The smartest woman in the world would relish "the raucous give and take of American democracy," as Charles Kuralt once put it. hillary clinton, by contrast, subsists on cozy clintonoid interviews of the Colmes kind... In her new book, Political Fictions, Joan Didion indicts the fakery of access journalism practiced by vacant politicos like clinton, whom she sees as "purveyors of fables of their own making, or worse, fables conceived by political strategists with designs on votes, not news."
(Didion on clinton (bill, that is): "No one who ever passed through an American public high school could have watched William Jefferson Clinton running for office in 1992 and failed to recognize the familiar predatory sexuality of the provincial adolescent.") (And Bob Woodward: His accomplishment, she says, is to have produced "books in which measurable cerebral activity is virtually absent.")
|
|
OFF THE RECORD: AN OLD DOG NEEDS NEW TRICKS
|
|
|
To paraphrase Abe Lincoln and Adlai Stevenson: hillary clinton can compress the most words into the smallest idea of any numskull I know....In America, anybody can be first spouse. That's one of the risks you take. |
|
Rumor has it William Jefferson Clinton himself is to recite Honest Abe's lines in this New Year's Eve pageant. Whoever writes these scripts has a natural talent for irony. For some irrepressible reason, one cannot help but think of that costume party in "The Manchurian Candidate,'' complete with Red Queen and Abe Lincoln in stovepipe hat and fake beard. Hillary Clinton says it's a great opportunity to unite the nation. (The way she's united New York?) But the Clintons are never so polarizing as when they are intent on uniting us. How can that be? Maybe it's their perfectly fabricated authenticity. The Nineties have had much the same effect, stirring the same vague dissatisfactions -- and sparking sudden outbursts of temper. What was it that poor, embarrassed David Brinkley, thinking his mike was off, said after the president's victory speech in '96: "We all look forward with great pleasure to four years of wonderful, inspiring speeches, full of wit, poetry, music, love and affection, plus more goddam nonsense.''
Hey, what a party! New Year's at the White House |
|
Mindless rhinestone-studded-and-tented kleptocracy by Mia T John Podhoretz recently asked, "Whence comes hillary clinton's reputation for brilliance?" For the answer, he intuitively, rather brilliantly in fact, looked to her anatomy and noted,"This isn't the first time she's shot herself in the foot."
The above anatomical analysis supports the Podhoretz thesis. Notwithstanding The Pod's erroneous conclusions concerning Ian Hunter recently observed that our leaders are shrinking. "From a Churchill (or, for that matter, a Margaret Thatcher) to a Tony Blair; from Eisenhower to Clinton; from Diefenbaker to Joe Clark; from Trudeau to Chretien -- we seem destined to be governed by pygmies." The pols understand their anatomical limitations well; they attempt to mitigate them with veneer. And so we suffer mindless alpha-beta-beelzebubba grotesquerie. . .
and rhinestone-studded-and-tented kleptocracy.
With all the media genuflecting before the press-conference podium of bill clinton, it bears remarking yet again that the clinton intellect (an oxymoron even more jarring than AlGoreRhythm and meant to encompass the cognitive ability of both clintons) is remarkable only for its utter ordinariness, its lack of creative spark, its lack of analytic precision, its lack of depth. The clintons' fundamental error: They are too arrogant and dim-witted to understand that the demagogic process in this fiberoptic age isn't about counting spun heads; it's about not discounting circumambient brains. Politicos and reporters are not rocket scientists . . . Professions tend to be self-selected, intellectually homogeneous subgroups of Homo sapiens. Great intellects (especially these days) do not generally gravitate towards careers in the media or politics. Mediocre, power-obsessed types with poor self-images do. Thus, clinton mediocrity goes undetected primarily because of media mediocrity. ("Mediocrity" and "media" don't come from the same Latin root (medius) for no reason.) Insofar as the clintons are concerned, the media confuse form with substance, smoothness with coherence, data-spewing with ratiocination, pre-programmed recitation with real-time analysis, an idiosyncratic degeneracy with creativity. Jimmy Breslin agrees. In Hillary Is the 'Me-First' Lady, Breslin laments: "At the end of all these years and years that are being celebrated this week, the national press of America consists of people with dried minds and weak backbones and the pack of them can't utter a new phrase for the language or show the least bit of anger at a business or profession or trade or whatever this business is that is dying of mediocrity."
Listen carefully to the clintons. You will hear a shallow parody of the class president. Not only do they say nothing; they say nothing with superfluous ineloquence. Their speeches are sophomoric, shopworn, shallow, specious. Platitudinous pandering piled atop p.c. cliché In seven years, they have, collectively, uttered not one memorable word save, "It was a vast right-wing conspiracy," "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky,"and, "It all depends on what the meaning of 'is' is." Even the clintons' attempts at alliteration fall flat. Compare Agnew's (Safire's) "nattering nabobs of negativism" with clinton's "preachers of pessimism," an impotent, one-dimensional, plagiaristic echo (its apt self-descriptiveness notwithstanding). Before they destroy their backs along with their reputations, media gentry genuflecting at the altar of the clinton brain should consider Edith Efron's, Can the President Think? A wasted brain is a terrible thing.
|
roadside ad, 
