Hillary Clinton, Burns Strider, and the Fault Lines of #MeToo; The Atlantic, January 26, 2018

Megan Garber, The Atlantic; Hillary Clinton, Burns Strider, and the Fault Lines of #MeToo

"The Times story paints a picture of a Hillary Clinton who is, given her history, both a recipient of harassment and a passive enabler of it. A manager, in other words, like so many of the others who have been revealed in the journalism of the post-Weinstein months: one who learns of an accusation of harassment and addresses it by disrupting the life of the alleged victim, rather than the life of the alleged perpetrator. The boss who found enough evidence of Burns Strider’s wrongdoing to dock his pay and put him in counseling … but who kept him on staff—with all its many other young women—nonetheless. Here is Clinton serving, yet again, as a rich metaphor—this time, though, for complacency and complicity. For powerful people who are concerned, but not concerned enough.

And also: for managers who meet the humanity at the heart of harassment allegations with the clinical language of corporate callousness. It’s unsurprising, perhaps, but notable nonetheless that Clinton responded to the Times’ reporting with a statement that was many steps removed from Clinton, the person: It was written by Utrecht, Kleinfeld, Fiori, Partners, the law firm that had represented the campaign in 2008 (and that, the Times puts it, has “been involved on sexual harassment issues”). The statement was delivered, from there, through an unnamed Clinton spokesman. “To ensure a safe working environment,” it read, “the campaign had a process to address complaints of misconduct or harassment. When matters arose, they were reviewed in accordance with these policies, and appropriate action was taken. This complaint was no exception.”

So while it was Clinton, the manager, the Times report goes, who made the decision to keep Strider on her team, Clinton, the manager, is notably absent from today’s explanation of things. She has outsourced her own decision-making, it seems, to discussions of process and policies—the same anonymous structures that so many other managers have relied on for legal, and moral, insulation. What were the “processes” that kept Strider in his job and his accuser out of hers? You are not supposed to ask. “Processes” are meant to be the answers to their own questions. So are “policies.” Corporations-as-people, if you’d like, but the framework falls apart when organizations are able to deny that humanity as soon as it becomes a liability."

Hillary Clinton Says Libraries Are Essential In Fight To Defend ‘Truth And Reason’; HuffPost, June 27, 2017

Hayley Miller, HuffPost; Hillary Clinton Says Libraries Are Essential In Fight To Defend ‘Truth And Reason’

"“The work you do is at the heart of an open, inclusive and diverse society,” Clinton told a crowd at the American Library Association’s conference in Chicago. “I believe libraries and democracy go hand-in-hand.”...

“You have to be on the front lines of one of the most important fights we have ever faced in history in this country: the right to defend truth and reason, evidence and facts,” she said...

The former first lady added that libraries are critical to the well-being of rural communities and provide invaluable resources to help immigrants and refugees learn English and “know their rights.”"

Hillary Clinton Attends Donald Trump’s Inauguration ‘To Honor Our Democracy’; Huffington Post, 1/20/17

Marina Fang, Huffington Post; 

Hillary Clinton Attends Donald Trump’s Inauguration ‘To Honor Our Democracy’

"Former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton attended the inauguration of President-elect Donald Trump on Friday after spending several weeks away from the public eye. 

The former first lady, who won the popular vote over Trump, tweeted that she was attending the event “to honor our democracy & its enduring values.”"

Hillary Clinton’s Final Exam; New York Times, 9/24/16

David Axelrod, New York Times; Hillary Clinton’s Final Exam:

"Without pretense about the challenges Americans face, she will offer a more optimistic vision of the future than Mr. Trump’s relentlessly dystopian portrait of a country on the brink — the audacity of no hope. She will embrace diversity as a strength, in contrast to his past slights on immigrants, Muslims, women and people with disabilities.

Finally, she will stress the need to work together to solve the nation’s problems and mock Mr. Trump’s oft-stated declaration that he will single-handedly cure America’s ills — on Day 1. Both liberals and conservatives bridle at this autocratic vision.

In the end, presidential debates are less a trial of fact than a televised final exam for the most exacting job on the planet. They offer Americans a window into how each of these candidates would deal with excruciating pressure. They are measured in revealing moments. Will the candidates react with grace, humor and unflappability, or with anger and uncertainty?"

She’s With Us: The fundamental choice in this election is between Trump’s “I” and Hillary’s “We.”; Slate, 7/29/16

William Saletan, Slate; She’s With Us: The fundamental choice in this election is between Trump’s “I” and Hillary’s “We.” :

"Trump sees the “we” approach as timid and liberal. But Clinton, like Obama, hears echoes of the anti-government message of Ronald Reagan. “Our founders fought a revolution and wrote a Constitution so America would never be a nation where one person had all the power,” Clinton warned. Obama, in his speech to the convention, issued a similar rebuke: “Our power doesn’t come from some self-declared savior promising that he alone can restore order as long as we do things his way. We don’t look to be ruled.”

Framed this way, the election isn’t a choice between Trump and Clinton. It’s a choice between authoritarianism and self-government, between a man and a team. Clinton can’t match Trump’s ego, and she doesn’t have to. She just has to offer a better alternative. The alternative is a different conception of the presidency, one that’s less imperial but gets more done. It’s less about the president and more about us. The choice isn’t left versus right, or him versus her. It’s Trump versus America."

‘Stronger together’ vs. ‘I alone can fix it’, Boston Globe, 7/29/16

Michael A. Cohen, Boston Globe; ‘Stronger together’ vs. ‘I alone can fix it’ :

"Thursday night at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia, Hillary Clinton did not deliver the best address of this convention or even the runner-up. Instead she gave a solid, substance-laden, and highly effective acceptance speech to her fellow Democrats. It never reached the rhetorical flights of fancy achieved by Obama the night before — but it didn’t need to. Clinton delivered rhetorical shot after rhetorical shot to Donald Trump as she laid out a clear vision for her presidency. She offered the nation an unabashedly liberal agenda — one surely intended to appeal to Bernie Sanders supporters — but in its wonkish, populist tone was eerily reminiscent of political speeches once delivered by her husband. She fully embraced the diverse and multicultural society America has become. But above all, she did the one thing that she and her party absolutely needed to do this week in Philadelphia — make clear the stark political contrasts between Clinton and Trump for the general election to come.

“Stronger together’’ has become the theme of Clinton’s campaign. In a country with the motto epluribus unum, out of many one — it’s an idea that would have resonance in any presidential race."

Michelle Obama delivers a passionate defense of Hillary Clinton; Washington Post, 7/25/16

Krissah Thompson and Ed O'Keefe, Washington Post; Michelle Obama delivers a passionate defense of Hillary Clinton:

"Obama did not mention Donald Trump by name, but she had a pointed critique of the Republican nominee.

“When you have the nuclear codes at your fingertips and the military in your command, you can’t make snap decisions. You can’t have a thin skin or a tendency to lash out. You need to be steady and measured and well informed," Obama said...

“When they go low, we go high,” she said, repeating a mantra she heard as a child.

She delivered a passionate defense of Hillary Clinton — touting her “lifelong devotion to our nation’s children -- not just her own daughter – who she has raised to perfection, but every child who needs a champion.”...

"“When I think about the kind of president I want for my girls and for all children, that’s who I want,” Obama added. “I want someone with the proven strength to persevere. Someone who knows this job and takes it seriously. Someone who understands that the issues that a president tackles are not black or white and cannot be boiled down to 140 characters.”...

“I wake up every morning in a house that was built by slaves. And I’ve watched my daughters, two beautiful intelligent black young women, playing with their dogs on the White House lawn. And because of Hillary Clinton, my daughters and all of our sons and daughters, now take for granted that a woman can be president of the United States,” she said."

Hillary Clinton Broke One Glass Ceiling. When Were Others Broken?; New York Times, 7/25/16

Karen Yourish, Larry Buchanan, Adam Pearce, New York Times; Hillary Clinton Broke One Glass Ceiling. When Were Others Broken? :

"Hillary Clinton made history by becoming the first woman poised to accept a major political party’s nomination for president. Her achievement comes 180 years after the first non-white man was elected to a major political position. A look at milestones in politics for women and minorities..."

Jimmy Kimmel Shows How F**ked Up Criticism Of Hillary Clinton’s Voice Can Be; Huffington Post, 3/25/16

Paige Lavender, Huffington Post; Jimmy Kimmel Shows How F**ked Up Criticism Of Hillary Clinton’s Voice Can Be:

"To prepare the former Secretary of State to debate someone like Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump, Kimmel volunteered to mansplain her remarks. In the process, Kimmel proved just how ridiculous it is when people hit Clinton for how loudly or calmly she speaks — criticism the male presidential candidates don’t often receive...

The joke went on, with Kimmel saying Clinton wasn’t “doing it right.”

“I can’t put my finger on it,” he said. “But you’re not...”

“A man?” Clinton quipped."

Clinton's comments on the Reagans and Aids demand more than apology; Guardian, 3/11/16

Steven W. Thrasher, Guardian; Clinton's comments on the Reagans and Aids demand more than apology:

"Aids historians, LGBT activists and anyone who cares about little things like the truth were immediately enraged at Clinton’s false claims. Ronald and Nancy Reagan were no more leaders discussing Aids in the 1980s than Republicans are at championing abortion access today.

“It may be hard for your viewers to remember,” Clinton said, “how difficult it was for people to talk about HIV/Aids back in the 1980s.”

She didn’t lie there. Indeed, it was difficult to talk about Aids throughout the 1980s – largely because of the silence from the White House. In April 1987, activists unveiled a poster that said “Silence = Death” – a month before Reagan would finally devote a speech to the years-long epidemic. That slogan would become the motto of the group Aids Coalition To Unleash Power (ACT-UP), and according to their website, the slogan was asking “Why is Reagan silent about Aids? What is really going on at the Center for Disease Control, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Vatican?”...

But for those of us who care about Aids and LGBT people, it is much harder and important to criticize the frontrunner of the Democratic party, who takes the support of gay voters for granted. Why, in 2016, did the Democratic frontrunner engage so blithely in the erasure of the people who actually did start the “national conversation” about Aids? Was it because they were gay men of the in-your-face variety of activism – many of whom died of the virus?

When Clinton said the Reagans led the way on Aids when “nobody wanted to do anything about it”, she is erasing these people from history in an ugly and dismissive fashion. People initially got HIV in this country through IV drug use, blood transfusions and sex. But while the Reagans looked the other way – even when a friend asked for help – it was was queer activists who were loud as hell in New York and San Francisco who forced the nation to face the plague...

I have been frightened for some time that the crisis of AIDS is not over, especially for black America, and yet it has again largely been erased from our national political consciousness. Aids, which is projected to infect one in two black gay American men, is almost invisible from the presidential race. And now even the Democratic frontrunner has diminished Aids history herself."