Hillary Clinton: Maragaret Thatcher Didn’t Earn A Place In Book Of Gutsy Women Because She Didn’t Try To “Make A Positive Difference” For Other Women
[guest post by Dana]
Yet another reason Hillary Clinton does not deserve to be the President of the United States. The first woman elected as Britain’s prime minister wasn’t considered worthy to be in Hillary and Chelsea Clinton’s book titled “Gutsy Women” because she didn’t really make a positive difference for other women.
When Margaret Thatcher came to power in 1979, many in the West had come to believe that the Cold War could not and should not be won, that anti-Communism was morally wrong, and that the future lay in détente between the superpowers and the evolution of democracy into ever-deepening state socialism. By the time she left office, the Berlin Wall had fallen and Eastern Europe was liberated. A year later, the Soviet Union crumbled into the dustbin of history. Democracy and freedom were on the advance.
Prime Minister Thatcher’s contributions to this victory were profound. Together with the firm vision of her close friend President Ronald Reagan, the inspiration of Pope John Paul II, and the determination of the oppressed peoples of Eastern Europe and Russia, her courage and leadership were instrumental to democracy’s defeat of Communism.
Even before 1979, the Soviet Union derisively described her as the Iron Lady. She proved that, for once, the Communists spoke the truth, turning what was intended as an insult into an honor hailed around the world. As the liberated nations and their friends and allies commemorate the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, her part in this great victory must be remembered with gratitude.
You can watch Hillary comment on Thatcher below. Sneering at another powerful woman who actually accomplished great things doesn’t make a positive difference for other women, Hillary. Instead it makes us remember what a small and bitter woman you continue to be. I’m glad this interview aired because now the “many, many, many people” you claim are pressuring you to consider a run in 2020 will also be reminded of the sad, failed candidate you were:
Hillary and Chelsea Clinton haven’t included Margaret Thatcher in their book of “gutsy” women@HillaryClinton tells @EmmaBarnett that Thatcher didn’t try to “make a positive difference” for other women
🎧Full interview: https://t.co/VqEUpMJ4jd#EmmaBarnettGetsAnswers pic.twitter.com/GDyYigC2pG
— BBC Radio 5 Live (@bbc5live) November 12, 2019
–Dana
She sure knows how to keep herself in the news. Not for anything relevant, but in the news, nonetheless…
Dana (cb74ca) — 11/13/2019 @ 7:02 amI think Margaret Thatcher would want to be mentioned in a book authored by Hillary Clinton about as much as she would want to be mentioned in a book authored by Xaviera Hollander, and even less to be mentioned approvingly.
nk (dbc370) — 11/13/2019 @ 7:31 amnk, that was my first thought….
But if this is an accurate representation of the contents
Kishnevi (57338f) — 11/13/2019 @ 7:48 amThatcher is too important a person to be included. (the Amazon blurb, a Q&A with H and Chelsea, this part atrributed to Chelsea)
Given his recent moves to the far-far-far right, has Morrissey come around on the Iron Lady? This interview is from 2013 –
urbanleftbehind (5eecdb) — 11/13/2019 @ 7:52 amhttp://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/morrissey-calls-margaret-thatcher-a-434819
Query — Did Angela Merkel make the cut?
Young Greta Thalberg did — for cussing out politicians and blaming her future misery on all of us. Maybe Hillary feels a kinship.
Appalled (78615b) — 11/13/2019 @ 8:04 amI’d be interested in a book written by Hillary on parenting tips for raising a daughter, as a How Not To guide.
Munroe (dd6b64) — 11/13/2019 @ 8:10 amshe didn’t really make a positive difference for other women.
Yes, helping end Communism, and reviving the British economy, did not help women.
And this woman should be president, why?
Bored Lawyer (998177) — 11/13/2019 @ 8:35 amShe’s tweeting as the hearing happens:
Dana (8b25a4) — 11/13/2019 @ 9:56 amThatcher’s achievements had nothing to do with riding her husband’s coattails — which must irk Hillary to no end.
Munroe (4ae3dd) — 11/13/2019 @ 9:58 amTaylor and Kent are making everyone else look like clowns, esp Nunes and the GOP counsel.
JRH (52aed3) — 11/13/2019 @ 10:20 amI’m watching this…and I disagree.
Kent and Taylor presented this as policy disagreements. The only legs is Taylor’s objection to Zelenski to publicaly announce that they’re conducting investigations into the 2016 election and into corruptions regard Biden-connections to Burisma.
But, much if this is getting lost in the weeds though and I seriously doubt that this is helpful to Democrats. I think the public will yawn and the support for impeachment would drop more.
whembly (fd57f6) — 11/13/2019 @ 10:42 amNunes and the GOP counsel are making everyone else look like clowns, esp Taylor and Kent
rcocean (1a839e) — 11/13/2019 @ 10:50 amRight Nunes and Gym Jordan, paragons of dignity and rectitude. LOL.
JRH (52aed3) — 11/13/2019 @ 10:57 amClinton talks about how Thatcher was very “clever” in making sure she had the right hairdo, clothes, voice lessons, etc. to become successful, but she didn’t “open doors for other women”, which was one of her “criteria” for inclusion in the book. I’m sure its just payback for the fact that Thatcher didn’t have a lot of respect for “hill and bill” while they were in the White House.
rcocean (1a839e) — 11/13/2019 @ 10:58 am‘she [Thatcher] really didn’t make a positive difference for other women…’
As far as the Brits go, apparently, she [Thatcher] didn’t:
‘Thatcher did “little to advance the political cause of women” either within her party or the government. (Burns (2009, p. 234) states that some British feminists regarded her as “an enemy”. Purvis (2013) claims that, although Thatcher had struggled laboriously against the sexist prejudices of her day to rise to the top, she made no effort to ease the path for other women. Thatcher did not regard women’s rights as requiring particular attention as she did not, especially during her premiership, consider that women were being deprived of their rights. She had once suggested the shortlisting of women by default for all public appointments, yet had also proposed that those with young children ought to leave the work force.’ – source, wikithatcher
It’s her book. And that lst bolded bit sorta doesn’t hold with the ‘not-stay-home-stand-by-my-man-and-bake-cookies-crowd.’
She’s had her 15 minutes– for over 50 years now.
Stop giving her publicity.
The future of the Heritage Foundation will follow that of The Weekly Standard if this is what it is wasting time on.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 11/13/2019 @ 10:59 amI notice none of these Left wing interviewers EVER ask Hillary any tough questions. Nothing about the “Bimbo erruptions” or Clinton’s impeachment or the Hillary numerous scandals or why she lost. They wouldn’t want to be “Rude” – LOL.
Of course with any Conservative/Republican woman its one tough question after another.
rcocean (1a839e) — 11/13/2019 @ 11:01 am@16. OTOH, she stay married to the jerk; Newtie, Dole, Reagan, Trump, etc., etc., dumped theirs.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 11/13/2019 @ 11:04 amWhat did Hillary do to “ease the path for other women” as 1st Lady or Sec of State? You got me. Thatcher wasn’t a feminist with a capital “F” – which is one reason Hillary didn’t like her. Thatcher criticized several Clinton Foreign policy initiatives in the 90s, and was critical of the Bosnian war. By 2005 she had turned against the Iraq war and was against the UK signing the Maastricht Treaty treaty in 91.
rcocean (1a839e) — 11/13/2019 @ 11:08 amThis mindset also goes towards why the left in the U.S. freaks out more when they think any female has a shot on the Republican side at being president more than any other person not named Donald Trump. In their minds’ it’s their birthright to have the first female American president — they don’t want it to be a conservative, as was the case in England with Thatcher, and turn the rhetoric up to 11 when they do search-and-destroy on any possibilities (i.e. — the same level of hyperbole you’re seeing today with Trump you’re going to see again in 2024, if Nikki Haley runs for president and looks like she has a chance to win).
John (c7bcb1) — 11/13/2019 @ 12:03 pmAll.Of.This:
whembly (fd57f6) — 11/13/2019 @ 12:06 pmhttps://www.nationalreview.com/2019/11/trump-vs-the-policy-community/
jfk in profiles in courage had robert taft a conservative in his book ;but that was then this is now. get used to the enemy must be destroyed as cicero said about carthage. Remember the book none dare call it treason? well what goes around comes around. for years conservatives called liberals who they disagreed with communist traitors. so now you complain about liberals returning the favor by calling conservatives nazi traitors and white supremacist?
asset (22c7be) — 11/13/2019 @ 12:11 pmWhy would someone be cited approvingly who, after achieving national office, used that office primarily to help women instead of the nation she was elected to lead?
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/13/2019 @ 1:14 pm@19. By 2024 Nikki will be staler than year old bread. Very old news. Christie made the mistake of not going for the brass ring when it came by.
Obama didn’t.
She’s made her move; Haley needs to get hooked up w/Trump on the 2020 ticket or she’ll be lost in the backwash as fresher faces surface.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 11/13/2019 @ 1:15 pmWhat did Hillary do to “ease the path for other women” as 1st Lady or Sec of State?
I suppose the path to Bill’s bedroom doesn’t count.
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/13/2019 @ 1:16 pmJordan wasn’t any good. One part was reasonable – that this is all about a 55-day delay, and the ley thing they have is maybe some statement about September 1.
But his characterization of this as Trump withholding the aid because he didn’t knew who Zelensky was, and then releasing it after 6 people told im he was okay…
….Simply doesn’t fit the facts….
That’s what a lawyer who excluded hearsay evidence might cook up.
The defense is that Trump truly believed it was possible that the stuff he was hearing about Crowdstrike and Biden was true.
And he was not asking for a witch hunt, or even a fishing expedition and not any kind of a criminal investigation either.
And that Trump believed that what he was asking for – getting to the bottom of these accusations – was simply the right thing to do, (albeit of special interest to himself) and all he was asking for was for Ukraine to do the right thing.
And that there was no specific quid pro quo, not on July 25, and not in September. That actually made it worse because nobody knew what could get the aid released. Taylor’s worst fear is that Ukraine could announce investigations and still not get the aid.
Sammy Finkelman (7b1b59) — 11/13/2019 @ 1:16 pmChristie made the mistake of not going for the brass ring when it came by.
So did Hillary. W would have had a much tougher time in 2004 against Hillary instead of Lurch. BUt Hillary was waiting for Her Turn in 2008.
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/13/2019 @ 1:18 pmAs far as the Brits go, apparently, she [Thatcher] didn’t:
Our British friends have now had two — count ’em, two — female Prime Ministers while we have had zero female Presidents. If anything, I think we could say that Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi haven’t done anything for the cause of other women.
JVW (54fd0b) — 11/13/2019 @ 1:18 pmBy 2024 Nikki will be staler than year old bread. Very old news. Christie made the mistake of not going for the brass ring when it came by.
I agree. She should run against Trump in 2020.
Kevin M (19357e) — 11/13/2019 @ 1:19 pmButter knife: dull.
Mueller hearing: duller.
Schiff’s hearing: dullest.
Gawd awful Opinionfest. Terrible TeeVee. For a guy who dabbles in screenwriting and can quote The Big Lewbowski line by line; Adam… ‘dude,’… where was your Haldeman, Ehrlichman Dean and Butterfield?
“… what’s the point, man?!” – The Dude [Jeff Bridges] ‘The Big Lebowski’ 1998
DCSCA (797bc0) — 11/13/2019 @ 1:29 pm@27. Back in the day they had some strong and effective feminine royalty, too- Elizabeth I, Victoria. Their campaign system is certainly better; 90 days and done. The fractional party system [IMO] is more representative of the electorate, too, but the trade off makes forming a majority government in turbulent times for a parliamentary system harder.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 11/13/2019 @ 1:42 pmAre Indira Gandhi or Golda Meir in her book?
DCSCA (797bc0) — 11/13/2019 @ 1:47 pm@28. LOL not w/that book out and her comments of late. After the Senate trial- if there is one– Mikey might suddenly be told to “crave more time w/his family.”
DCSCA (797bc0) — 11/13/2019 @ 1:51 pm@27 The Brits have had two female PM’s because they are selected by their Parties. Also, the PM is not the head of state and the OFFICIAL Commander in Chief. Its tough for some Americans – especially older ones – to see a Woman as Commander-in-Chief, the leader of the free world. Also, they have to go through a demanding, grueling nomination process.
Unless they’re Hillary – in which case, its really just a coronation.
rcocean (1a839e) — 11/13/2019 @ 6:23 pmPeople are already getting bored with this shampeachment. I see no passion about it, everyone seems to regard it as Partisan DC clown show. The press is covering it like it was Watergate, but I’d love to see the ratings.
rcocean (1a839e) — 11/13/2019 @ 6:25 pm