By Selwyn Duke

There are many things I dislike about snooty former Britisher Christopher Hitchens; in fact, I’ve been thinking about making him the centerpiece of a none-too-flattering article.  Having said that, there’s no denying that when he’s right on an issue, he can treat it with flair and wit that are almost unparalleled.  Such is the case with his exposé of Hillary Clinton; in it he captures her dishonesty and ineptitude in a way that characterizes perfectly why she should be kept far from the White House. 

Hitchens begins by discussing Clinton’s famous Sir Edmund Hillary lie:

Seeing the name Hillary in a headline last week—a headline
about a life that had involved real achievement—I felt a mouse stirring
in the attic of my memory. Eventually, I was able to recall how the two
Hillarys had once been mentionable in the same breath. On a first-lady
goodwill tour of Asia in April 1995—the kind of banal trip that she now
claims as part of her foreign-policy "experience"—Mrs. Clinton had been
in Nepal and been briefly introduced to the late Sir Edmund Hillary,
conqueror of Mount Everest. Ever ready to milk the moment, she
announced that her mother had actually named her for this famous and
intrepid explorer. The claim "worked" well enough to be repeated at
other stops and even showed up in Bill Clinton’s memoirs almost a
decade later, as one more instance of the gutsy tradition that
undergirds the junior senator from New York.

Sen. Clinton was
born in 1947, and Sir Edmund Hillary and his partner Tenzing Norgay did
not ascend Mount Everest until 1953, so the story was self-evidently
untrue and eventually yielded to fact-checking.
Indeed, a spokeswoman for Sen. Clinton named Jennifer Hanley phrased it
like this in a statement in October 2006, conceding that the tale was
untrue but nonetheless charming: "It was a sweet family story her
mother shared to inspire greatness in her daughter, to great results I
might add."

Read the rest here.