Don’t worry world: should Hillary Rodham Clinton win the 2016 presidential election, there will be peace in our time — at least between giant ducks and tiny horses.
That’s the takeaway from Clinton’s latest interview with faux newsman Stephen Colbert. Attempting to gauge Clinton’s ability to follow through on the titular promise of her new memoir — to make hard choices — he asked the prospective 2016 contender an age-old question: Would you rather fight 100 duck-sized horses, or one horse-sized duck?
One could say the interaction was poorly scripted, but poorly delivered from a teleprompter is probably more accurate. But did it successfully address the perception that Clinton is out of touch? The former first lady set of a firestorm of derision on book tour by saying in an interview that she and Bill left the White House “dead broke.” Clinton seems to hope that the awkward name-dropping gag Colbert has her run through can poke fun at her celebrity, making her seem more accessible, while simultaneously showing her qualifications as a world stateswoman. But it hardly inspires confidence when she uses ducks and horses, and their shared origin on Old MacDonald’s farm, as well as her porcine alliance—which has to tick off both Israel and potential Muslim allies—as an example of diplomatic, or even agrarian for that matter, leadership.
Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://thespectator.com/world.