|
The Weedpatch Gazette The Weedpatch Gazette The Weedpatch Gazette The Weedpatch Gazette The Weedpatch Gazette The Weedpatch Gazette The Weedpatch Gazette The Weedpatch Gazette The Weedpatch Gazette The Weedpatch Gazette February 07 March 07 April 07 May 07 June 07 July 07 August 07 September 07 October 07 November 07 December 07 January 08 February 08 March 08 April 08 May 08 June 08 July 08 August 08 September 08
RSS 2.0![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
|
Fun with Bill and Hill
A very likable old fellow had a running joke among the patrons of one pub I used to frequent here in the Kern River Valley that he was planning on going to Tahiti as soon as he could get enough women to row the boat. Unlike Alec Baldwin who threatened to leave the country if Bush was elected, I am not going to make such a threat if Hillary is elected, though thoughts of Tahiti do come to mind. Ok, so such thoughts of going to Tahiti have nothing to do with Hillary even if she was willing to do the rowing. However, since politicians have made such shipwreck of America anyway and will continue to do so no matter who holds what office I want to look at the bright side. Regardless of how much I despise the Clintons, much as it may be considered gallows humor I think of Ms. Clinton becoming President as “Fun with Bill and Hill.” You know, the Bush administration hasn’t been much fun, and all bets may be off should Bush decide to go out in a blaze of glory by nuking Iran. But though macabre in some respects I view the Bill and Hill scenario with some degree of potential humor. Certainly the White House gossip would take a turn for the better, enriching both MSM and the tabloids, and interns would once more find their proper sexual role in the scheme of things. Given to whimsy as I often am, it is fun to imagine Bill’s wife divorcing him as soon as she was elected. That would be a real hoot. But practically speaking, no matter how delicious the idea, the two are such political animals I don’t give that much chance of happening. Now thoughts of the Borgias do come to mind, but which of the Clintons would gain by one poisoning the other? Despite the Constitutional limitations, which would prove very disagreeable for Bill, neither he nor his wife would find murder at all disagreeable in achieving their ends as their dark past suggests though they might draw the line at murdering each other; not from affection but because it would be politically undesirable. On the plus side, Hillary might bring back the White House furniture, linens, silverware she stole when she left the last time. All the computer keyboards that were missing the “w’s” have been replaced so that would not be a bother. However, attention would have to be paid to possible computer viruses that might have been encrypted by Bush cronies. Imagine Hillary trying to reach the ambassador in China and instead launching a nuke. When it comes to race, the Clintons are admirably suited to winning minority approval by substituting the old “Forty acres and a mule, free watermelons and chickens” with things like “free healthcare.” And of course they will now add “free piñatas” to sweeten the deal. Thing of it is, they will not view these political promises as being racist. People like Bill O’Reilly are not racist. They are guilty of being condescending and patronizing, something more insidious than overt racism. One of the major factors that enabled me to be a successful teacher in Watts is that I was never condescending nor patronizing. The grievous thing about people like the Clintons and O’Reilly is they seem oblivious to being so. It is a distinction of the wealthy and politicians that live such insulated lives they never have to deal with the circumstances that create the more ugly facts underlying racism. Because of this insulation from reality, they seem unaware of how hateful their condescension and patronization of those they unconsciously consider inferior really is. For my part, I much prefer the in your face racism of Al Sharpton. He does not condescend, he does not patronize; he is the preeminent pickpocket that warns in advance he is going to pick your pocket. You know exactly where you stand with people like Sharpton. He is a thoroughgoing racist, a lying, cheating scoundrel and flim flam man that makes no apologies for being such. It says something about the MSM that find him such a darling. Jesse Jackson would do well to drop his pretense of being anything other than Sharpton, though Jackson could never be anywhere near as funny. Despite it being Machiavellian in the extreme inviting the total destruction of America, given the total disaster of the Bush administration and my personal belief the Devil chooses those he wants in power, the electorate may opt for the familiarity of Bill and Hill. There is just something about that kind of comfortable familiarity that calls to mind: Vice is a monster of such frightful mien As to be hated needs but to be seen; Yet seen too oft, familiar with her face, We first endure, then pity, then embrace. Alexander Pope (1688-1744) 18 comments from 8 users
posted by
countygirl
on Sep 27, 2007 at 01:08 PM
Why in the world would we want someone who has said this.. "God bless the America we are trying to create." ..running for president? Thousands have given their lives so that we'd have the America we are today and yet that isn't good enough for her. She is running for something she isn't even proud of!! As far as Hillary not being a family person...or at least not making her family her number one priority, I say, "Great! Let's have the poster child for dysfunctional families running our country." Want to know one of the main things ruining our country.... the fact that family isn't our number one priority. Let's prove this and put another Clinton into office!! One last thing.... I'll NEVER understand why women put up with cheating husbands, unless you're Hillary and you need your hound to get into office!! posted by
oohchild
on Sep 27, 2007 at 02:37 PM
How do you know when Clinton started supporting campaign finance reform, Rick? You weren't even interested in her answers to the initial questions! Seems like you're the one with the pre-conceived notions there. Really, folks, if your priority in the Presidential election is the "family values" of the candidate, you've got some pretty slim pickens to choose from. Personally, I'm more interested in their approach to the war. That's number one for me. In 1992, the motto was: "It's the economy, stupid." In 2008, for me, the motto is: "It's the war in Iraq, stupid." A question for Rick & countygirl: I googled that quote y'all printed, and I couldn't find an original source for it. In fact, the only websites I could find with that quote were either right-wing blogs or libertarian chat rooms. Could you source that for me, so we can see it in context? A lot of the quotes Rick listed were taken out of context, y'know. posted by
oohchild
on Sep 27, 2007 at 03:31 PM
First, you already know I'm an Edwards supporter, Rick. Second, I'm still waiting for that source regarding Clinton's so-called quote. Third, check out the Rasmussen polls when Clinton is put up against the leading Republican candidates: http://tpmelectioncentral.c... She leads them all. Fourth, I still wonder what you think about a "news" site that doesn't print responses to questions posed to a candidate. |