Hillary Health Double Standard?

Quite a few people have asked my opinion about the Hillary Clinton health debate which has been in the news with remarks from individuals such as GOP strategist Karl Rove and former governor of Alaska and 2008 GOP Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin. Others such as Senator Dianne Feinstein of California have criticized Rove for his statements.

Here is a sampling of Karl Rove articles:



Here is a piece covering Dianne Feinstein’s appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union.”


Here is a posting from Sarah Palin’s Facebook page along with the links she included to stories about her.


If Hillary Clinton seeks the 2016 presidential nomination, I feel her health is a legitimate issue. It’s a legitimate issue for any candidate seeking office. It’s a legitimate issue for anyone holding a position responsible to others.  In reference to the presidency, can there be a logical desire for a repeat of what occurred during the second term of Woodrow Wilson?  After becoming incapacitated from strokes, Wilson should not have continued his term as President with the First Lady and Edward House carrying out the duties of the office in place of the President.

In 2008, I feel that Sarah Palin’s health was a reasonable topic because she was a candidate for office. That’s said, the focus on her youngest child and whether or not that little boy was her child was ridiculous. It was irrelevant to the campaign, and appealed to people who sadly must have nothing better to do with their lives. The only reason I could see someone in the general public having a legitimate excuse would be if the young child’s health issues encouraged better awareness to enable improving treatments and research for a cure. My use of the term “cure” is meant only to apply to preventing these health issues and obstacles in the future. I am not using cure to infer disease or inferiority for people with conditions or limitations from any cause.

Likewise, I don’t feel the other Palin children should have been dogged by press or paparazzi during the campaign.  Despite the outcry by some, at least a couple of those children have turned that attention into financial bonanzas post-election as reality TV figures.   All I can say is that is their privilege, and I admit that I did attempt to watch one or two episodes but the language and attitudes expressed by the girls and their on screen companions are not within my personal taste of entertainment.

What bothers me about this current Hillary news story is that the focus is on either the past or the future and not the present. Sarah Palin was a candidate and opened both herself and her family to the media. After the lost election, it appears that the Palin family has made a personal choice to try and remain public figures. Myself, I could care less about their personal lives or scandals, but they seem to enjoy the attention.

My primary issue, however, is Karl Rove and Dianne Feinstein. The GOP matter of importance from one of its big name strategist is 2016?  A Senator is spending time talking about an upcoming Presidential election even before midterm elections have taken place?

The precedent…

Historically I like to argue that at one time Federal politics had seasons. Yes, there was an election season when the focus was on money and ballot time, but it was not nonstop, 24/7, from election to election. At one time, Members of Congress actually took the time to address issues of importance to the country. Can anyone argue that this or the most recent Congresses have done much of anything?

Even if you hate Obama and believe all the conspiracies, wouldn’t you say that the previous committees and investigations accomplished little if anything? If for example the House Select Committee on Benghazi unearths some damning evidence, doesn’t that mean that all the previous investigations failed?

Congress can vote to prevent their personal flights from being delayed. They can hold investigation after investigation. Members can read Green Eggs and Ham. Yet our overly simplistic tax code with the gazillion loopholes which no two CPAs interpret in the same manner is off the table. I’m not a fan of the IRS so why not take some of that agency’s interpretive power away by making processes and codes straight forward?

I believe that we have many immigration laws which are not enforced and even more that are ambiguous. Securing any border focuses on only a single facet. It does not solve any problems. Why not go through the laws with a fine toothed comb and get the system to work?

Our infrastructure is in need of repair, but how do we fund those repairs? Congress won’t touch, but it can be sure to include the exemptions for NASCAR tracks but apparently not have time to address the roads and bridges upon which We the People travel.

Of course it’s all Obama’s fault. Who gets the blame once his term is complete?  If things continue as is, I reckon the blame gets levied on the next opponent or opponents in not just the next but in the remainder of election cycles before a Member or Senator takes a lobbying or consulting position.

Think about it.  My take is that Hillary’s health should not even be a standard, double standard, or of any concern while she is a private citizen no different from you or me. Yet, the 2016 election is of more interest to both political parties and Members of Congress.