New Hillary Clinton bio for kids: Putting the 'hag' in hagiography

A gushing new biography of Hillary Clinton for children seeks to rewrite history so as to create a litany of "accomplishments" for the former first lady and indoctrinate the young about them from the start. Here is a screen photo of Hillary Rodham Clinton: Some Girls Are Born to Lead, by Michelle Markel.

It's nothing but a leftist bid to indoctrinate the young on Hillary Clinton as some sort of role model to salvage her legacy in the wake of her 2016 presidential election loss.

The publisher Harper Collins, calls it "an inspiring portrait" as Clinton "paved the way for women everywhere"

The contents begin like this:

In the 1950s, it was a man’s world. Girls weren’t supposed to act smart, tough, or ambitious. Even though, deep inside, they may have felt that way. And then along came Hillary. Brave, brilliant, and unstoppable, she was out to change the world.

They said a woman couldn’t be a mother and a lawyer. Hillary was both. They said a woman shouldn’t be too strong or too smart. Hillary was fearlessly herself.

It didn’t matter what people said—she was born to lead.

The Daily Wire, which first spotted the book, noted that:

The author might want to note successful women were around before Hillary — a few examples:

Nobel Prize in Physics, 1903: Marie Curie

Nobel prize in Literature, 1909: Selma Ottilia Lovisa Lagerlöf

Nobel Prize in Chemistry, 1911: Marie Curie

American women’s suffrage: 1920

Nobel Peace Prize, 1931: Jane Addams

Golda Meir, prime minister of Israel: 1969

Margaret Thatcher, Prime Minister of England: 1979

and added a choice tweet to sum up:

http://<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Apparently, women contributed NOTHING to science, art, or society before Hillary Clinton. <a href="https://t.co/Mq3V0Yjwhf">pic.twitter.com/Mq3V0Yjwhf</a></p>&mdash; Beth Lynch (@BethLynch2020) <a href="https://twitter.com/BethLynch2020/status/922518730822881280?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 23, 2017</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 


 

...from a feminist socialist no less, probably a Sanders supporter.

The disgust was pretty significant, to consider the collection of other tweets the Daily Wire curated in its piece.

It's actually pretty redolent of Hillary's phony persona in general. Voters after all, tended to shun Hillary Clinton at the 2016 polls because they didn't trust her. Even the Sorosians, taking the plunge to try to figure out why people voted for Donald Trump, came to that conclusion, as I noted here.

Claiming Hillary has any accomplishments is absurd. She flunked the bar multiple times, was kicked off the Nixon impeachment team, married into political talent rather than develop her own, went on to become a widely disliked Arkansas first lady, then a scandal-mired U.S. first lady, riding on her husband's political talents. From cattle futures profits, to smearing her husband's sex harassment accusers, to misplacing her Arkansas billing records to keep them out of prosecutors' hands, to firing the White House travel office, to winning a Senate seat on her name recognition, to doing absolutely nothing in the Senate, to losing a winnable nomination for president in 2008 to a political neophyte, to serving as an especially incompetent Secretary of State, famous mainly for her pay-to-play access and rolling donations to her foundation and her mishandling of the Benghazi terror attack, this isn't exactly a distinguished record of accomplishment.

Rejected by voters who got wise to her, rewriting history and indoctrinating youth about it seems to be the only thing left. Yet it's as fake as her useless claims to have endured Bosnian gunfire and to have been named after Sir Edmund Hillary of New Zealand.

Even the illustrations in this book are problematic. To examine the cover picture, Clinton in her Yalie youth with her striped hippie pants is depicted as carrying a backpack, which wasn't widely done in the 1960s and riding a man's style ten-speed bike, which wasn't around at that time either.

The claim implied from the pictures that black men had it easy compared to Clinton is problematically ahistorical, too.

This hasn't stopped gushing from reviewers featured by Harper Collins, however. Get a load of the valentines:

Critical Praise

“Smart and snappy…as inspiring as it is delightful.” — Booklist (starred review)

“Concisely outlines Clinton’s journey from activist to First Lad of Arkansas and on to Washington, D.C….Pham’s (the Freckleface Strawberry series) watercolors are steeped in period detail.” — Publishers Weekly

“Both for fun and education…go-girl power and a good read.” — Kirkus Reviews

“[An] honest and open portrayal” — Bulletin of the Center for Children’s Books

It takes hagiography to a whole new level.

 

 

 

 

A gushing new biography of Hillary Clinton for children seeks to rewrite history so as to create a litany of "accomplishments" for the former first lady and indoctrinate the young about them from the start. Here is a screen photo of Hillary Rodham Clinton: Some Girls Are Born to Lead, by Michelle Markel.

It's nothing but a leftist bid to indoctrinate the young on Hillary Clinton as some sort of role model to salvage her legacy in the wake of her 2016 presidential election loss.

The publisher Harper Collins, calls it "an inspiring portrait" as Clinton "paved the way for women everywhere"

The contents begin like this:

In the 1950s, it was a man’s world. Girls weren’t supposed to act smart, tough, or ambitious. Even though, deep inside, they may have felt that way. And then along came Hillary. Brave, brilliant, and unstoppable, she was out to change the world.

They said a woman couldn’t be a mother and a lawyer. Hillary was both. They said a woman shouldn’t be too strong or too smart. Hillary was fearlessly herself.

It didn’t matter what people said—she was born to lead.

The Daily Wire, which first spotted the book, noted that:

The author might want to note successful women were around before Hillary — a few examples:

Nobel Prize in Physics, 1903: Marie Curie

Nobel prize in Literature, 1909: Selma Ottilia Lovisa Lagerlöf

Nobel Prize in Chemistry, 1911: Marie Curie

American women’s suffrage: 1920

Nobel Peace Prize, 1931: Jane Addams

Golda Meir, prime minister of Israel: 1969

Margaret Thatcher, Prime Minister of England: 1979

and added a choice tweet to sum up:

http://<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Apparently, women contributed NOTHING to science, art, or society before Hillary Clinton. <a href="https://t.co/Mq3V0Yjwhf">pic.twitter.com/Mq3V0Yjwhf</a></p>&mdash; Beth Lynch (@BethLynch2020) <a href="https://twitter.com/BethLynch2020/status/922518730822881280?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 23, 2017</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 


 

...from a feminist socialist no less, probably a Sanders supporter.

The disgust was pretty significant, to consider the collection of other tweets the Daily Wire curated in its piece.

It's actually pretty redolent of Hillary's phony persona in general. Voters after all, tended to shun Hillary Clinton at the 2016 polls because they didn't trust her. Even the Sorosians, taking the plunge to try to figure out why people voted for Donald Trump, came to that conclusion, as I noted here.

Claiming Hillary has any accomplishments is absurd. She flunked the bar multiple times, was kicked off the Nixon impeachment team, married into political talent rather than develop her own, went on to become a widely disliked Arkansas first lady, then a scandal-mired U.S. first lady, riding on her husband's political talents. From cattle futures profits, to smearing her husband's sex harassment accusers, to misplacing her Arkansas billing records to keep them out of prosecutors' hands, to firing the White House travel office, to winning a Senate seat on her name recognition, to doing absolutely nothing in the Senate, to losing a winnable nomination for president in 2008 to a political neophyte, to serving as an especially incompetent Secretary of State, famous mainly for her pay-to-play access and rolling donations to her foundation and her mishandling of the Benghazi terror attack, this isn't exactly a distinguished record of accomplishment.

Rejected by voters who got wise to her, rewriting history and indoctrinating youth about it seems to be the only thing left. Yet it's as fake as her useless claims to have endured Bosnian gunfire and to have been named after Sir Edmund Hillary of New Zealand.

Even the illustrations in this book are problematic. To examine the cover picture, Clinton in her Yalie youth with her striped hippie pants is depicted as carrying a backpack, which wasn't widely done in the 1960s and riding a man's style ten-speed bike, which wasn't around at that time either.

The claim implied from the pictures that black men had it easy compared to Clinton is problematically ahistorical, too.

This hasn't stopped gushing from reviewers featured by Harper Collins, however. Get a load of the valentines:

Critical Praise

“Smart and snappy…as inspiring as it is delightful.” — Booklist (starred review)

“Concisely outlines Clinton’s journey from activist to First Lad of Arkansas and on to Washington, D.C….Pham’s (the Freckleface Strawberry series) watercolors are steeped in period detail.” — Publishers Weekly

“Both for fun and education…go-girl power and a good read.” — Kirkus Reviews

“[An] honest and open portrayal” — Bulletin of the Center for Children’s Books

It takes hagiography to a whole new level.

 

 

 

 

RECENT VIDEOS