The Sound of Sanctimony. How Dare You, Bill.
Fri Oct 26, 2007 at 10:23:00 PM PDT
Hi there. This is my first diary. I had no idea that my first diary would be all about how I don't like the Clintons anymore, but that's just how it is. I'm sick of the way Hilary was ushered by the press (from the beginning) into "inevitability" status, I'm sick of Hillary's Oprah shtick, I'm sick of her lack of leadership on all issues, especially foreign policy, the environment, and healthcare, I'm sick of the way they shill for big business, and I'm sick, most of all, of their sanctimonious tone. They weren't always like this, but I suppose this is now the end-product of being slandered, smeared, and abused in many other morbid and depraved ways by the Grand Wizard Party for nearly two decades. The Republicans' intention was to systematically destroy them, and to an extent I now think they've succeeded: The Clintons just aren't nice to Americans all the time anymore.
Just after I rolled into work this morning, I performed my usual routine of skimming all the blogs. I ran across this on huffpo:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
"A fraud? No, it wasn't a fraud," Clinton said, responding to one of the hecklers as the audience cheered. "I'll be glad to talk to you if you shut up and let me talk." Another protester yelled that the attacks were an "inside job."
"An inside job? How dare you. How dare you. It was not an inside job," Clinton said. "You guys have got to be careful, you're going to give Minnesota a bad reputation."
I'm disappointed in President Clinton. I never thought I'd hear him say "How dare you" to people who were excersizing their first amendment rights, even if they were rude and/or acting crazy. If these people really think that their government conspired to murder over three thousand Americans in order to flush us down into an authoritarian upside-down nightmare world, does anyone really need to ask them how they could possibly dare to be panicked enough to voice their concern? Is it a surprise that they're in a bit of a frenzy, considering what they believe?
The correct response would probably have been more like "I think you folks might want to calm down," or "It's terribly unfortunate that you believe that. I can understand why thinking these things would cause you to act like this [I feel your pain], but your beliefs are unfounded, and you're being suckered," while waiting for the goons to drag them away. That would have been a nice opportunity to talk about how Republican rule has lead us to this or something. The President's joke-making at their expense, after they were dragged away, wasn't even funny. From the way the article was written, it looks as if he poked fun at them before they were removed, but the video makes it seem like he was making light of them during or after they were gone. Either way, it just belittled them as people, rather than belitting their point of view or just specifically their form of conduct. He wasn't speaking to them as equal humans. He was being weak, which is the opposite of how he perceived himself at the time, I'm sure. Maybe he just doesn't realize that even though he's a former President, being on the edge of getting into the Whitehouse again and saying "How dare you" in such grave tones to American citizens kinda rings of authoritarianism and sounds more like a Republican's behavior, rather than the Bill Clinton of yore.
I can't expect anyone to be perfect; to be on their game at all times, but I expected more from Bill. He was my President when I was growing up. He turned the world around me more beautiful and prosperous. He was an enlightened, eloquent leader (the first and only during my lifetime), and most of all he seemed to really understand people. But his current santimony irks me, even if I can see how I'd also probably behave like that, or worse, if I'd been in politics when and where and for how long he was. It reminds me of that time Hillary was at a town hall meeting and brushed off a question for not being framed right or something.
All of her campaign has been soulless artifice. I don't care how successful it seems. It's nausiating, seeing her spew her own piety at the debates, talking down from on high about what people running for President should and should not be careful about what to say (who made her the judge?), and claiming that there's no way any campaign contributions from insurance companies could ever influence her decision making, even though her plans seem to include them making more money. How dare you imply she'd take a bribe? Sanctimony is a common facade for disingenuous people.
I'm pretty sure that most people (including me) think that the 9-11 conspiracy theorists are kinda crazy. But I will say this for them: their view of the world is more realistic and less destructive than the people who think Saddam Hussein carried out the 9-11 attacks, and the people who voted to give George Bush authorization to attack Iraq, and the people who are currently helping to pave a very bumpy road into Iran.
The Clintons might need a break from Washington. Look at what exile did for Al Gore.
(updated to fix a spelling error. thank you, arodb!)
