Do you realize we know more about Barbara Walters’ fall and cut head than we do about Hillary Clinton’s reported fainting spell, fall and concussion?
Think about it.
Two very famous, very rich, very influential American women had an accident.
Both fell with resulting head injuries.
We’re told both are fine now, but there’s a major difference in media coverage of the incidents.
In the case of the show business person, we have lots of details. Barbara Walters tripped and fell on the stairs at the Washington home of Peter Westmacott, the British ambassador to the United States, during an inauguration party.
Walters hit her head, got a cut, was taken to the hospital for treatment and a full examination and was released after a few days.
In the case of the powerful American politician, we know almost nothing.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, we’re told, had a stomach flu, then was dehydrated (how did they know?) and fainted (where?) and hit her head (on what?).
We’re told she wasn’t hospitalized (why?), and doctors said she should work at home.
Then we’re told she had a blood clot in her head (how did they find out at home?), but it wasn’t serious. Apparently she was hospitalized, but she’s out now, wearing glasses that show modifications to correct double vision.
Like it or not, this appears to be another administration cover-up. What are they hiding about Clinton’s mysterious illness, then her fall and the outcome?
Anyone raising such questions is insulted for even asking but if we’re given details of an entertainment figure’s accident, why are we denied details about a woman who holds enormous power in our government and whose injury could impact international relations?
It’s especially suspicious since the “accident” allowed Clinton to delay even further her facing questioning about the botched handling of an attack on our Consulate in Benghazi that left four Americans brutally killed.
Consider Hillary Clinton. Wife of a presidential liar, former duplicitous first lady, former U.S. senator with no experience, failed presidential contender, and now, about to be former secretary of state who has her ambitious eyes cast on another presidential run that many believe she “deserves.”
And last week, when she finally appeared for congressional questioning about the horrific debacle in Benghazi – her money quote was, “What difference, at this point, does it make?”
The questions she faced generally were softballs, preceded by comments about how wonderful she has been in her job and how thankful those elected officials and the American people are for her hard work.
Count me out on that.
Do Americans really care she traveled more than a million miles? We paid for all of them.
Do Americans know what benefits this country gained from her gadding about, pretending to deal with serious issues of state that have supposedly made Americans and our allies safer in a dangerous world?
Since the Obama administration has been in office and Clinton in her prestigious job, the world has not become safer. In fact, it’s worse.
The Middle East is in flames, millions are under the thumb of violent Islam, Christians are being pursued and killed for their religion, and the brazenness of militant Islam and the followers of jihad have only increased.
We’ve been blindsided by what the administration touted as the Arab Spring, supposedly a “birth” or “rebirth” of freedom.
What we have is an Islamic dictator in Egypt, turmoil in Libya, Syria about to implode, increased threats from Iran, Mali on the edge of full-blown war, murder and kidnapping in Algeria and the list goes on.
During the questioning, Clinton ran the gamut of predictable and rehearsed reactions, including tears.
There was, of course, the expected “I know nothing” attitude.
She knows nothing about a lack of security at the Benghazi facility or earlier requests for reinforcement of what security there was, or of requests for assistance during the attack from the three men who were fighting to the bitter end and ultimately were killed by the Islamic enemy.
Why were drones airborne to observe the area but no military response from this country to assist the Americans at risk?
She doesn’t know.
She knows nothing about any “obscure film” that supposedly offended Muslims and caused that Middle East unrest, even though she herself referenced it to the media and to the families of the dead men. The White House did the same as did other official spokespeople.
In fact, that’s what the American people were told for weeks after the attack, but it was a lie.
Why did the administration and its lackeys lie to Congress and to us?
Clinton knows nothing.
Why is she lying?
She says she knows nothing about U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice’s theatrical appearances on a weekend of network news programs spouting a well-rehearsed mantra of what happened because of “that film” and the mob attack on our facility. Both lies.
Clinton was questioned about the deaths of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, former SEALs Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods and Air Force veteran Sean Smith at the hands of the militant Islamists.
She erupted in fury, stating that concerns about “why” it happened mean nothing.
By the way, the killing of an ambassador is tantamount to a declaration of war. Why doesn’t anyone care?
And why didn’t the media notice that she expressed concern about the “spreading jihadist threat”?
I thought her boss, Obama, said there’s no such threat, there’s no further danger from al-Qaida and there’s no such thing as terrorism.
Maybe Clinton was on one of her many trips somewhere when that meeting was held and she didn’t get the memo – just the way she never got the urgent cables from diplomats in Libya about the increasingly dangerous situation brewing and the need for more security.
Ah yes, but Obama says Osama bin Laden is dead, al-Qaida has been decimated and we’re at the end of the time of wars and heading into an era of peace.
How stupid does he think we are?
But then, he just got re-elected, so he knows.
Too bad, we don’t.