Not that Her Nib doesn't believe what she's saying, but it's pretty clear that she's going out of her way to be over-the-top Christophobic and persecutory in her endorsement of judicial tyranny and First Amendment-evisceration for no other practical purpose than her continued frantic pandering to the far Left in order to staunch her hemorrhagic bleeding of Democrat support to Weekend Bernie Sanders.
It's about the only thing about which she is genuinely transparent:
Hillary Rodham Clinton says that jail was the "right thing" for a Kentucky clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
Speaking in Iowa Wednesday, the Democrat presidential hopeful says Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis was "treated as she should have been treated."
Davis spent five days in jail for defying a[n illegal] court order and refusing to license [homosexual and all other] marriages. Several Republican presidential candidates have vocally defended Davis.
[Mrs.] Clinton says people are entitled to their private beliefs, but that "when you take an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States, that is your job."
Obviously she doesn't believe people are entitled to their private beliefs if she doesn't also believe they are entitled to act upon them. And in point of fact, Kim Davis WAS upholding the Constitution of the United States in defending her First Amendment religious liberties, denying all marriage licenses in accordance with the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and in the sense of the federal government having no constitutionally enumerated power over the institution of marriage in any way, shape, or form, regardless of what Justice Kennedy says, rendering it a State and local issue, the level of government at which the Rowan County Clerk just happens to reside.
But then what might be termed "the Huckabee crowd" wasn't the Empress's audience in Iowa. And by the continuing downward trend of her polling numbers and upward course of her negatives, this frantic pandering doesn't appear to be accomplishing what she wants and needs:
I think these two areas mutually reinforce each other. After all, if two-thirds of the electorate thinks you're a filthy liar, it really doesn't matter how much you claim to care about or promise to fight for the needs and problems of "ordinary people," you're highly unlikely to persuade them. Heck, you might not even be able to convince leftwingnuts that you really want to crucify Kim Davis ISIS-style.
Take a gander at the comparable numbers for the Hamlet-esque Joe Biden. If there actually are any Democrat "establishment" voters out there who are concerned about electability (basically the same bunch that opted for John Kerry over Howard Dean back in '04) vis a vie Bernie Sanders, the current reigning veep provides them all the "safety" Sanders lacks and all the positives (especially likability) and none of the scandal baggage the Ugly Dutchess is dragging around. Plus, don't discount the appeal of Biden representing a third Obama term; I still believe that if The One could (or did anyway) run for a third term, he'd win in a walk. And don't forget that Slow Joe has a great deal of public sympathy and good will going for him after the death of his son, Beau.
Yes, Biden and Sanders and Hillary are all old, stale white people, so that's the context in which I state the following. But of the three, the veep is looking like the closest thing to a masterstroke the Dems could come up with next year.
And Hillary Clinton knows it. Which is why she's going to continue to get more and more radically left, and more and more vicious.
Kim Davis got, comparatively, the kid gloves treatment compared to what's coming.
UPDATE: Mrs. Clinton drops nineteen points....in California?