I have never liked the label elite liberal snobs attach to the type of people I grew up among. Effete East Coast nabobs like to refer to my kind of folks as “the common people.” But there is nothing common about everyday working Americans. The people Hillary and her ilk refer to as “common people” are the Americans who exhibit uncommon valor as they do the fighting and dying in our nation’s wars. They are also the people who keep our nation running on a daily basis. There is nothing common about the good folks liberal snobs condescendingly refer to as the “common people.”
Now Hillary Clinton—one of the most elite of East Coast snobs—is on the campaign trail claiming she is the candidate of the “common people.” Is there any claim being made by any candidate of any party in this presidential campaign more ludicrous than this? Sorry Hillary, but its takes more than eating one burrito in Iowa to understand the values and needs of what you and other elite liberal snobs refer to as the “common people.” In fact, Queen Elizabeth is more capable of empathizing with so-called common people than Hillary Clinton.
Rather than simply accept Mrs. Clinton’s absurd claim that she is the darling of everyday working Americans, the mainstream media—aka Hillary’s fan club—might consider asking the candidate a few obvious questions; that is if they can convince her to submit to an interview rather than meekly cooperating in her choreographed campaign stops. For example, a responsible journalist might ask Hillary how she can empathize with or relate to “common people” in the military and their families when she spent her formative years as a strident anti-war protestor and then married the world’s most famous draft dodger. After all, it was the so-called common people of America who fought in the war she and her husband protested against. Further, it is the common people of America who have done most of the dying to keep our nation free and are still fighting to keep it secure from international terrorist organizations that are covertly supported by some of the same governments that contributed millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation. In fact, the security personnel who were brutally murdered on Hillary’s watch in Benghazi qualify as members of what she refers to as the “common people.”
Speaking of Benghazi, a responsible journalist might ask Mrs. Clinton to explain how she can claim to be the candidate of the common people when her incompetence and neglect led to the death of those brave common men in Benghazi and her only response was the angry question: “At this point what does it matter?” I suspect the unnecessary deaths of these patriotic Americans mattered a great deal to their parents, all of whom fit into that group Hillary Clinton and her ilk refer to as the “common people.” Any person who despises the U.S. military as Hillary does, who marries a draft-dodging coward, and who does not acknowledge that every death of every American on a foreign battle field matters can hardly claim to be the candidate of the common people.
Perhaps there are some other ways Hillary might be enough like everyday working Americans to qualify as the candidate of the common people. How about education? Many of the people Hillary refers to as the “common people” got their education in the school of hard knocks. For example, my father—an electrician—and my mother—a waitress—never finished high school, and most of the people in our neighborhood were in the same category. But these “common people” understood the value of education and wanted their children to go to college if possible. Some of us did, but for the most part the local community college was our only option.
Hillary, on the other hand, attended two of the most elite colleges in the U.S.—Wellesley for undergraduate studies and Yale for law school. Further, she sent her daughter Chelsea to one of the most elite private schools in the Washington, D.C. area—Sidwell Friends School—and to the most elite West Coast University—Stanford. Now she makes a grand production of hosting campaign events at local community colleges. The problem with this scenario is that until she decided to run for president, Hillary would not have been caught dead on a community college campus, nor would she have allowed her daughter to attend a community college. How, then, can she possibly relate to what everyday working Americans go through to get an education themselves and to ensure that their children do?
Does Hillary come from an impoverished background that allows her to relate to the everyday financial struggles of working Americans? Hardly. Her father was a successful businessman who housed his family in the comfortable, upscale Park Ridge community outside of Chicago. She never knew what it is like to struggle from payday to payday or to have to take on an extra job to keep up with the mortgage. Hillary never had to clip coupons, shop at a second-hand store, or eat burritos for that matter. But these are the types of difficulties working Americans—aka “common people”—face on a daily basis.
Think about it. While everyday Americans have stood in unemployment lines for the greater part of the past seven years, Hillary Clinton has been receiving as much as $700,000 for giving a speech and enjoying the prospect of knowing that foreign governments were donating millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation. In fact, former Democratic presidential candidate Gary Hart was quoted as saying it should “frighten every American” that the Clintons intend to raise more than a billion dollars for Hillary’s presidential campaign. For an individual with her net worth to claim to represent everyday working Americans who don’t even know if they will be able to pay their rent from month to month is a little bit too much to take.
Frankly, for an individual whose main job has been in politics since 1979 to claim she can understand, relate to, or even empathize with everyday working Americans is ludicrous. She lives in one of the most upscale communities in the Northeast, has more money than some third-world nations, is guarded around the clock by Secret Service Agents and has not—by her own admission—even driven a car since 1996. But perhaps the best way to determine how Hillary Clinton really feels about those she refers to as the “common people” is to examine how she treats them. The world got an inside look at how Hillary Clinton treats the everyday working people she comes in contact with in Ronald Kessler’s book titled, The First Family Detail.
According to Kessler, Hillary Clinton was the worst First Lady the Secret Service agents he interviewed for his book had ever worked for. They described her as being rude, imperious, inconsiderate, and condescending toward Secret Service personnel and the military. She refused to greet the men and women on her Secret Service detail and had them instructed to not greet or otherwise talk to her. Secret Service agents interviewed for Kessler’s book reported being treated like lowly peons by the first lady. If anything, she treated military aides even worse—demanding they wear civilian suits rather than uniforms when in the White House. The wife of an infamous draft dodger—herself an ardent anti-military protestor—did not want to have to even look at military uniforms, yet she now wants to be America’s Commander-in-Chief.
Even more revealing of Hillary’s true feeling toward everyday working people were her demands that White House staffers such as those who do routine maintenance and cleaning be unseen when performing their jobs. If she happened to walk by when maintenance or cleaning staff were working, they were instructed to jump behind drapes or step into a closet until the first lady passed so she would not have to be bothered by seeing them. According to her Secret Service agents, Mrs. Clinton treated them and the other people who worked in the White House like something she might scrape off the bottom of her shoes. And this is the individual who now claims she is the candidate of the “common people.”