Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
American Digest: And I like this from "The Blog That Nobody Reads", because it is -- mostly -- about me. What can I say? I'm on an ego trip today. It won't last.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Dr. Melissa Clouthier: Morgan Freeberg at House of Eratosthenes (pftthats a mouthful) honors big boned women in skimpy clothing. The picture there is priceless--keep scrolling down.
Exile in Portales: Via Gerard: Morgan Freeberg, a guy with a lot to say. And he speaks The Truth...and it's fascinating stuff. Worth a read, or three. Or six.
Just Muttering: Two nice pieces at House of Eratosthenes, one about a perhaps unintended effect of the Enron mess, and one on the Gore-y environ-movie.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
The Virginian: I know this post will offend some people, but the author makes some good points.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
I really don’t know the answer to that question. Is she a Mrs. Doormat, or former Mrs. Doormat?
If she runs, we should know. As First Dude, Bill Clinton would not be as dangerous as his wife. But he’d be more nauseating, if only just barely.
Apart from that, I suppose I don’t really care. I’m more concerned about the why. Why is it that I don’t know. The democrats have gotten into this weird habit of answering every single question that comes up with an answer of “How dare you ask the question” that their most notable luminaries have become cloaked with the shroud of enigma that in generations past, would have been thought dangerous to any aspiring politician. Not that anybody has asked questions about the Clintons’ marital status. But they haven’t been acting like a married couple since, oh, sometime around ’94 when Hillary was selling us her own health care plan. Twenty years. I haven’t heard anything of a divorce, but I wouldn’t.
Also: Why do democrats get married? I remember how they used to compare the Clintons, favorably, to Republicans like Bob Dole and Ronald Reagan who had been married more than once. Alright, assuming the Clintons are still married, that’s the first for both of them, good for them. But what’s the point?
For votes? Like Catholic democrats who are Catholic even though they aren’t practicing Catholics, so they can get Catholic votes? What is there apart from that? The democrat groom marries the democrat bride because he’s just so lost without her? And she marries him because “he makes me laugh” or some such rot?
The votes-thing distresses me somewhat, because there is something going on here that is new. It’s a change. That enigmatic cloaking, its beneficial effects. Voters feel like they “know” the candidate, now, when they don’t. Time was when the candidate would convince the voters, that the voters knew the candidate, by revealing something. Maybe it was all bull, but still that was the move: Inspire this feeling of camaraderie, membership in a common clique or interest group, by letting information out. Introducing the wife and kids. Appearing in front of cameras and talking about personal things. Now, it’s the opposite: They define themselves as dark and shapeless blobs. Defining through lack of definition. Stem to stern, it’s all “how dare you ask” to this and that and the other.
It’s not what they’re hiding that is bothersome. It isn’t even the dark-shapeless-blob maybe-married-maybe-not politicians. I’m concerned about the changing behavior of the public. They used to be fooled into thinking the candidate was their friend, when they learned things. Now they get fooled into thinking that when information is deliberately kept from them. The old way was better, because although problems can result from making friends with people who lie to you, it is certainly hazardous to make friends with people who consistently and deliberately hide things from you.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
It makes me feel all kinds of icky to admit it, but… I’m actually kind of a fan of the Clintons. They’re the weathervane of our times.
As we all know, the point of liberalism is: I’m Better Than You. But the Clintons made it official. They were out-n-proud elitists while the rest of the Democratic Party was still sorta kinda pretending to be on the side of the little guy. Bill especially displayed droit de signeur better than anyone since Louis XIV. And we, the people, were ok with it. You had that silly tw[i]t reporter proclaiming to all the world she’d be happy to blow him “to thank him for keeping abortion legal.” Feel free to ignore everything in quotes.
The how-dare-you-ask-me-that thing? The Clintons invented that. Hillary! deserves to be Secretary of State –and President — because she is who she is. And that’s all. Get a few glasses of chardonnay into most of her supporters and they’ll be happy to admit as much. And shut up if you disagree, peasant. Your Betters are discussing your future, and you may leave the room (but leave your wallet). The Clintons invented all that shit, and I have to love them a little bit for that.
- Severian | 04/11/2014 @ 06:33Yes. Hillary will never divorce as long as Bubba’s alive, and will never remarry after he dies. Secret Service, you know.
Now if (God forbid) she gets elected president, she’s entitled to lifetime protection in her own right. In that case, all bets are off. But until then, until death them do part, baby.
- Rich Fader | 04/11/2014 @ 13:55[…] House of Eratosthenes wonders if the Clinton’s are still married […]
- Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup » Pirate's Cove | 04/13/2014 @ 06:08