Hillary Speaks! #Hillbots swoon! I throw up in their mouths

Yes, Hillary spoke.

And told us more bullshit than in the previous nine months.

First, the idea that because of her sex, she couldn't get mad over the election results is rank sexism. It is, you tribalist #ImWithHer (and ignoring Cynthia McKinney 2008, Jill Stein 2012, Jill Stein 2016) #Hillbots.

It's sexist because it perpetuates a myth that women are somehow unable to get angry. Constitutionally, of course they are. (By that, I mean emotional constitutions, not the toilet paper of Philly 1787.)

It's sexist because it inflates claims about the so-called patriarchy, if that's what she's getting at. Nobody is repressing her right to get angry.

It's also classist, because it ignores that many workaday world women, and men, can't get angry on the job or they'll be fired.

And, it's a lie.

Anybody who believes Hillary's claim she couldn't be angry because she's a woman ignores the lampshade she reportedly threw at Bill in the White House. It ignores the many other reported instances of anger when she was First Lady. it ignores the anger that’s noted in the new book, “Shattered.”

What was it Billy Martin said about Reggie Jackson and George Steinbrenner? 

Oh, yes.

"One's a born liar, the other's convicted."

Just plug in Hillary Clinton first, and Bill Clinton halfway (on "is," and loss of law license, etc.) second.

Of course, this all goes to show that, despite their rejoinder to Karl Rove a decade-plus ago, most tribalist Democrats aren’t really part of the reality-based community either.

OK, besides that like, and Hillbots and Clintonistas being ready to believe it, let's unpack this more.

There's the language of victimhood:

“I was the victim of a very broad assumption that I was going to win.”

Well, that Jehovah's Witness type back of hand to forehead will probably click a box with a few, but it's also not credible.

"Shattered" indicates that, at least after overrated ex-FBI Director James Comey spoke about Anthony's Weiner having probed its way into your emails, you were worried. And, Five Thirty Eight and other polls noted at that time that you didn't have a lot of room for error. Maybe your own attempts at head-faking, as Robby Mook and others call it, over not going to Iowa contributed to that, and you hoist yourself by your own petard.

I mean, you're the person who still claims you somehow got "lucky" enough to make a $100,000 killing on cattle futures. Don't forget, that happened at the same time as the constellation of events eventually lumped together as "Whitewater." While Jeff Gerth et al may have gotten much wrong, where there's enough smoke, there's surely a low-grade ground fire.

As for blaming the DNC for not enough data?

Doesn't this really indict your own campaign, since Dear Leader in 2008, and 2012, ran his own data-mining and targeting operation separate from the DNC? And, isn't this the DNC that's being sued right now for allegedly rigging the primary campaign in your favor? Isn't this the DNC run by your best bud Donna Brazile after you nudged aside Debbie Wassermann Schultz?

And, in his own piece, Brains reminds of her joint fundraising with the DNC. Riffing on Brains, let's also remember that she was partaking of the DNC's data operations. You know, the ones with the security-glitchy servers run by NGP VAN, the one that the Sanders staffer got into and then Debbie Wasserman Schultz temporary cut the Sanders campaign off before the threat of a lawsuit.

Her joke about "covfefe" fell as flat as the rest of the left hand of the duopoly's jokes about it, or as flat as the rest of her campaign.

Actually, it IS about the Russians. It's Trump's code that "Bill is sleeping with a Russian bimbo, courtesy Frank Giustra."

People talk about how she's a different person once the political "wraps" are off. Well, if she really has run her final campaign, the wraps are off. And she didn't she much in the way of human warmth. Instead, this looked like a calculated press op to butter the public up for her book, which will probably sink like a lead-petrified turd.

And, is there anything much more tiresome than an earnest liar?

And, yes, despite Bill seemingly being the smooth, suave liar, I think that proves that he's less the born one than she is in some ways.

The Slickster no more believed his own lies than he did in the man in the moon. Whereas she seems to believe hers. But, she's got that junior high school earnestness that makes the self-believed lying still not work, but in a different way from Bill.

A word to both #Obamiacs and #Hillaryites via Ted Rall

It's the start of the new year, and I'm being snarkier than ever from my skeptical left-liberal perspective.

That said, it's a lot easier with the help of Ted Rall, a master of snark.

Ted Rall's own caption: Hillary Clinton has titles, but few achievements, to her name.
Her campaign is built on hype. People are more into what she would symbolize if she won —
a first woman president — than what she would do. Sound familiar?

That said, a couple of points to note.

First, in 2008, when people asked if I didn't want to help make history,  or whatever, I told them I was voting for both the black and the woman, in the same person, before the Democratic primaries even ended. (I have no idea if Cynthia McKinney had or has something in the closet on her sexual preferences, and it's none of my damned business if she does.)

And, per a friend of mine, I have a new word: "Demdroids."

I define it as a lower digestive system ailment one gets on a no-fiber, all neoliberalism diet.

That said, if you don't recognize that you're being fed pablum with no sustenance in the first place, you don't realize that having a low-grade burning pain in the ass is not the way things are supposed to be. 

Or, you may believe that a diet with 2 percent fiber, and the resultant Demdroids, is enough less bad than the zero-fiber GOP alternative. In that case, don't blame GOP governors for people lacking insurance, don't trot out conspiracy theories about Obamacare's website getting disrupted by wingnuts with DDOS attacks or anything else.

Look at said cartoon above, again, especially the top right panel.

I had thought about having "Be less snarky" as one of my New Year's resolutions, but I realized I'd break that in a New York minute.

Rather, mentally, I'm thinking, "Be more acccurately snarky," or "Be snarky with more precision," is what I'm looking at. New Year's resolutions, or better, goals, are supposed to be SMART: Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic, and Time-bound and, this fits all of them.

That said, looking ahead to 2016.

While Elizabeth Warren might actually do more good in the Senate, I suspect a lot more people will run the possibility of "demdroids" in 2016 unless someone like her enters the Democratic race. Hell, maybe Tammy Baldwin should run, as long as its not on a sexual identity special interest platform.

And, let's see one, just one, Kossack post this at the great orange Satan.

That reminds me of something else. Some of you may recall the whole Daily Kos kerfuffle,where Kossacks accused Rall of racism, and Rall eventually said he would draw Obama differently? What if he just doesn't draw him at all for three more years, while continuing to take potshots? Take that, Kossacks! 

Sadly, instead, he went back to "just" drawing Obama like before. But, there's hope!

Anyway, in one post, Rall bankshots both Obama and Clinton, while perhaps setting the tone until Jan. 20, 2017. And, for Kossacks who are also Hillaryistas, now you know — mess with Ted Rall at your own peril, or with any cybercartoonist who buys coloration by the pixel-barrel.