She says she was shocked by how “rude” Bill Clinton’s DNC speech was. Who’s “she”? Ann Coulter? Sarah Palin? The answer may stun you — but her reasons may not.
It was supposed to be the highlight of Hillary’s coronation. Everyone on the left still loves former president Bill Clinton, right? To them he can do no wrong.
Breitbart.com reports that Rachel Maddow of all people, that stalwart “progressive” talking head at MSNBC, wasn’t happy about how Bill’s address started out:
Maddow began by giving the end of the speech an A+, but then said, “I think the beginning of the speech was a controversial way to start, honestly, talking about the girl, a girl, leading with this long story about him being attracted to an unnamed girl and thinking about whether he was starting something he couldn’t finish, building her whole political story, for the whole first half of the speech around her marriage to him. I think, unless there were worries that this is going to be too feminist a convention, that was not a feminist way to start. But the end of the speech was really good. I’ve got to say, the top of the speech I found shocking and rude.”
Leaving aside the questionable sincerity of Bill’s praise of Hillary and their marriage, what to make of Maddow’s critique?
Talking about falling in love and getting married might be considered corny or overly personal, but is it really “shocking and rude”?
And what is “un-feminist” about Bill Clinton talking about falling in love with a woman who clearly considers herself one?
Maybe Rachel Maddow is just a bitter, lonely, jealous person.