Thursday, October 29, 2009

False Comparison

I really wish that Bill O'Reilly would stop lumping CNN and MSNBC together. It's like, WHAT, is he actually saying that Anderson Cooper is as biased toward Obama as Keith Olbermann, that Campbell Brown is as biased toward him as Maddow? I mean, I know that my conservative friends continue to equate the CNN of the 90s to the CNN of today (still, of course, thinking that it tilts mega-left), but I don't even think that they would equate CNN with MSNBC. That, I'm afraid to say, is strictly O'Reillyville.

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Digging for a Deeper Find

One of modernity's most persistent axioms is the one that states that Jews and Muslims are just plain incapable of living in peace with each other. They point, specifically, to Arab pogroms, the constant struggle between these groups in the holy land, and, yes, they even go as far as to bring up the Crusades. And while, yes, these are in fact some good examples of just how intractable the problems have been at times, they hardly represent an exhaustive study of the history between them.......................................................................................For example, a closer examination of history shows that from the 15th to the 19th century, the Muslim majorities of the Balkins and Turkey were both exceedingly hospitable to the Jews of their region. In fact, folks, when the Jews of Europe and Russia were being persecuted in the 17th century, many of these same Jews escaped and found refuge in Turkey. Yeah, that's right, Jewish refugees from places such as Ukraine actually looked to the Turkish Sultan to protect them from all things, CHRISTIAN PERSECUTION!!......................................................................................Now, none of this is to excuse the virulent anti-Semitism that's still evident in a great many Arab countries. But 1) it does serve to show people that the two groups have in fact lived in harmony and 2) that Islam is NOT de facto a violent religion. Yes, they've done a lot of violent things throughout hisory. But so, too, have the Jews and Christians - Christians, especially. I mean, just look at the European colonization of North and South America. That, me-buckos, was a wholesale massacre. Nazi Germany, the forced conversions of the Nordics and Slavs - the frigging list goes on and on. Thankfully, "we've" changed. And I'm thinking that if we've changed, maybe so, too, can the Muslims....yet again.

The Principle Involved

Thank goodness/the Lord for George Will. I mean, I know that the guy can be a pompous ass from time to time and that, yes, he's probably a lot more conservative than some of us. But, 1) the guy is a traditional conservative (this, as opposed to a neoconservative) and 2) he's never been one of those guys who would defend the indefensible out of partisanship.............................................................................................For example, while, yes, he did in fact strongly support Reagan, he was also strongly critical of both President Bushes. He didn't, for example, just because a Republican did it, throw away his opposition of nation-building, start to say that it was now a necessary tactic, etc.. On the contrary, folks. Will was one of the strongest critics of the Iraq War/President Bush's (mis)handling of it............................................................................................And, yes, folks, Mr. Will continues to place principles over partisanship. When asked about Dick Cheney's criticism of President Obama's deliberative approach regarding Afghanistan ("the President is dithering"), Mr. Will responded by saying that it probably would have been a good thing if the Bush/Cheney administration had done a little more dithering prior to their getting us involved in Iraq. Wow, huh? Talk about an arrow directly hitting the bulls-eye. Mr. Will literally nailed that sucker, for Christ. It's just too bad there aren't more conservatives like Will out there.

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

The Gitmo Got Nothin'....

I don't know if the people who go on the Nancy Grace show get paid or not. But, I'm telling you, if in fact they do pay 'em, whatever it is that they pay 'em, it ain't even remotely enough. I mean, my God - have you seen this woman/lunatic? She has got to be the rudest person in the history of television. And it isn't just the analysts who take it on the chin, either. She treats the straight reporters like garbage, too. She even treats regular folks (who are already frigging nervous, mind you) shabbily. I'm personally surprised that anybody would be willing to go on the air and get a brow-beating like that. They must really like to be on the TV. That's the only thing that I can come up with........................................................................................P.S. Just for the record - even if there weren't any guests on her show, it would still be unwatchable. This, me-buckos, in that, yes, the woman's self-righteousness alone is enough to make me vomit. She literally thinks that she's this high-powered voice of virtue, a protectorate of the little folks, etc.. And I'm also telling you, folks, if I have to hear one more story about those twins of hers....(I obviously DO watch from time to time).

Sunday, October 25, 2009

Fuzzy Thinking All Around

To those of you who say that the Republicans have used a lot of scare tactics/misinformation in an effort to sink the President's health care agenda, I basically say, "fair point". When you go around using such terms as "death panels" and "government takeover, the overall discussion at the very least gets clouded. But, while I do think that, yes, we should put a damper on this type of lingo, I also think it's fair to point out some of the more legitimate criticisms of what the Dems are espousing..........................................................................................For instance, in the Baucus plan, there is a mandate that individuals /families procure health insurance....and, if they don't, they will be fined. The problem with this is that the fine is considerably less than the health insurance would cost. A lot of people may simply opt to pay the fine. AND, because the Baucus plan also outlaws preexisting clauses, they will simply wait until they get sick to get insurance. The end result could be only sick people seeking insurance. THAT would be totally unworkable..........................................................................................And, so, too, the fact that they're cutting half a trillion out of Medicare; reducing reimbursements to doctors, facilities, etc.. That as well would have repercussions. Doctors would either have to take a huge hit OR try and get it out of the rest of us (charge more and/or spend a lot less time per patient). Hell, folks, some doctors just might say screw it and no longer accept Medicare (as they are similarly doing with Medicaid NOW!) Then where in the hell would we be? I don't know, I really think they need to think this through a little more.

Friday, October 23, 2009

A Very Good Sport

I've never been a big fan of the University of Miami football program. First of all, the teams themselves were just so frigging dominant. This, I'm saying, in that from the late 70s (Jim Kelly's hey day) all the way to the early part of this decade (the Ken Dorsey era), Miami probably had the most dominant program of the era (5 national championships, almost always ranked in the top 20, etc.)...................................................................................But it wasn't just the program's success that bothered me. I didn't like the image of it, either. I don't know if you remember or not, but the 'Canes of that era had a major-league swagger to them - an arrogance, if you will. They also had a reputation for being thuggish/intimidating. And, yes, folks, one could clearly get the impression that the bulk of the players revelled in this bad boy status. I mean, it was almost impossible NOT to root against them................................................................................So, yeah, it does feel kind of weird that I'm actually rooting for Miami now. Why am I rooting for them? Three little words, folks - coach Randy Shannon................................................................................For those of you who don't know the man, coach Shannon was actually a player on one of those Miami teams; the 1987 national championship team in fact. But to say that this guy wasn't one of the typical Miami players is an understatement............................................................................................To make a long story short, Randy Shannon grew up in the most dire of circumstances. At the age of three (for instance), his father was murdered. At age ten, both of his brothers became addicted to crack cocaine (they later died). A few years later, his sister died of AIDS. And at age sixteen, Shannon himself fathered a child. But, instead of allowing these circumstances to destroy him forever, Shannon worked his way through high-school and was awarded a scholarship to play football at the University of Miami. Since then, he's had a brief NFL career, worked his way up the coaching profession, and, yes, presently coaches at his alma mater.....................................................................................How's he doing there? Well, after a little bit of a tough start, it appears that the Hurricanes are back. They're presently 5-1 and ranked 8th in the country. And, yes, folks, after they beat the Oklahoma Sooners a few weeks back, I'll admit it. I got a little lump in my throat.......................................................................................But it obviously isn't just results on the field that we're looking at. Shannon, instead of reconstituting that bad boy image of the 'Canes, has brought about some real perspective on campus. The first thing he did was to eliminate the players' names on the jerseys (a "there is no i in team" approach, obviously). But even more so than that, he's totally focused in on academics. If a player misses a class and/or his grades fall below a certain grade-point average, that player just doesn't play. And when he recruits a player, he talks to the family about basically everything. The only thing that he doesn't talk about? Yeah, you got it, football. That'll take care of itself, he figures....Go Canes.

Thursday, October 22, 2009

Worst Case Solution/Shittiest Case Scenario

The "hawks" are constantly telling us that if we prematurely leave Afghanistan, the Taliban will inevitably return to power there. They also tell us that if in fact this does happen, Al Qaeda will also return - and quickly..................................................................................Well, guess what, me-buckos, to this I stoutly say, FANTASTIC! I mean, think about it here. Wouldn't it be much better to have these frigging a-holes loose in Afghanistan - this, as opposed to Pakistan? This, I'm saying, in that that way we can blow their frigging brains out and not have to worry about near the number of repercussions...................................................................................And, really, folks, doesn't a rationale for such an open-ended commitment also come with a shit-load of presuppositions? First of all, the Taliban is thoroughly despised by a huge percentage of the Afghan people. They and the various factions of that country are hardly going to roll over and allow these mother-effers to dominate them. And even if the Taliban does reign supreme again, I'm not necessarily convinced that they're going to want to deal with Al Qaeda. One, they're already going to be war weary at that point and two, I also think that they're going to pretty much remember their previous association (how miserably that worked out for them, etc.) with them. I'm not so frigging sure that they're going to want to travel that road again. I mean, think about it. Who in their right mind wants to be blown to smithereens?....Well, you know what I mean.

The Thinner the Skin, The Bigger the Lap-Dog

I guess that Olbermann didn't like it when former President Bush (the elder) called him a "sick puppy". He actually decided to go on the offensive about it (never minding the fact that the former president was being critical of right-wing cable-hosts, too). Hell, Mr. Olbermann even went as far as to say that it was THIS former president who prompted this entire downward spiral of negative campaigning; the '88 campaign, the Willie Horton TV add, etc.................................................................................Now don't get me wrong here, folks. The '88 Bush Campaign probably WAS one of the nastier ones. The mere fact that it employed ramrods the calibre of Roger Ales and Lee Atwater is proof sufficient. But, for Olbermann to say that the '88 Bush campaign was the genesis of nasty/negative campaigning is ludicrous. Negative campaigning has been around for-frigging-ever. And it hasn't always been solely a Republican tactic, either. I mean, just look at the way that the left blugeoned Reagan (in 1980, especially). And what about the ad that the Johnson folks ran against Goldwater in '64 - a little girl picking daisies and a nuclear explosion goes off? The frigging Willie Horton ad ain't got nothing on that little ditty..................................................................................As for Mr. Olbermann himself, that blankety-blank is exactly like O'Reilly (how ironic, huh?), for Christ - a thin-skinned lunatic, in other words. It's like, what, he has to retaliate EVERY SINGLE TIME? My God! That, in my mind, is the very definition of thin-skinned/paranoid....And, plus, he's kind of creepy, too.

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

The High Cost of Relativity

As far as I know, there's only been one country in the history of contemporary warfare (the last 100 years or so) that HASN'T indiscriminately dropped bombs on an enemy's city (targeting civilians) in retaliation for that same action being done to them. And, yes, folks, believe it or not, that country is Israel..........................................................................................I mean, come on, think about it for a minute. The United States has done it. The British have done it. The Russians have done it. The French have done it. Obviously, the Germans did it in spades. Only Israel hasn't (they actually go out of their way to reduce civilian casualties - often opting for urban "operations" that are far, far, riskier for their own soldiers). But who in the hell is it that the world community constantly pisses upon? Yep, you got it.

Friday, October 16, 2009

The Six Hundred Pound Lemming

I'll admit it, folks. I've been giving Mr. O'Reilly a fair amount of credit lately. I mean, I've pretty much had to. This, in that, yes, the fellow has clearly been giving a much more balanced presentation these days (yes, especially when you compare him to some of the others at Fox). The only problem (well, maybe not the only one - the MAJOR one) is that he continues to to have this illusion that Fox News, as a whole, has been fair. So, no, in that regard, he hasn't changed a single iota....................................................................................Of course, what I find even more ludicrous is the fact that he's still using those same old talking-points of his, those flat-out distortions, etc.; "Fox has just as many liberals as conservatives", "The network is just as hard on Republicans as it is on Democrats", etc.. And the fact that rarely has a guest on that'll challenge him on it (even Fox's so-called "liberals" capitulate to him). Nobody, for instance, ever points out to him that only conservatives have star billing/their own shows. OR that most of the stories that they cover place liberals in a vulnerable spot, force them to go on the defense, etc.. And, yeah, what about all of those political "analysts"; Karl Rove, John Bolton, Dick Morris, etc.? - nobody challenges him on that stuff, either..................................................................................I don't know, folks, the entire thing seems a little too convenient to me. And as for Mr. O'Reilly himself, while, yes, he can be doltish at times, I would think that even he has to know (on some level, anyway) that this is utter nonsense. Either that, or he IS paranoid. Obviously that's a real possibility, too.

Thursday, October 15, 2009

Notable Oscar Snubs (Snubs, As in Not Even Being Nominated)

Jackie Gleason, "Requiem for a Heavyweight"........Burt Lancaster, "Sweet Smell of Success"........Montgomery Clift, "The Misfits"........Greta Garbo, "Queen Christina"........Edward G. Robinson, "Little Ceasar"........Henry Fonda, "Once Upon a Time in the West"........Vivien Leigh, "Waterloo Bridge"........Barbara Stanwyck, "The Lady Eve"........Carole Lombard, "Twentieth Century"........Joseph Cotten, "Shadow of a Doubt"..................................................................................And those are only the ones that I can think of. I'm sure that there are many, many more.

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

A Different Type of Matter

From Retch's perspective, just having seen that damn thing on her finger was poor. And the fact that it was frigging blooming, for Christ! I mean, hell, folks/truth be known, it was almost as if the sun had had its own frigging butt-crack opening floundering and stumbling kerplunkingly. Of course, for Retch to have had such a hankering for his own sniffer to sense it so/dutifully, you really do have to wonder about him, too. I sure as hades do.

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

She Clearly Vasn't Alone

To the casual classic movie aficionado, the 30s are (at least when it comes to analyzing female stars) basically a ten year slug-fest between the deep throated beauties, Garbo and Dietrich. And while certainly these two luminaries were indeed Hollywood's two biggest stars of that era (male OR female), to imply that there weren't other women closely nibbling at there heels is ludicrous.....................................................................................First there were in fact the established stars; Jean Arthur (Capra's personal favorite), Claudette Colbert (an Oscar winner), Irene Dunne (a five time Oscar nominee), Jean Harlow (not a great actress but definitely a star), Carol Lombard (the funniest lady this side of Lucy/Seinfeld's Elaine), Myrna Loy (shimmering in the "Thin Man" series), and, yes, most notably, Norma Shearer (MGM's first big female star/an Oscar winner/seven time Oscar nominee). Clearly these women competed strongly with Garbo and Dietrich. And, yes, me-buckos, when you add to that all of the fresh-faced up and comers; Joan Crawford, Bette Davis, Olivia DeHavilland, Kathryn Hepburn, Vivien Leigh, Barbara Stanwyck, etc., damned if it wasn't a golden-age and then some.......................................................................................Of course, what was even more amazing back then is that the women, in very many instances, were bigger than the men (bigger stars)....and often got the better billing, too. Reference Jean Arthur over Jimmy Stewart in "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington", Bette Davis over Henry Fonda in "Jezebel", Irene Dunne over Charles Boyer in "Love Affair", Greta Garbo over John Barrymore in "Grand Hotel", etc.. And the fact that the gals had so much longer careers back then - most of them maintaining star status well into their 40s-50s. Compare that to today when women (except for Meryl Streep, of course) get tossed aside at the initial sign of their FIRST wrinkle. Yikes, huh? So much for progress across the board.

Monday, October 12, 2009

A Voice of Occasional Reason

Can we have just a little love for Senator Graham here? I mean, I know that he tends to be a hawk and all....and that, yes, this is in fact troubling FOR A LOT OF US. But, please, I implore you, a trifle bit of credit perhaps?..........................................................................Think about it, folks. 1) He voted for Sotomayor. 2) He just got done giving Glenn Beck a beat-down. 3) He's currently working with Senator Kerry on a climate change bill. 4) He's generally been on the right side (in my opinion) of other key issues; torture, immigration, etc.. And 5) (perhaps #1 in a lot your opinions), Rush Limbaugh apparently can't stand him (Lindsey Grahamnesty, he calls him)...................................................................................So, while, no, I don't expect you (my liberal friends) to necessarily do cartwheels over the fellow, I don't think that a tip of the cap would hurt you big time, either. And, besides, President Obama needs all the help he can get....wherever he can get it.

Bloomberg in 2012

Just thinking out loud here - no biggie.

The War-Hero (Enemy) of My Draft-Dodger (Enemy) is My Friend

"Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican."....Ronald Reagan........"I find that very hard to adhere to where Chuck Hagel is involved."....Dick Cheney. Gee, Chuck Hagel or Dick Cheney, I wonder which one I would pick in the end....NOT!!!!!

Sunday, October 11, 2009

There's More to a Pulpy Mess Than Meets the Eye

It's a fact, folks. There were more Palestinians killed during the second intifada than Jews. The final tallies, I believe, were around 800 dead Israelis and 2,000 dead Palestinians. And while nobody that I know is disputing these numbers, a strong case could also be made regarding their deceptiveness. 1) The Palestinian figure includes (unfairly, in my opinion) the blown up bodies of suicide bombers themselves. 2) The Jewish number doesn't take into account the fact that many of the attempted terrorist plots were foiled. It's not like the Palestinians weren't trying to kill more than 800. 3) The Palestinian number is heightened by the fact that terrorists frequently use civilians as human shields/place their headquarters and/or bomb-making facilities in residential areas - shamelessly so, for Christ! 4) The Palestinian figure also includes civilians caught in the crossfire - even when it is totally unclear from which side the killing shot came. 5) The disparity between Israeli and Palestinian deaths is also a function of the differential way in which the two sides allocate health care. The Israelis immediately take their wounded to Israeli hospitals. The Palestinians, not having similar facilities on their side, refuse to do so (i.e., take their wounded to Israeli hospitals) - this, despite the fact that Israeli hospitals DO NOT DISCRIMINATE. It's absolutely beyond dispute that many of these 2,000 Palestinians could have been saved. The only thing preventing that was Palestinian hatred. I mean, how frigging sad is that, huh?.......................................................................................P.S. It also must be pointed out that the Palestinian Authority clearly had the capacity to improve the Palestinian health care system. This entity has been given approximately 6 billion in international aid over the years. Apparently, they've squandered this money on other "priorities".

Thursday, October 8, 2009

The Danger of Idiocy

I don't know about the rest of the states, but Connecticut has a law against hand-held cell-phone use while driving. And, yes, me-buckos, being that they now say that this irresponsible behavior is responsible for over 6,000 deaths per year, I for one support the law. The only problem is that the police apparently aren't enforcing it. I mean, just on my 5 mile ride to work alone, I see 8-10 of these idiots driving while talking on their damn cell-phones. And you know that a large chunk of them are probably texting, too. It's all damned extraordinarily aggravating, I think....................................................................................I mean, I know that we can't have a patrol car at every corner looking for drivers talking on cell-phones. But certainly we can do a lot better than what we've done so far. We should at least treat it as seriously as the seat-belt laws (laws through which we've clearly been successful in terms of changing behavior)......................................................................................How about this for a proposal? We 1) enforce the law and 2) put some frigging teeth into it; I don't know, how 'bout $500 for the first offense, $1,000 for the second offense, and, yes, a one year suspended licence for the third one. I mean, think about it here, folks. For something that the experts are now saying (the texting component, especially) is worse than drinking while driving, don't you think that we should start taking it seriously? I certainly do.......................................................................................P.S. For those of you who may in fact miss this strange form of idiocy, take heart/scurry on over to your neighborhood grocery store aisle. There's a man sized helping of it there, too.

Tuesday, October 6, 2009

A Glance at/from Evil

There have been countless scary movie scenes throughout the years. We're obviously all familiar with that shower scene from Hitchcock's, "Psycho"; Anthony Perkins hacking away (in drag, no less) at Janet Leigh, those close-up shots of blood running down the drain, etc.. And how about that image of Shelley Winters's dead body submerged in water - THIS, from the Charles Laughton masterpiece, "Night of the Hunter"? Of course, nobody, NOBODY, will ever forget that dreaded scene form Robert Aldrich's "Whatever Happened to Baby Jane". Yeah, that's right, the one where Betty Davis serves a dead, uncooked bird to her invalid sister (Joan Crawford). Yikes, huh?..................................................................................But, yes, folks, I'm also telling this. Sometimes a director doesn't need to go to such extremes to scare the crap out of you. I site, specifically, a scene from yet another Hitchcock classic, "Shadow of a Doubt" (supposedly the master's own personal favorite). It's that scene where the entire family is seated at the dinner table, Joseph Cotten going on and on about the worthlessness of the folks he despises. Teresa Wright (who had an absolutely bitching ass in the 40s, by the way - though, clearly, I digress), already suspicious that her uncle (the Joseph Cotten character) is probably a cold-blooded killer, challenges him, "How can you say that? They're human beings, they're alive!" And, yes, folks, this is where it gets really creepy, Joseph Cotten turns to her (and, yes, to us, too, as Hitchcock has him staring directly into the camera) and dryly utters, "They are?" I mean, talk about a shiver going directly up your spine. THAT....is a kisser that this fellow will never forget.

Monday, October 5, 2009

Wild Crony Chase

It's looking more and more like Mayor Daley owes the President of the United States an apology. At least from what I've been hearing, the so-called intelligence that the White House had gotten on this Olympic matter (i.e., that Chicago was running neck and neck with Rio/Madrid....and that, yes, a presidential visit would in fact get us over the hump) had come from none other than the mayor's office. And, yes, folks, being that this information was obviously bogus/the President himself was left with egg on his face, I truly think that the Mayor needs to show some accountability here. Of course, whether he needs to admit that he was lying or not (this, as opposed to his simply being wrong), that's something for him to come to grips with. Him, and whatever conscience the fellow has/hasn't.

Sunday, October 4, 2009

Same Old Song and Dunce

I've got good news and bad news for you University of Virginia football fans. The good news is that the team actually won a game. Better yet, they looked pretty impressive in doing so; winning 16-3 AT North Carolina. Unfortunately (and, yes, folks, this is the REAL bad news), they lost their best recruit. Yeah, that's right. Tyler Brosius, the number one high school quarterback in the state of North Carolina, has decided that he doesn't really want to play for the Cavaliers after all. No, it seems he'd rather play for N.C. State instead. And why the hell not? That's a program heading in the right direction....with a coach that isn't on the hot seat constantly. Seems like a reasonable move to me. You?....................................................................................P.S. As much as the Cavs' fans are going to be happy with the victory, this is a story-line that's becoming all too familiar. This, I'm saying, in that every time Coach Groh gets on the hot seat (believe me, it's hotter than hot right now - even WITH this victory), the team runs off a couple of victories and dogs get called off for a while. Well, let me tell you something. I don't think that that's going to work this time. Groh is STILL going to go. There isn't an athletic director alive (even UVA's brain-dead Craig Littlepage) that's going to extend this turkey's contract. Not this year....and certainly not next. Taps, anyone?

Friday, October 2, 2009

Relative Urgency

Let's see if gotten this straight here, folks. The previous president (a Republican) basically ignored Afghanistan for seven years. And THAT, evidently, WASN'T a problem - this, according to the Republicans in Congress/media conservatives? But now - now that the current president (a Democrat) wants to take a couple of weeks before he makes the biggest foreign policy decision of HIS young Presidency, delay is suddenly a big sign of weakness? Correct me if I'm wrong here, kids, but that sounds a little inconsistent................................................................................I mean, don't get me wrong here. The President absolutely HASN'T handled this perfectly. Like I've said in other posts, he's basically boxed himself into this nasty situation. But, really, for the right to be so constantly shooting buckshot at him, I don't know, I think we're really getting close to overkill.

Strange Weed-Fellows

My advice to Congresswoman Bachman is very, VERY, simple. Five little words; please don't talk so much. I mean, think about it, folks. Basically every time she opens her mouth, embarrassment follows her closely. And, yes, me-buckos, it also hurts the Republican Party. Not that I'm exactly rooting for the Republicans, mind you. But, seriously here, don't you think we'd be better off with two strong parties from which to choose from. Me - I'd personally like to see more than two - but at least two!..............................................................................And I'm also asking you to examine it from this angle. The more that this woman idiotically spouts and drivels shamelessly like this, the more we also have to listen to blowhards like Keith Olbermann, THEIR over-the-top outrage, etc.. And I don't know about you folks, but I'm really starting to get fatigued with that, too (all of those "special comments", especially)..................................................................................P.S. It should also be stated that factions such as this have a tendency to need each other. I mean, think about it here. The more stupid things that Bachman utters, the better it is for Olbermann, ratings-wise. And, conversely, the more that Olbermann rails against this poor bastard, the better it is for her, publicity-wise (criticism from Olbermann is probably a badge of honor on the right). So, yes, folks, it is kind of Jacobean, at times. Oh hell, they're probably getting it on (perversely, of course), too. This, for all that we frigging know.

Thursday, October 1, 2009

Tricky is Right!

I'd have to say that most presidents would probably fall into that general category of "fascinating". Some (FDR, JFK, Clinton) undoubtedly are far more fascinating than others (Ford, Carter, Coolidge). But, yes, all of these fellows are, to a certain degree, "subjects"/"case studies"............................................................................But, I'm also telling you here, there isn't a single one of those other 42 (don't forget, Cleveland x2) that even compares to Nixon. I mean, think about it, folks. This fellow had nothing but utter disdain for his vice president. But, still, he kept that poor bastard around ("if they keep going after him, then maybe they WON'T go after me, evidently the reasoning). He would also constantly refer to his secretary of state as a "dirty Jew". But, yes, when he needed somebody to pray with him, who did he turn toward (pray with me, Henry, pray with me) BUT THIS DIRTY JEW. He spent the bulk of his adult life Commy baiting - only to, when he finally did become president, work with the Soviet Union AND China. He constantly spoke in bellicose/narrow-minded terms. But, during his years in the White House, he governed there as liberally as any president of the 20th Century. Talk about a contradictory fellow, huh? And, no, folks, I haven't even touched on the paranoia yet. That, I'm afraid to say, will have to wait for another day.