Sunday morning, Hillary Clinton got dizzy and had to leave a memorial service. Sunday afternoon, her campaign explained that she’s been working her way through a case of pneumonia and that she’s fine. By Sunday evening, the Beltway media was in a frenzy. And no one exemplified this “blood in the water but only if it’s Hillary’s” mentality than the Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza.
His article, “Hillary Clinton’s health just became a real issue in the presidential campaign,” is exactly the kind of Hillary Hunting nonsense we’ve come to expect this election season. And WHY is it a real issue now? Because Chris Cillizza’s feelings were hurt that reporters were not immediately informed of what was going on.
But the issue is that Clinton kept reporters totally in the dark for 90 minutes after her abrupt departure from the 9/11 memorial service for a health-related matter. No reporter was allowed to follow her. (Clinton has resisted a protective pool for coverage because Donald Trump refuses to participate in one.) This is, yet again, the Clinton campaign asking everyone to just trust it. She got overheated! But she’s fine now!
This is textbook Clinton Reporting Rule #3: The media assumes that Clinton is acting in bad faith until there’s hard evidence otherwise. So much so that if I was writing a parody of Clinton reporting, this is the kind of whiny attack on Clinton I might have come up with. This is why satire is a dying art in America; we’ve gone so far off the deep end, how can you make fun of what is already a caricature?
And then Cillizza went full concern troll:
Clinton may well be totally fine — and I certainly hope she is. But we are 58 days away from choosing the person who will lead the country for the next four years, and she is one of the two candidates with a real chance of winning. Taking the Clinton team’s word for it on her health — in light of the episode on Sunday morning — is no longer enough. Reasonable people can — and will — have real questions about her health.
And why is her word not enough? Two reasons: A. Because her name is Hillary Clinton. B. See A.
Curiously, the Beltway media can’t seem to muster the same enthusiasm for looking into Trump’s health. After his “doctor” delivered a “report” that would have embarrassed a first year med student, the same media that’s VERY concerned about the health of a 68-year-old woman just yawned over the lack of transparency for a 70-year-old’s health.
Right now, newsrooms all over the country are praising the news gods for this. The Clinton Foundation story blew up in their faces after their breathless reporting on “optics” earned them a well-deserved round of mocking. Matt Lauer publicly humiliating himself last week essentially ended the email witch hunt. But painting Hillary as weak and frail? Oh, that’s gonna have legs!
The fact that it just “happens” to feed into the sexist stereotypes that the “liberal” media have been pushing for months is quite the bonus. After all, when people asked about John McCain’s age and health, the media was aghast at the notion. Men strong! Women weak!
I don’t know about you, but I’m rapidly losing what little faith I had left in America’s media giants to behave in a responsible manner.
Featured image by Jeff Swensen/Getty Images