Despite the importance of the mid-term elections this November, many people are already looking past them to the 2016 Presidential election. Speculation about whether Hillary Clinton will run has Democrats in a tizzy. Indeed, they essentially are touting Hillary as the most qualified and deserving candidate of all time.

Last month when the Democrat National Committee met for its Spring meeting, MRC TV’s Dan Joseph was there to ask Hillary supporters what her biggest accomplishment was as Secretary of State. In true liberal fashion, the interviewees could not name anything specific that she has accomplished. They’re smug attitudes melted away to confusion and silence when Joseph dared to ask for specifics.

The truth is, those DNC Hillary supporters should not feel too bad that they cannot name an accomplishment of Hillary’s. They are in good company. Three days ago Hillary herself was asked what she was most proud of during her stint as Secretary of State, and, like  her DNC supporters, she could not name a single specific accomplishment of her own.

The next night Clinton demonstrated what may be an accomplishment of sorts — the ability to make up terms that have no meaning. She is the queen of nonsensical word-smithing. Recall that it was under her State Department leadership that use of the term “war on terror” was prohibited and “overseas contingency operation” was substituted. During her appearance at the annual Women in the World summit in New York this past Thursday, Clinton cited the need to get back to “evidence-based decision-making” situation she was asked to address our country’s future. Perhaps Clinton was reflecting on her botched handling of Benghazi, where the evidence showed that the lives of Ambassador Stevens and other Americans were gravely threatened prior to the attacks on our embassy. Her decision-making in that situation was appalling, despite her asking the Congressional investigators, “What difference does it make?” Later in that same Thursday night interview, Clinton said the United States must address economic hardships facing many young people in order to produce an “inclusive prosperity.” That must be a reference to her embracing of Marxist economic theories and advocating for taking from hard-working richer American to give to lazy handout-seeking leeches.

Surely someone can come to Hillary’s rescue and help her find something to cite as an accomplishment. I went online and found that last month liberal pundit Leslie Marshall wrote an article called “Hillary Clinton’s Accomplishments Speak for Themselves.” After reading the article, I actually had to look up Leslie Marshall, because, even though I know who she is, I thought maybe somehow she had changed her political affiliation and was reverse channeling Steven Colbert — as in spoofing a Republican pretending to be a Democrat. The article is that comical.

I don’t know if Marshall was told to write this piece and this is all she could come up with, or if she really thought she was doing Hillary a favor. Whatever prompted the writing, the piece is laughable and downright embarrassing. If this is all a seasoned, devout, liberal mouthpiece can come up with on behalf of Clinton, then pathetic is not a strong enough word for it. Here are a few of the “accomplishments” that Marshall cites as laudable for Clinton, along with my commentary on each.

• Although her major initiative, the Clinton health care plan failed, it certainly set the groundwork for the health care law we have today, the Affordable Care Act. COMMENT: Does Marshall think the ACA is a good thing in the minds of Americans? There was a reason the Clinton plan failed. Democrat politicians are running from the ACA as it continues to hit all time lows in popularity. I doubt Hillary will rely on Obamacare as a weapon in her arsenal for 2016.

• She also played a leading role in creation of the Adoption and Safe Families Act and the Foster Care Independence Act. COMMENT: Both of these laws had heavily bipartisan support when they were introduced as bills in a Republican-controlled Congress in 1999. The latter bill was passed unanimously by the Senate, showing that anything Hillary may have had to say was not determinative of the outcome whatsoever. If supporting bills that already  had overwhelming Republican support is held out as praise-worthy, then it smacks of desperation.

• She is also the first first lady to hold a post graduate degree, and she traveled to more countries than any other first lady had at that time. COMMENT: How the fact that Clinton was the first first lady to hold a post graduate degree has any significance is beyond me, since it was her husband who was elected, not her. Is Marshall saying all the previous presidents married stupid women? Moreover, traveling all over the world on the taxpayers dime as first lady means only that Michelle Obama has Hillary beat on that count. And Michelle has a juris doctorate, so she’s two up.
  

• As a U.S. senator, she was the first first lady to be elected to this office. COMMENT: Being first lady was the ONLY reason Clinton was elected to the Senate in New York. Laura Bush would have been elected in Texas if she had run, just as Michelle Obama will be elected if she runs. Again, this is riding coattails and is not a noteworthy accomplishment.

• After visiting soldiers in Iraq, Clinton noted that the insurgency had failed to disrupt the democratic elections held earlier, and that parts of the country were functioning well. COMMENTS: She noted this? I noted that the insurgency failed also. And I didn’t have to go to Iraq to make that observation. Hey, Leslie, does that make me qualified to be president also?

• She also she (sic) introduced the Family Entertainment Protection Act. COMMENT: Pssst…. Hey, Leslie. The Family Entertainment Act did not pass. It was an attempt to violate the First Amendment.  The bill failed. If introducing a bill that never passed is a qualification for president, then the other three Democrat Senators who were co-sponsors of the failed bill with Hillary should be given cabinet positions.

• And who can forget her run for the presidency, receiving more than 17 million votes during the nomination process? COMMENT: Ummmm, Leslie. You do realize that Hillary lost the Democratic primary nomination, don’t you? That’s when she was chosen by the winner, Obama, to be his little helper. That’s when she served in the position for which no one–including Hillary–can name an accomplishment.

• Clinton … prevailed over Vice President Biden to send an additional 21,000 troops to Afghanistan … COMMENT: Who hasn’t prevailed over Lunchbucket Joe?

• [Clinton] assisted the president with major decisions as to the U.S. position with regard to the revolution in Egypt and the decision to use military force in Libya. COMMENT: So letting the Muslim Brotherhood rise in power and doing nothing to stop the deliberate assassination of Ambassador Stevens qualifies Clinton to be Commander in Chief in Marshall’s book? She has a pretty warped sense of what it takes to maintain and defend the greatest nation in the world.

For the love of Pete our country, the only vote that Clinton should be facing is that of a jury determining how many years she should serve for her crimes at the State Department, including those leading to the loss of $6,000,000,000 of taxpayer money on her watch. Then, when Hillary is safely tucked away, Leslie Marshall, the Democrat National Committee, and all the other liberal worshippers can visit her behind bars and reminisce about all her many accomplishments.