| Today's Threads.. Twisting Tighter Tougher & Through to Transformation? | 3 comments |
|
 19 Feb 2003 @ 13:30, by Julie Solheim-Roe
According to the crazy right-wing AM radio stations and commentators I listen to as I descend from the Morongo Basin to the Choachella Valley every day, in a recent statement Senator McCain tells Clinton and Carter to 'shut up'. (Not, though I can't find this transcript yet in any news searchs!) ....
For example, far right commentator Glen Beck thinks that it's the Clinton's desire to rule the world by 2008. Which won't be too bad in my view. I see Clinton a lot like JFK. Obviously both men sold their souls to the devil to get into office. Clinton I am sure was some instrument with the Iran-Contra funds when he was governor of Arkansas; and it is well documented about JFK's daddy's mob and Hoffa buddies buying votes (see 'Double Cross' by the Gioccana bros). But there is an energy for lack of a better word that both men took on and almost embodied. They 'rose to the occasion' in a symbolic and thus important sense. I was lucky to experience the European view of Clinton in his last year in office whilst I was in the UK. An incredible statesman. Could talk beyond rhetoric without notes for an hour at a time. Yes, I know my conspiracy and liberal friends would say he was just as bad in policy as present King George---and, yes, just like Blair, both men represent a 'labour' and 'democratic' platform that is far more to the right and sold out to corrupt corporate interests. No longer seeming to care about the eroding working/ middle class common folks.... and, I agree.
Yet, there is something inherently cool and smartly hip about Clinton... some Light with a capital L--that one can almost sense or detect in his very presence and in the invisible forces behind what he symbolizes whenever he takes the podium or has a lucid moment captured on camera... That's where I draw my analogy with Kennedy. Also the very atmosphere of business and the culture in the country. Where the money was hot. The idea that information, knowledge and virtual realities possessed an inherent value beyond what the current profit margin was. Of course the dot com bubble needed to burst to some extent. But the money although still corporate and thus still corrupt---was a step in the right direction, not the same power as the old money of tobacco and oil that seems to be behind the Bush camp.
So, Beck says that Clinton is jockeying for UN Secretary-General. Here's a few negative ideas on the matter; ... Sure he is still looking out for his own grandeur and political career. But no matter, I feel he could be well 'used' in these situations. And here Laura Ingraham warns: "As conservatives long suspected, Bill Clinton's loyalty, as evidenced in this speech, is not primarily to this country. His loyalty is to the liberal European elites who adore both him and the prospect of the world where America is no longer the world's sole super power. (Clinton also warned against US efforts to "dominate and run the world.")
For Clinton, a new UN resolution on Iraq is merely a means to a larger goal-"the chance to integrate the world, to make the United Nations a more meaningful, more powerful, more effective institution." The crowd went nuts.
Bill Clinton is still the biggest figure on the Democratic stage. He still raises the most money. He still exerts influence through Hillary and pal DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe. He is still beloved by Hollywood. Republicans should call upon all Democrats to either embrace or distance themselves from this World According to Clinton. Do they agree with Clinton that the US shouldn't try to be a dominant world force? Do they agree that our main goal should be an "integrated world." Do they agree that we're ripping off the UN by not sending more money Kofi's way?
Meanwhile, if Bill Clinton wants, sometime in the future, to be named Secretary General of a super-sized UN, he already has the campaign theme down pat: America Last." Similarly, Beck 'warns', what if in 2008 the then UN Secretary-General Clinton is hosting a party for his wife the eve of the election---who will run the world then?
None of these 'warnings' frighten me. Rather a deliver a strange surreal hope and even a promise amist all the current mayhem... if we could make it to 2008.
Maybe the fall of Rome won't hurt so bad if a former Casesar--having been matured, humbled and even more enlightened--is involved with it's empiricism's punishment and potential reform on the global stage... and if Hillary keeps her spine up!
|
|
Category: Politics
3 comments
19 Feb 2003 @ 18:22 by sharie : Questions, Suspicions, hmmm...
Clinton was President when the corrupt mobsters began to seize control of our government. He could have stepped in and made a demand for a re-count in Florida. He did nothing, let the Supreme Court usurp the voters, and walked out of the White House. I suspect he pocketed a few million under the table for that. He and Hillary were bankrupt because of their legal bills as you recall. But suddenly they show up in Manhattan with millions to buy a mansion. This is all very strange. Where'd they get the money?
I definitely think we'll see Hillary in the White House again at some level (not that I'm a fan).
Thanks for the post.
20 Feb 2003 @ 01:27 by jazzolog : Mobsters
Not sure whom Sharie means with that comment, but I'd say Eisenhower was President when what he referred to as "the military-industrial complex" began to seize control---and in a famous speech he warned us. By the time we get to Carter, CEOs on the golf course could figure out how to dump an entire political party. Clinton? Despite his political skills, he was surrounded.
Julie's right about his charisma though. Somebody wrote on the Internet yesterday that Clinton could be Britain's Prime Minister tomorrow. I haven't seen him in person, but I have Hillary who seems like a pretty ordinary human to me. I saw John Kennedy though---and he absolutely glowed.
22 Feb 2003 @ 13:32 by sharie : I stand corrected
The mobsters began to seize control of our government around 1914 from what I gather - with the illegally-imposed federal income tax which pulls in trillions of dollars a year - we see where that's gotten us.
In my comment above, I was referring to the mafia don and his family which currently control *all* the public funds. This is the first time in history where one group controls all of america. That's what I was referring to.
Other entries in Politics
31 Aug 2008 @ 12:48: Election '08: You Make Me Feel So Young!
12 Aug 2008 @ 09:13: Truth, Denial and Fascism
5 Aug 2008 @ 20:08: Alexanders Ragtime Band
24 Mar 2008 @ 20:50: Is it time?
29 Feb 2008 @ 06:49: Vote For MRS. Barack Obama!
24 Feb 2008 @ 13:25: What's With Hillary?
19 Feb 2008 @ 21:28: Letter to presidential candidates
18 Feb 2008 @ 10:26: Is Obama The Answer?
4 Feb 2008 @ 19:45: Citizen McCain
31 Jan 2008 @ 19:53: The King of Mountebanks?
|
