We find it incredulous that Hillary Clinton can get away with overtly embellishing her ‘experience’ during her years as First Lady.  I mean, c’mon, if Joe Sixpack went in for a job interview and told these types of ‘fishing stories’ and then was called out on it, he’d be blacklisted on Monster.com faster than Eliot Spitzer can put on his business socks.

We read a great article in the NY Times today by David Brooks in which he said:

For nearly 20 years, [Hillary] has been encased in the apparatus of political celebrity. Look at her schedule as first lady and ever since. Think of the thousands of staged events, the tens of thousands of times she has pretended to be delighted to see someone she doesn’t know, the hundreds of thousands times she has recited empty clichés and exhortatory banalities, the millions of photos she has posed for in which she is supposed to appear empathetic or tough, the billions of politically opportune half-truths that have bounced around her head.

The best contrast of all, however, is how completely different Hillary’s response was relating to her Boznian embellishment than Barack’s was in response to the the Rev. Wright debacle.  Barack follows up with what has been called on both sides of the aisle as a groundbreaking and historic speech on race relations, eclipsing the controversial episode entirely.  Hillary on the other hand, parses and triangulates and inherently increases the focus on the issue at hand making it seem even MORE of an insult to our intelligence, but then makes a weak effort to claim that she’d have left Rev. Wright’s church had she been in earshot of his remarks. 

So, we’re just finding ourselves unwillfully suspending our belief that anything Hillary says is true.