Posted on 02/08/2006 4:56:38 PM PST by Mia T
THE (oops!) INADVERTENT ADMISSIONS OF BILL + HILLARY CLINTON part one
|
This legacy confab is in and of itself proof certain of clinton's deeply flawed character, and a demonstration in real time of the way in which the clinton years were about a legacy that was incidentally a presidency.
Madeleine Albright captured the essence of this dysfunctional presidency best when she explained why clinton couldn't go after bin Laden.
According to Richard Miniter, the Albright revelation occurred at the cabinet meeting that would decide the disposition of the USS Cole bombing by al Qaeda [that is to say, that would decide to do what it had always done when a "bimbo" was not spilling the beans on the clintons: Nothing]. Only Clarke wanted to retaliate militarily for this unambiguous act of war.
Albright explained that a [sham] Mideast accord would yield [if not peace for the principals, surely] a Nobel Peace Prize for clinton. Kill or capture bin Laden and clinton could kiss the 'accord' and the Peace Prize good-bye.
If clinton liberalism, smallness, cowardice, corruption, perfidy--and, to borrow a phrase from Andrew Cuomo, clinton cluelessness--played a part, it was, in the end, the Nobel Peace Prize that produced the puerile pertinacity that enabled the clintons to shrug off terrorism's global danger. |
To wit: A proven felon and utter reprobate can remain president; clinton can be a failed human being but a good president.
The error in these statements arises, says Steele, from the belief that virtuousness is separate from personal responsibility so that one's virtuousness as an individual is determined by one's political positions on issues rather than on whether or not in one's personal life there is a consistency and a responsibility.
Steele's contention is that this compartmentalization, rather than being the amazing advantage the clintons would have us believe, in fact, spills toxicity into, corrupts, the culture.
If mere identification with good policies is what makes one virtuous then those policies become, what Steele calls, iconographic, that is to say they just represent virtuousness. They don't necessarily do virtuous things.
If clinton's semantic parsing strips meaning from our words, clinton's iconographic policies strip meaning from our society, systematically deconstructing our society as a democracy. . .
I would take Shelby Steele's thesis one step further. I maintain that iconographic policy functions like a placebo, producing a real, physiological and social effects.
The placebo effect is, after all, the brain's triumph over reality. Expectation alone can produce powerful physiological results. The placebo effect was, at one time, an evolutionary advantage: act now, think later
bill clinton is the paradigmatic Placebo President. Placebo is Latin for "I shall please." And please he does doling out sham treatments, iconographs, with abandon. To please, to placate, to numb, to deflect. Ultimately to showcase his imagined virtue. Or to confute his genuine vice.
clinton will dispense sugar pills (or bombs) at the drop of a high-heeled shoe... or at the hint of high treason...
clinton's charlatanry mimics that of primitive medicine. Through the 1940s, doctors had little effective medicine to offer so they deliberately attempted to induce the placebo response.
The efficaciousness of today's medicines does not diminish the power of the placebo. A recent review of placebo-controlled studies found that placebos and genuine treatments are often equally effective. If you expect to get better, you will.
Which brings me back to the original question: Can clinton be a failed human being but a good president?
Clearly he cannot. These two propositions are mutually exclusive. clinton's fundamental failure is a complete lack of integrity. He has violated his covenant with the American people.
Because clinton has destroyed his moral authority as a leader, he can no longer function even as a quack; the placebo effect is gone.
And so the Placebo President must now go, too.
|
WAR AND TREASON AND THE NEW YORK TIMES
by Mia T, December 29, 2005
It is no accident--and the Sheehy hagiography notwithstanding, it is certainly not because of any patriarchal society--that this reflexive kleptocrat never sought office. She never ran simply because she is a perfectionist and an incompetent who cannot tolerate personal (as opposed to bill-related) criticism, witness the prescreened, heavily controlled, sycophantic crowds, her pre-programmed, totally scripted appearances (or, alternatively, her totally mute "listening tour"), her unavailability to the press, indeed, her "bluebird."
Mia T, 8.16.05 |
Clinton Administration Veteran:
|
The clintons, as is their wont, are now taking this proxy scheme to even more outrageous extremes. The latest: an actual hillary clinton proxy presidency, populated on both sides of the camera by assorted rodham and clinton ex-staffers, sycophants and should-be felons, witness the latest hire.
'Commander-in-Chief,' a show that sets out to crown a 'queen,' instead exposes the kitschy simplemindedness of Hollywood fantasy and the special sway and shortsightedness of the pathologic ego.
Mia T, 10.27.05 |
Having failed to snare the Nobel Peace Prize by ignoring terrorism, clinton has apparently decided to intensify his America-bashing on foreign soil, the method employed by Jimmy Carter to great (if somewhat belated) effect. (The Nobel committee, sufficiently mollified only after 24 years of the peanut president's America-bashing, awarded Carter his 1978 Peace Prize finally in 2002.)
Meanwhile, back in the Senate, the missus, the other half of the clinton construct, maintains her hawkish pose (though not without bird problems of another sort).
Yet another example of the clinton conflation ploy, (see SCHEMA PINOCCHIO: how the clintons are handling the hillary dud factor), this variant allows "clinton, the construct" to hold two mutually exclusive positions simultaneously, thereby enabling the missus to avoid in '08 the trap that repeatedly ensnared the ever 'nuanced' Kerry in '04.
Do you now understand how stupid the clintons think you are?
A CALL TO IMPEACH CLINTON IN ABSENTIA |
The reviews miss the point of the show, (i.e., the show is not optional but necessary (though hardly sufficient) if clinton is to prevail), because the reviews fail to identify missus clinton's problem in the first place. And circular reasoning compounds the error.
While America appears not to be ready for a female president under any circumstances, the post-9/11 realities pose special problems for a female presidential candidate. Add to these the problems unique to missus clinton. The reviews make the mistake of focusing on the problems of the generic female presidential candidate running during ordinary times.
These are not ordinary times. America is waging the global War on Terror; the uncharted territory of asymmetric netherworlds is the battlefield; the enemy is brutal, subhuman; the threat of global conflagration is real.
Defeating the enemy isn't sufficient. For America to prevail, she must also defeat a retrograde, misogynous mindset. To successfully prosecute the War on Terror, it is essential that the collective patriarchal islamic culture perceives America as politically and militarily strong. Condi Rice excepted, this requirement presents an insurmountable hurdle for any female presidential candidate, and especially missus clinton, historically antimilitary--(an image, incidentally, that is only enhanced today by her clumsy, termagant parody of Thatcher), forever the pitiful victim, and, according to Dick Morris, "the biggest dove in the clinton administration."
It is ironic that had the clintons not failed utterly to fight terrorism... not failed to take bin Laden from Sudan... not failed repeatedly to decapitate a nascent, still stoppable al Qaeda... the generic female president as a construct would still be viable... missus clinton's obstacles would be limited largely to standard-issue clintonisms: corruption, abuse, malpractice, malfeasance, megalomania, rape and treason... and, in spite of Juanita Broaddrick, or perhaps because of her, Rod Lurie would be reduced to perversely hawking the "First Gentleman" instead of the "Commander-in-Chief."
Mia T, 10.02.05 |
December 7, 1941+64
RE: a not-so-modest proposal concerning hillary clinton
Hillary Clinton's revisionist tome notwithstanding, 'living history' begets a certain symmetry. It is in that light that I make this not-so-modest proposal on this day, exactly 64 years after the attack on Pearl Harbor.
The context of our concern today--regardless of political affiliation--is Iraq and The War on Terror, but the larger fear is that our democracy may not survive.
We have the requisite machines, power and know-how to defeat the enemy in Iraq and elsewhere, but do we have the will?
In particular, do we have the will to identify and defeat the enemy in our midst?
Answerable to no one, heir apparent in her own mind, self-serving in the extreme, Hillary Clinton incarnates this insidious new threat to our survival.
What we decide to do about Missus Clinton will tell us much about what awaits us in these perilous new times.
COMPLETE LETTER |
Next month watch for the airing of a curiously structured hillary 'event.'
~ Chitchat meets town hall.~
Think of it as the resuscitation of hillary by hybrid vigor.
C-SPAN may run this slice of unreality in real time.9 (Lucky us.)
To ensure cozy clintonoid interviews of the Colmes kind, missus clinton always demands the added firewall of the sycophantic host10 --Jane Pauley this time, ever-sweet despite Doonesbury.11 (A prescreened audience from that ultra-left-wing city by the bay apparently wasn't sufficient protection for missus clinton from the bane of all crooked pols: the nasty followup.)
Understandable. Real questions served up by real people12 remain the ubiquitous clinton sinkhole. Even in San Francisco.
"PARDON ME!"
Missus clinton can make these demands--and, even more amazing, certain people will actually obey them. Simply because she is MISSUS CLINTON.
It's not negotiable. Missus clinton doesn't do real questions... which, the media may not have noticed, include theirs.
HILLARY ANSWERABLE TO NO ONE
The only solo press conference I can recall is the one way back in February 2001.13 It was missus clinton's first (and apparently, her last), an ad hoc affair hastily arranged, (by which I mean the clinton machine didn't have the necessary heads up to exert its usual control over process and content).
Missus clinton's stated purpose for the press conference was to defend freedom. Her own.
Her one and only solo press conference was a bust. Pity her 'freedom' 'defense' wasn't one, too. (Thank you, Robert Ray.)14
But I digress....
|
|
GONE WITH THE WIND
If Katrina's inescapable allusion is the parting of the Red Sea, (and it is):
Miss hillary's 'plantation' metaphor, ostensibly about Bush and the Republicans, is really about the clintons and Katrina and New Orleans and the Democratic Party. (The Left generally, and the clintons, in particular, are notoriously projectional.)
Katrina has opened the eyes of the poor -- mostly black -- underclass, the Left's absolutely essential -- and until now, captive -- constituency.
The clintons and the Left are terrified that these poor people will finally see what has been before them for 60 years: Not only a failed idea, but a party whose power depends on perpetuating that failure.
The clintons and the Left are terrified that these people will finally see the modern Democratic party for what it is: a bunch of bitter, self-serving, moribund, power-hungry, dangerous elistists whose very existence depends keeping them dirt poor, disinformed and dependent.... This, in contrast to a Republican party whose power depends on their education, self-sufficiency and success.
Indeed, the people are already seeing.
'CULTURE OF CORRUPTION'
Finally, why the shameless "culture of corruption" harangue? Its tactical purpose was diversionary. Miss hillary had no politically helpful answer to the question, ("Why did you vote for the war?"), having previously staked out Iraqi territory apparently populated by no one.
But "culture of corruption" also served a broader, strategic function: the inflation of the clinton legacy. Downward revision ("defining deviancy down") is the classic clinton m.o., (see Jefferson double-helix hoax), (although clinton, exposed, will often argue the obverse: the double negative offers the illusion of higher ground.)
Posthumous misappropriation, for obvious reasons the clintons' preferred method of legacy inflation, was unavailable. Not a problem. Miss hillary will take whatever she can get.
Yesterday, Daniel Patrick Moynihan died. Today, the clintons are arrogating his soul. Hardly surprising. In 1999, the clintons were not at all shy about seizing his still-warm senate seat.
|
thanx. :)
Bump-always love your clinton posts!
Welcome. :-)
thanx :)
ping
You're welcome!
I see (and hear) you've been busy again.
I'm gonna be click these links all night long.
Good Job!!!
Maybe you should become a mole in Hillary's campaigns - You know, like, you know, insert the truth in some of her speeches, ya know?
BTTT
I grow so weary of the two of them. I'm so glad you have the energy, the talent, and the drive to keep bringing to the forefront all their hypocrisy, their lies, and their incessant quest for coronation as king and queen of America. I guarantee they will continue to supply you with an abundance of subject matter. Many thanks for keeping us all informed.
And Johnny Cash was--is!--an American treasure....
|
;)
thx :)
ping
ping
fyi
ping
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.