In Hillary Clinton’s interview with George Stephanopoulos on Sunday, she spoke like a true bureaucrat — using a language quite different from English. It appears that her State Department tenure has resulted in a loss of ability to speak plainly and comprehensibly. Now she uses that style to evade answers to tough questions.
When George would ask her a question, she would always, always avoid a direct answer. Instead, she would rephrase the question in State Department gobbledygook and even then, obfuscate her answer.
She spoke like a live diplomatic communique.
On domestic policy, Hillary is quite capable of clear, declarative English statements. But when the questions shift to her supposed area of expertise, foreign affairs, she is so hidebound by her State Department training — and so insecure without the cover of Statespeak — that she cannot give a single straight answer.
When George asked if she would “carpet bomb ISIS” as Ted Cruz suggests, Hillary ridiculed him and then agreed in Statespeak, saying we needed an “intensification” of our efforts.
Yes and No are no longer part of Hillary’s vocabulary.
With the country wanting plain talk and real answers, Hillary’s sudden inability to speak English will handicap her as the questions surrounding ISIS intensify.
Like all diplomatic types, she speaks as if she is tiptoeing through a mine field rather than striding boldly forth to take a position. Her entire affect is risk-averse and her dominant emotion seems to be fear of being misquoted.
She has become like the Greek figure of myth who could see everything and was, as a result, blind. Every time she answers a question, you can practically hear her policy advisors whispering urgently in her ear to avoid this or that misstep, however technical it might be.
Would she “declare war” on ISIS? Well, she would support a new use of force resolution in Congress. Why didn’t she say “yes?” Because in the back of her mind she knows that legally war can only be declared on a nation-state and that we don’t recognize ISIS as a state, just as a terrorist group akin to al-Qaeda.
But a politician running for office would use the words “declare war.” But a bureaucrat wouldn’t.
Successful candidates run where cautious State Department diplomats fear to tread.