Transterrestrial Musings




Defend Free Speech!


Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay




Site designed by


Powered by
Movable Type 4.0
Biting Commentary about Infinity, and Beyond!

« Frying A Turkey Without Oil? | Main | Too Good To Be True »

Where Has He Been?

An interesting comment from this post:

Me and my family used to be the biggest fans of Bill Clinton. Everyone in my community can't stand to see Bill on TV anymore. I'm not sure if its his older age or maybe the lack of sleep lately, but I truly believe his lost his mind. He makes no sense anymore, cares about nothing other than attempting to get his wife elected, plucks words right out of the air while stating nothing, and now even goes against the voices of mass voters...


Bill Clinton is really not he same person I USED to respect and admire!

Sorry, he's exactly the same person you used to (foolishly and myopically) respect and admire. He's the same person he's been his entire political career, going all the way back to the seventies in Arkansas. Anyone who has followed his career, or read non-hagiographic biographies of him knows this. The only thing that's changed is that you've found a new empty vessel into which to pour your emotional political longings, and he's attacked it, so now you see the Bill Clinton that the rest of us have seen all along.

As I've said many times, I don't now, and never have "hated" Bill (or Hillary Rodham) Clinton. I find them far too trivial and unworthy subjects on which to expend such an intense and miserable emotion. I think that I'm in fact far more clinically objective about them than most Democrats have ever seemed to be able to be. The problem is not the "Clinton haters" (most of whom were merely pointing out the reality), but the far too many people who have loved him, far beyond reason, for decades. That was the source of his power.

And now that the scales have fallen from the eyes of many like the commenter above, the end may be very ugly, particularly if they are perceived to have stolen the nomination from Obama (something that they are surely plotting as I write this). Denver may make Chicago in 1968 look like a Sunday-school picnic.

They've never cared about the Democrat Party, other than as a convenient vehicle for the conveyance of their unlimited and insatiable ambition and lust for power, and they've been a disaster for it ever since they hit the national scene. They cost it the Congress for the first time in four decades, and the party couldn't hold on to the White House at the end of their term, at least partly because of the stench of it in the minds of the voters in 2000. Having Bill Clinton campaign for a Democrat has generally been the kiss of death, but because of this irrational love of them, they've managed to keep on doing it.

When it comes to the Clintons, it's always about them, and they always come first, and the national Democrats are finally starting to realize it, sixteen years later. If they'd been smart, and listened to Arkansas Democrats at the time, they could have had the much earlier epiphany, and spared their party a lot of corruption and embarrassment.

Oh, when the end comes, it won't be as bad as the Ceausescus (this is America, after all), but it will certainly be as final. There will be no more comeback kids. If he's still around in a couple decades, I suspect that Bill Clinton will be continuously enraged and deeply envious of the legacy of George W. Bush.

 
 

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Where Has He Been?.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.transterrestrial.com/admin/mt-tb.cgi/9066

23 Comments

Steve wrote:

This is exactly why Hitlary will lose. Their 15 minutes is SO up, thank God for small favors. Too many of the faithful have seen them for the nuts that they are and they now wonder about both the Clintons. He looks crazy (and drunk) sometimes. She's older and more shrewish than ever. Kind of like Mrs Stapleton, your super evil, grade school substitute teacher. The ex-faithful are questioning just what good either of the Clintons ever did for them.

I know I harp on this following statement, but there are Democrats who own stock in oil companies too. Not just evil Republicans. No American, Democrat or Republican wants to hear,

"I want to take those profits...",

Let's face it, that's a frightening concept. Especially if part of your retirement is tied up in energy stocks.

I'm sure, inside their pointed little heads, this soundtrack is playing, as they see her slipping down the well of Obamania,

"YOU presume to criticize the Great Was?! You ungrateful creatures!"

[but the curtain has slid back now, no going back]

"Vote for Hillary, Er... the Great Was has spoken."

[Was redraws the curtain hastily, but it's stuck open now]

"PAY NO ATTENTION TO THAT MAN (or his wife) BEHIND THE CURTAIN! THE GREAT, er... WAS... HAS SPOKEN!!"

She's melting MELTING!! What a world, WHAT a world. Thank God for small favors.

David Ross wrote:

"Hitlary" - u just lost teh Internet

Craig wrote:

I believe Juanita Brodderick. The simple truth of what that story says about both Clintons is that neither of them should be in public life, and at least one of them should have done time.

Jack is Back! wrote:

Now you know how con-men and con-women can make a living off the gullible. This is nothing more than a political swindle job - as long as it sounds good and they tell you that you can be free, pay nothing and get everything you have ever wanted - you will bite the apple of temptation. Welcome to the Garden of Eden, Clinton style.

apetra wrote:

Your XML link at the upper left is dead.

chris in st louis wrote:

After they left the White House in January 2001, some wag referred to them as "political grifters" which, at the time, I found a rather harsh judgment. Now I find it rather mild. Yes, I too voted for him twice. And I was glad both times he won. But I'll never vote for what's-her-name.

K T Cat wrote:

What's the over-under on how long it will take Hillary to file for a divorce once she loses?

mz wrote:

Oh here we have again the self proclaimed Mr. Substance blogging about Bill and Hillary Clinton. So, what is there to say about the Substance? Nothing, the elections don't seem to be about how the candidates would run the country, but personality cults and intangible gut feelings.

I didn't add any actual policy substance with my comment either though, so I'm not any better :/ .

Just saying.

Rand Simberg wrote:

What's the over-under on how long it will take Hillary to file for a divorce once she loses?

I predict that they'll never divorce. As long as they remain married, they can't be compelled to testify against each other.

ballyfager wrote:

It's nice to see people finally catching on to these two creeps but, on the other hand, doesn't it frost your ass that this low-rent, posturing parasite was ever elected Pres. of the U.S.

I have doubts that McCain can beat Obama, but seeing the latter's youth and skill overcome the Clinton's old age and treachery would be pleasing.

DonL wrote:

Aw gee! The same fools have now shifted to drooling over the next media created socialist, Obama. I think we need to identify a list ofqualifications for president anbd select by random computer.

Humans are either too ignorant or too selfish and corrupted to pick wisely. There was once a field where the "worst of the bunch was acceptable." Now we have the "best of the bunch is a disaster for America" - and that includes both Parties.

RKV wrote:

"Yes, I too voted for him twice. And I was glad both times he won. But I'll never vote for what's-her-name."

You STILL haven't learned anything, have you? And I bet you'll pull the lever for Obama if he gets the nomination, won't you?

Phil Fraering wrote:

It's interesting watching both the Clinton and Obama camps get soooooooo pissed off at each other because the other camp treats them the same way both camps have treated Republicans for the last twenty years.

Bob Hawkins wrote:

"The only thing that's changed is that you've found a new empty vessel"

I think this is spot-on. Don't these people remind you of a 13-year-old girl who's dropped Brad Pitt for Johnny Depp?

Rand Simberg wrote:

Actually, I wrote that, not Bob Hawkins. Or if Bob Hawkins wrote it, it wasn't here.

Samuel wrote:

For me, the most brilliant part of the essay was:
"The only thing that's changed is that you've found a new empty vessel into which to pour your emotional political longings, and he's attacked it, so now you see the Bill Clinton that the rest of us have seen all along."

This is exactly right. It's nice to see many Democrats having a Clinton Awakening after 15 years or so of defending them and visciously attacking those who tried to open their eyes. But it would be even nicer if they would now, in light of this experience, heed our words about Obama being a hard-left socialist and empty suit and a real danger for America.

Michael wrote:

>>If they'd been smart, and listened to Arkansas Democrats at the time,
Rand,
Clinton had been getting rnominated and relected Governor of Arkanas by the Democratic party there for twelve years or more. Where do you see that the Arkansas Democrats recognised him for what he was, or at least objected to it?

Rand Simberg wrote:

Clinton had been getting renominated and reelected Governor of Arkansas by the Democratic party there for twelve years or more. Where do you see that the Arkansas Democrats recognised him for what he was, or at least objected to it?

Democrats are Democrats--they like to win. But if the press had bothered to get any of them into a bar and gotten a couple of beers into them, they'd have heard lots of stories about "Slick Willie."

You think that they didn't know what Paul Greenberg knew? Most of them knew that there wouldn't be any big benefit to them of Bill going to Washington--all it would mean was that there would be many Arkansan rocks overturned. And they were right. They lost the governorship, due to residual corruption from the Clinton era, and ended up with Mike Huckabee.

Jim C. wrote:

Rand Simberg wrote: I predict that they'll never divorce. As long as they remain married, they can't be compelled to testify against each other.

BWAHAHAHAAAAAA! Great line!

Mac wrote:

DonL wrote: The same fools have now shifted to drooling over the next media created socialist, Obama. I think we need to identify a list ofqualifications for president anbd select by random computer.

Even I have to admit, Clinton the former could speak. Even if he never said anything worthwhile, his delivery is near perfect. Obama has the same charisma and delivery in campaigning and I can see why people are drawn to his youth and fire. Now, if he'd just change his stance on the Iraq war.

My wife had a great idea for elections. The candidates would be assigned numbers and those numbers (without the associated names) would be posted at the polling centers with the stances on all the major issues. Then, without knowing who's who, you vote based on issues alone. Never happen, but a neat idea.

Smith wrote:

I never admired nor respect Clinton(Hillary), I don't think they can give a fruitful, respectful leadership to the country like US.

By special request, I have added a few drink recipes that incorporate cinnamon in the taste. Let these delicious cocktails take you back to your childhood days as memories of freshly baked Gingerbread cookies come flooding into your head. Making one of these fancy cocktails will be more fun than the Gingerbread Houses you made when you were littleā€¦ plus they get you drunk!!

Leave a comment

Note: The comment system is functional, but timing out when returning a response page. If you have submitted a comment, DON'T RESUBMIT IT IF/WHEN IT HANGS UP AND GIVES YOU A "500" PAGE. Simply click your browser "Back" button to the post page, and then refresh to see your comment.
 

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Rand Simberg published on February 17, 2008 4:06 PM.

Frying A Turkey Without Oil? was the previous entry in this blog.

Too Good To Be True is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Powered by Movable Type 4.1