton was in the hospital only for three days. Rove conceded the point about her hospital stay but largely stuck by his monthlong timeline. “She goes in on a Sunday, she comes out on a Wednesday. But this is a 30-day period where she’s fighting something.”
The Republican strategist said his main point was that her health invariably will come up on the campaign trail if she chooses to run for the Democratic nomination in 2016.
Now, this is a line of attack that not many would use against a candidate – unless you’re a Democrat going after a Republican, of course, but this is Karl Rove here, so it’s a safe bet to say he doesn’t really view anything as off the table – especially when it comes to the Clintons. And considering the left (and the media) set the standard for questioning someone’s health (and age) when they went after Senator John McCain along those same lines back in 2008, why shouldn’t it be on the table? Well, because it’s Hillary Clinton – who may one day be the first female President in United States history – so the media is predictably doing their thing, just like they did for Barack Obama, in helping try to pave the way. Here are some recent examples of them in the role of human shields for La Clinton … and not just over Rove’s comments:
Expect much more of this in the coming months as the same MSM that eventually sided with Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton in 2008 – even going so far back then as to give her AND her husband the same kind of unfair kneecapping treatment they typically do Republicans – transitions into “Hillary 2016″ mode, saying and doing … and not saying … whatever they can to not only inspire her to run but to carry her through the rough and tumble primary fight she would potentially face and onto the Presidency. Imagine the exclusives they could get of the first lady President in American history if they treat her the “correct” way!?
While that’s all well and good, now is as good a time as any to remind people – and the media – that this is the same Hillary Clinton who, along with her husband, kept an “enemies list” of both politicos and media types alike as she presided as “co-president” alongside Bill for eight years – a habit she never dropped, as we learned from her 2008 “enemies list” activities. I think it’s safe to assume it’s a practice she still keeps up.
Not only that, but the former SOS has shown she’s no shrinking violet, as we saw at the Benghazi hearings last year, and as we’ve seen at other public functions where she was invited as a guest to speak or testify. She deserves the same level of scrutiny and questioning that journalists routinely give not only to male politicos but that they gave to Sarah Palin in 2008 and beyond as well – minus the hypocritical, cheap shot attacks on Mrs. Palin’s looks and family, of course.
That said, we all know Hillary Clinton won’t get anywhere close to the level of scrutiny by the press that she deserves – but fortunately we don’t have to rely solely on “old media” for in-depth reporting anymore. Thank God.
Related: Twitchy Team – ‘Got hypocrisy?’: Jedediah Bila slams media’s coddling of Hillary Clinton