A puff piece on Clinton’s new book reveals that she is even more tone-deaf than we could have imagined

By Dave Andrusko

Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton

Consider the following in the light of what NRL News Today has already written about Hillary Clinton’s get-even election memoir, What Happened.

From POLITICO, referring to an interview with NPR’s Terry Gross

Democrat Hillary Clinton refused to rule out challenging the legitimacy of last year’s presidential election in an interview released Monday afternoon, though she said such a move would be unprecedented and legally questionable.

Gracious to the very end.

Then there are several from an utterly amazing story in the Washington Post, written by James Hohmann. Scout’s Honor, I am not making up any of these quotations.

#1. To keep her failure in perspective, Clinton thought instead about how good she still has it compared to Fantine in Victor Hugo’s “Les Miserables.”

Well, yes. This fictional character is a working class girl who is impregnated by a rich student, abandoned, who turns to prostitution to survive, and sells her hair and teeth to support her daughter. I suppose Mrs. Clinton, who has more money than she knows what to do with, is slightly better off.

#2. “Hillary insists that she was not blind to the anger that existed in the Rust Belt before the election results came in. During the campaign, she writes that she and her husband Bill both read “The True Believer,” the 1951 classic by Eric Hofer about the psychology behind fanaticism and mass movements. She says she even told her senior staff that they should read it too.”

So, she insists she did not miss the anger that exists in the Rust Belt. How did she know what they were thinking, what they were like? She read a 55-year-old book “about the psychology behind fanaticism and mass movements.”

By this standard, being called a irredeemable deplorable seems almost a compliment. One more from James Hohmann who is almost as willfully blind to what he writes as Clinton…

#3. This is how Clinton always operates. First she has just told us how tuned in she was to us riff-raff, then she writes

“Since the election, I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about why I failed to connect with more working-class whites.”

So she was tuned in, but didn’t connect. Sigh.

What’s the explanation? It’s found (where else?) in Thomas Frank’s book, “What’s the matter with Kansas,” which is hugely influential with pro-abortion Democrats. Why? Because they are absolutely blameless. All electoral failures are pinned on cynical Republicans and the white people who are too stupid to see they are being conned. Here’s the quote from Mrs. Clinton’s book:

“After John Kerry lost to George W. Bush in 2004, the writer Thomas Frank popularized the theory that Republicans persuaded whites … to vote against their economic interests by appealing to them on cultural issues – in other words, ‘gays, guns and God.’

Clinton’s assessment? “There’s definitely merit in that explanation.”

So…. Clinton is still grousing about losing, even recycling the notion that if there was any way (and there ought to be!), she’d contest the results of the presidential election.

Her self-pity has reached delusional levels. Slightly better off than a 19th century working class girl reduced to prostitution to provide for her daughter? Clinton got an $8 million dollar advance for her dud of a book about being First Lady; $14 million for “Hard Choices,” her account of her time as Secretary of State; $20 million for “What Happened,” in addition to roughly $200,000 a pop for boilerplate speeches.

And, if anyone needed further proof of how totally tone-deaf she is, Clinton tells us she can “feel the pain” of the white working class because she understands the psychology of fanaticism and because she grasps how we dummies can be suckered in by what are (to Clinton) phony “cultural issues.”

You cannot–cannot–make this stuff up.