Hillary Clinton visited Yale this week and immediately played the children card and it wasn’t really necessary. The Branford Eagle reported:
It seemed that everyone at the Yale Law School reunion Saturday was talking about Hillary Rodham Clinton running for president in 2016. Except Clinton herself.
She talked about children. Impoverished children in particular.
Certainly she misspoke because since President Obama has been elected all this has been taken care of, certainly she can’t really mean that children are hungry and walking the streets in bare feet in Obama’s America, can she?
Hillary attended Yale to receive what the university calls “Award of Merit”. It’s an odd thing to award Merit to someone whom has spent her entire political career on the basis of “ Children and the political and legal importance of taking care of them” as quoted by Dean Robert Post because when Hillary came up to speak she said:
If you want to understand how economic dislocation of the past dozen years has affected American life, look at our children...More than 16 million kids live in poverty today, the highest percentage since the early 1990s. Nearly half of all food-stamp recipients are children, nearly 22 million of them. And yet the over all poverty rate in New Haven is just over 25 percent ... For children it is nearly 38 percent. And in Hartford it is more like 50 percent.
Think about that for a moment. Connecticut is one of our wealthiest states and more than half the children in its capital live in poverty
To what does the university owe such a prestigious award for a person who has worked to the benefit of poor children since conditions are so rotten for them, in fact the worst it has ever been, right at the time of her retirement? And could she be right about the poverty rate in Connecticut big cities since all of them have been run by Democrats since like forever and ever?
“No, no, I don’t deserve it, no. I failed, Obama failed, in fact the entire Democratic party of Connecticut has failed because children are living miserable lives, thanks but no thanks”. Now that would have been my honest response if I were Hillary.
It doesn’t seem to matter to the audience at Yale nor to their Dean that results do not equal rhetoric. What is important--and don’t think Hillary doesn’t know this, especially her--that her constituency are fools who melt at the very mention of indigent children. She knows all to well how to pacify their moral vanities for base political gain and it works smashingly well, note her craftiness:
If you even want to understand the human costs of political brinkmanship and gridlock in Washington, look at the children... Because of the shutdown, nearly 9 million women and children will soon be unable to buy healthy food and feeding formula.
But men will continue to feed their fat faces. One last thing, can the shutdown finally end all this business about child obesity?