Sunday, October 14, 2007


Your enemy can't murder when he has a bullet in his brain. Pretty harsh, but think how different history would be if a certain politico had brought that philosophy to the White House. bill clinton, of course. And his political philosophy was surprisingly close to that. The actual quote is, "Your opponent can't talk when he has your fist in his mouth."

Y'see, thing of it is, the first iteration should have expressed his constitutional duty -- to protect and defend America -- whereas the second, the real one is simply more reason for disrespect. Being able to talk is something a president should protect -- free speech and all that. You know, that Constitution thing again. The problem was that he got serious only with things that didn’t really matter. What could we expect from a funhouse president but a funhouse philosophy? Something just a bit twisted, just a bit off. It's almost not ridiculous. bill clinton always got it wrong. He was the North Star of perverted values.

In 1996 Nebraska DemSen Bob Kerrey said, "Clinton's an unusually good liar. Unusually good. Do you realize that?" Earlier this year, lefty bigwig Hollywood mogul David Geffen called the clintons an Ivy League Bonnie and Clyde. Reckless and Relentless, respectively. "God knows, is there anybody more ambitious than Hillary?" he wondered. "Everybody in politics lies, but they do it with such ease, it's troubling." Well, no -- it's called "acting." And the best lies are the ones that stick closest to the truth, pace Goebbels. Just a few words off, like switching political opponent for blood enemy.

But bill clinton is old news, so fifteen-years-ago, capable now of doing only the harm that, say, a carter can do. We have more pressing issues than raging about impeached former presidents. This weak and ambitious Macbeth, alas, does have his Lady, and one unconcerned about such mere housekeeping drudgery as getting out damned spots of body fluids. There's another House that she would keep, or reclaim. Lady Hillary, of course.

Charles Krauthammer is almost always right, and when he’s not, he’s always edifying -- reasonable and plausible. So what he has to say about HRc is worth considering. He says she’s not the worst thing that could happen. How could we disagree with that? Much worse things could happen. The 12th Imam could come back -- that would be embarrassing. A planetoid could strike the earth. Zombies could eat our brains. Why, the list of worse things might be dozens of items long.

Prezizle Hillizzle wouldn’t be a complete seppuku evisceration of America, thinks Krauthammer, because she is not principled. She is pragmatic. Anything will do, to get her what she wants. This is a good thing, he supposes, because according to the laws of chance she might sometimes get it right, whereas a principled lefty will always get it wrong. He must be an Evolutionist.

It is true that if a pilot looks to the heavens and charts a course by picking any star at random, some destination will be reached. Everywhere is a sort of destination. Whatever happens it what destiny is. Chance might even bring us to a place that’s worth getting to. Isn’t that how penicillin was discovered?

Well, Hill is not bill. In this Halloween season, we might think of him as the Blob -- slick, voracious and all-encompassing, while she would be not so much a witch -- the cackle is inconsequential -- as a vampire. How appropriate, for bill. A vampire, in her ruthless, her relentless thirst for blood and her ability to transform herself into whatever the night requires. They are certainly a team, and they certainly complement each other.

There are worse things than a marriage that is sustained merely as a cynical alliance. And we know that they do, both of them, have a bushel of mean packed into, pressed down and overflowing from their souls. This need not be a bad thing. It could be a good thing. It’s just a question of who they think their enemies are.

One realizes that tests are not egalitarian, at least in their results. But let's risk the insensitivity. Life is filled with risks. Which of the following images best represents the "enemy"?


(enlarged image of an American Flag lapel pin)


(reduced image of a moslem Ramadan ritual)

Putting the foolishness aside for just a brief moment, I pose a final simple question. Who would you trust to deal with the characters who dance on rooftops at the sight of image B?

It would have to be someone who can distinguish between opponent and enemy. This is why Krauthammer is wrong. Pilots can't follow just any star. There is only one true north, and the seas are filled with icebergs.


1 comment:

Danish Smith said...

Wearing lapel pins is not a big thing .. !!