Clarence Page's CHICAGO TRIBUNE column carries the headline "Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump? Who's least bad?," Vic Rosenthal's JEWISH PRESS column is entitled "The Crook vs. the Demagogue," on and on it goes.
How did we get to this point?
There's a lot of blame to go around.
With regards to Republican nominee Donald Trump, the media loves to sneer at him but they created him.
And we don't just mean this campaign cycle, we mean they spent the last 20 or so years creating him.
Because he's not just a business person, he's a 'reality' star.
Kim Kardashian has no talent.
She's not a singer.
She's not an actress.
Despite multiple photo shoots, she's not even a model -- nor could she be at her height.
It started with the Loud family on PBS in the 70s -- a creepy group of people willing to dish and presented as though the product was art or a documentary.
It was a tawdry soap opera and, as it ended, enough people felt guilty about the trash that was aired that no one proposed doing it again.
Then came MTV's greed.
Not content to corner a market and air music videos, it wanted to be on TV listings and wanted to do so without spending much money.
So they resurrected the shame that was the Loud family only they called it THE REAL WORLD.
And people pretended like it was (a) programming and (b) real.
It was neither.
But if birthed the genre.
Soon the shame that should have followed a sex tape was replaced with 'reality' 'stardom' (see Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian).
This crap was treated as entertainment when the media should have collectively shunned it and shamed it.
Not only that, they rushed to award Emmys for this garbage.
It wasn't entertainment, it was cheap programming.
And after years of playing footsie, idiots in the media thought they could now take Donald Trump out as a political candidate by shaming him when the point of 'reality' 'stardom' is that it can only be found by being outrageous.
Pulling weaves, throwing drinks, making rude and insulting remarks, drama trauma, it's how you achieved stardom in that trash genre.
That same trash genre that made Donald a star.
Yes, SOUTHPARK objected to the 'lowering of the bar' in an episode but most others ignored the lowering of standards.
Now they think they can clutch the pearls over Donald, over a decade after reality TV made him a star?
They think Donald saying something outrageous harms him, all the while failing to grasp it took Mama June dating a pedophile to put the stake in HERE COMES HONEY BOO BOO.
Let's move over to Hillary.
She's worse than a 'reality' 'star,' she's a tabloid star.
Did she shame Vince Foster into suicide?
It's a question that's plagued her since the 90s and the alleged disappearance of documents this week led, of course, to the tired and faded ESQUIRE pretending it was the 90s again and rushing in to a defense of Hillary -- like all the defenses, it doesn't really defend her because it can't, so instead it tries to muddy the charges.
For those who didn't live through the 90s,, it was a nightmare.
We were all expected to line up on one side or the other.
You either charged Hillary and Bill with crimes or you attacked the ones raising issues/charges.
And if you tried to remain above the fray, you were attacked for that.
The Clintons' tawdry and low class (and no class) ways generated one scandal after another.
That alone should have prevented her from ever running for the White House.
It appears she's wrongly been given a pass for 'speaking the truth' on a morning show.
But she didn't speak the truth.
She lied.
Bill has a cheap affair with Monica Lewinsky in the White House and Hillary charges onto NBC's THE TODAY SHOW to claim it's all part of a "vast right-wing conspiracy."
And hacks like Paul Krugman and Joe Conason and the laughable Gene Lyons rewrite history as: Hillary was right!!!!
She was not just wrong, she was lying.
LAUER: But we appreciate you honoring the commitment, even in light of recent events. So thank you very much. There has been one question on the minds of people in this country, Mrs. Clinton, lately, and that is what is the exact nature of the relationship between your husband and Monica Lewinsky. Has he described that relationship in detail to you?
CLINTON: Well, we’ve talked at great length, and I think as this matter unfolds, the entire country will have more information. But we’re right in the middle of a rather vigorous feeding frenzy right now. And people are saying all kinds of things, and putting out rumor and innuendo. And I have learned over the last many years, being involved in politics, and especially since my husband first started running for president, that the best thing to do in these cases is just to be patient, take a deep breath and the truth will come out. But there’s nothing we can do to fight this fire storm of allegations that are out there.
LAUER: But he has described to the American people what this relationship was not in his words.
[This was when Bill was publicly stated he has no had 'sexual relations' with Monica.]
CLINTON: Right.
LAUER: Has he described to you what it was?
CLINTON: Yes. And we’ll find that out as time goes by, Matt. But I think the important thing now is to stand as firmly as I can and say that, you know, the president has denied these allegations on all counts, unequivocally. And we’ll see how this plays out. I guess everybody says to me, how can you be so calm? Or how can you just, you know, look like you’re not upset? And I guess I’ve just been through it so many times. I mean, Bill and I have been accused of everything, including murder, by some of the very same people who are behind these allegations. So from my perspective, this is part of the continuing political campaign against my husband.
LAUER: To the best of your knowledge, Mrs. Clinton, has your husband ever given or received gifts from or to Monica Lewinsky?
CLINTON: I’m not going to comment on any specific allegation, because I’ve learned we need to put all of this into context. And it will be put into context. And anyone who knows my husband knows that he is an extremely generous person to people he knows, to strangers, to anybody who is around him. And I think that, you know, his behavior, his treatment of people will certainly explain all of this.
LAUER: When you say he’s a generous person, so it is possible that he has given gifts to Monica Lewinsky?
CLINTON: I think it’s possible, of course, because if you know my husband, you know that he is somebody who will, you know, say, how would you like this. I mean, I’ve seen him take his tie off and hand it to somebody.
LAUER: So that wouldn’t be a behavior that would be unusual for him dealing with an intern at the White House?
CLINTON: Dealing with anybody, Matt. I mean, seriously, I have known my husband for more than 25 years, and we’ve been married for 22 years. And the one thing I always kid him about is that he never meets a stranger. He is kind. He is friendly. He tries to help people who need help, who ask for help. So I think that everybody ought to just stop a minute here and think about what we’re doing. And it’s not just what we’re doing in terms of making these accusations against my husband. But I’m very concerned about the tactics being used and the kind of intense political agenda at work here.
LAUER: I want to talk about Kenneth Starr in a second. Before I get to him, let me just ask you, do you know Monica Lewinsky?
CLINTON: No.
LAUER: You’ve never met her?
CLINTON: I may have. You know, there are hundreds and hundreds of young people who serve as interns, and we have big events for them. We take pictures with them. But unless they work directly in my office, I’m not likely to meet them.
LAUER: Did Evelyn Lieberman, the former deputy chief of staff, or any other White House staffers, Mrs. Clinton, ever come to you and say, we may have a problem with one of the interns at the White House, and mention Monica Lewinsky by name?
CLINTON: No, that never happened.
LAUER: So these charges came as big a shock to you as anyone?
CLINTON: And to my husband. I mean, he woke me up Wednesday morning and said, you’re not going to believe this, but—and I said, “What is this?” So yes, it came as a very big surprise.
LAUER: When he said “but,” he said “but” what?
CLINTON: But I want to tell you what’s in the newspapers.
LAUER: I think the part of this that makes certain people across the country uneasy is that we have a 21-year-old intern at the White House who moves to the Pentagon, who then gets a job interview at the UN with Bill Richardson himself. And then a very dear friend of your husband, Vernon Jordan, recommends her for two jobs in this city here in New York and then drives her personally to a lawyer’s office when she’s subpoenaed by Kenneth Starr. Does it not appear, though, that this intern had more clout in Washington than most others do?
CLINTON: I don’t know the circumstances of any of that, Matt. I think that—you know, I just can’t describe to you how outgoing and friendly Vernon Jordan is. I mean, when he stood up and said what I believe to be the absolute truth, that he has helped literally hundreds of people—and it doesn’t matter who they are. And if he were asked to help somebody, he would help that person. I’ve seen him do it countless times. So I guess I know the people involved. I know them personally. I know them well. I’ve known Vernon longer than I’ve known my husband.
LAUER: So when people say there’s a lot of smoke here, your message is where there’s smoke...
CLINTON: There isn’t any fire, because think of what we’ve been through for the last six years and think of everything we’ve been accused of. And you know, initially, when this first started, and I would be accused of something or my husband would be accused of something, I would be really upset. And I would want to rush out, and I’d say, that’s not true. And then somebody would nit pick and say, well, what about this? I would say, well, I hadn’t thought about that. And then I’d rush around, I’d say, well, that’s not true.
LAUER: Are you saying that you no longer—this doesn’t upset you anymore? You’re almost numb to it?
CLINTON: It’s not being numb so much as just being very experienced in the unfortunate, mean-spirited give-and-take of American politics right now. So having seen so many of these accusations come and go, having seen people profit, you know, like Jerry Falwell, with videos, accusing my husband of murder, of drug running, seeing some of the things that are written and said about him, my attitude is, you know, we’ve been there before, we have seen this before. And I am just going to wait patiently until the truth comes out.
LAUER: So if what you have heard is something you can believe and if what the president has told the nation is the whole truth and nothing but the truth, then you’d have to agree that this is the worst and most damaging smear of the 20th century?
CLINTON: Well, I don’t know. There have been a lot of smears in the 20th century. But it’s a pretty bad one.
LAUER: Pretty devastating.
CLINTON: Well, just think about it, and this is what concerns me: This started out as an investigation of a failed land deal. I told everybody in 1992, we lost money. People said, it’s not true. You know, they made money. They have money in a Swiss bank account. Well, it was true. It’s taken years, but it was true. We get a politically motivated prosecutor who is allied with the right-wing opponents of my husband, who has literally spent four years looking at every telephone...
LAUER: And thirty million dollars.
CLINTON: More than that now. But looking at every telephone call we’ve made, every check we’ve ever written, scratching for dirt, intimidating witnesses, doing everything possible to try to make some kind of accusation against my husband.
LAUER: We’re talking about Kenneth Starr, so let’s use his name, because he is the independent counsel.
CLINTON: Well, we’re talking about—but it’s the whole operation. It’s not just one person. It’s an entire operation.
LAUER: Did he go outside his rights, in your opinion, to expand this investigation? After all, he got permission to expand the investigation from a three-judge panel?
CLINTON: The same three-judge panel that removed Robert Fisk and appointed him, the same three-judge panel that is headed by someone who was appointed by Jesse Helms and Lauch Faircloth.
LAUER: Also Janet Reno approved this expansion of an investigation?
CLINTON: Well, of course, she is, because she doesn’t want to appear as though she’s interfering with the investigation. I don’t—look, I’m not going to take all that on, because I’ve learned that we just have to ride this out. It’s just a very unfortunate turn of events that we are using the criminal justice system to try to achieve political ends in this country. And you know, when I’m here today, I’m not only here because I love and believe my husband. I’m also here because I love and believe in my country. And if I were just a citizen out there, maybe because I know about the law and I have some idea of some of the motivations here, I would be very disturbed by this turn of events.
LAUER: When—the last time we visited a subject like this involving your family was 1992, and the name Gennifer Flowers was in the news. And you said at that time in an interview a very famous quote, “I’m not some Tammy Wynette standing by my man.” In the same interview your husband admitted that he had, quote, “caused pain in your marriage.” Six years later you are still standing by this man, your husband, through some difficult charges. If he were to be asked today, Mrs. Clinton, do you think he would admit that he again has caused pain in this marriage?
CLINTON: No, absolutely not. And he shouldn’t. You know, we’ve been married for 22 years, Matt. And I have learned a long time ago that the only people who count in any marriage are the two that are in it. We know everything there is to know about each other, and we understand and accept and love each other. And I just think that a lot of this is deliberately designed to sensationalize charges against my husband, because everything else they’ve tried has failed. And I also believe that it’s part of an effort, very frankly, to undo the results of two elections.
LAUER: Let me talk about your role. There have been reports that you’ve taken charge at the White House and decided to be the chief defender of your husband, of the president, and deflect these charges. How much of a role are you taking in this and do you think you should take?
CLINTON: Well, I certainly am going to defend my husband. And I’m certainly going to offer advice. But I am by no means running any kind of strategy or being his chief defender. He’s got very capable lawyers and very capable people inside the White House, and a lot of very good friends outside the White House.
LAUER: But you’re probably the most credible defender of the president at this time?
CLINTON: Well, I probably know him better than anybody alive in the world. So I would hope I’d be the most credible defender.
LAUER: James Carville, who you know...
CLINTON: Great human being...
LAUER: I’m sure you like him, especially at this time. He has said this is war between the president and Kenneth Starr. You have said, I understand, to some close friends that this is the last great battle and that one side or the other is going down here.
CLINTON: Well, I don’t know if I’ve been that dramatic. That would sound like a good line from a movie. But I do believe that this is a battle. I mean, look at the very people who are involved in this. They have popped up in other settings. This is—the great story here for anybody willing to find it and write about it and explain it is this vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for president. A few journalists have kind of caught on to it and explained it. But it has not yet been fully revealed to the American public. And actually, you know, in a bizarre sort of way, this may do it.
Yes, Hillary did speak of a "vast right-wing conspiracy."
She used that as she explained to the American people and Matt Lauer that her husband had not had sex with Monica Lewinsky.
Of course, he had.
And this tawdry and cheap life that the Clintons led in DC led to them being referred to as "hicks from the sticks" and accused of turning the White House into an episode of HEE-HAW.
The moment that should really follow Hillary from that 90s exchange is this:
LAUER: I think the part of this that makes certain people across the country uneasy is that we have a 21-year-old intern at the White House who moves to the Pentagon, who then gets a job interview at the UN with Bill Richardson himself. And then a very dear friend of your husband, Vernon Jordan, recommends her for two jobs in this city here in New York and then drives her personally to a lawyer’s office when she’s subpoenaed by Kenneth Starr. Does it not appear, though, that this intern had more clout in Washington than most others do?
CLINTON: I don’t know the circumstances of any of that, Matt. I think that—you know, I just can’t describe to you how outgoing and friendly Vernon Jordan is. I mean, when he stood up and said what I believe to be the absolute truth, that he has helped literally hundreds of people—and it doesn’t matter who they are. And if he were asked to help somebody, he would help that person. I’ve seen him do it countless times. So I guess I know the people involved. I know them personally. I know them well. I’ve known Vernon longer than I’ve known my husband.
That minute has played out over and over in 2016 as Hillary's sat opposite one talking head after another. Most recently, it played out Friday on MSNBC's MORNING JOE:
BRZEZINSKI: If a Republican candidate who was actually credible was running against you and served as secretary of state and ran a foundation that took donations from foreign entities, wouldn't you be criticizing him or her for a conflict of interest? And, in retrospect, was that a good idea, if you're not going to be doing it, in some cases, as president?
CLINTON: Mika, I would not be criticizing. I would be looking at the work. And if there were no evidence — and, you know people can say whatever they want; I understand that — but if there were no evidence that there was any conflict, I would say, "Look, I appreciate the work that they did to help 11.5 million people around the world get more affordable medicines, and I appreciate the work that was done to help more people make a living and get a job and help American kids battle obesity and get better foods." I would appreciate that.
She continues to lie like that.
She continues to because the media fails to call her out.
The media never did their job.
And Clinton and Trump signify something else: The decay and the rot.
Gale Anne Hurd always makes us laugh.
Like when she's on her anti-piracy kick that she started around 2013.
Gale's over THE WALKING DEAD and FEAR OF THE WALKING DEAD -- AMC's faded garbage about zombies.
Gale claims that piracy is preventing her from having all the pennies in the world for the trash she foists off on people.
Reality: Piracy gave her tired show 'cred' it never deserved.
And it never deserved to be on the air.
Nor does Keifer Sutherland's upcoming ABC show.
Or half the crap -- depressing and disgusting and depraved -- that's covered the airwaves in the last ten years.
We're not 'moralists.'
We don't give a damn about cursing on screen, we could care less about sex or any other life affirming act.
We do care about depravity presented as normal.
HANNIBAL never belonged on TV.
Half the crap that's aired in the last ten years on network television had degraded the world.
It has done so by glorifying violence and by treating things that are grossly offensive as though they are normal.
Gale Ann Hurd has been among those selling eternal fear.
It is any real surprise that a culture that has embraced one dystopia narrative after another would end up with Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump as presidential candidates?
Entertainment has spent approximately ten years now preaching death and destruction.
On TV alone, we've had JERICHO, LAST MAN ON EARTH, THE 100, REVOLUTION, 12 MONKEYS, CONTAINMENT, THE MESSENGER, Z NATION, INTO THE BADLANDS, THE LAST SHIP, FALLING SKIES, UNDER THE DOME, COLONY . . .
Why even THE CARTOON NETWORK's ADVENTURE TIME takes place in a post-nuclear war world.
You think that doesn't impact society?
"What if all that we are is simply the result of what we have thought?"
That is one of the questions Shirley MacLaine raises in WHAT IF . . . A LIFETIME OF QUESTIONS, SPECULATIONS, REASONABLE GUESSES, AND A FEW THINGS I KNOW FOR SURE.
"What if all that we are is simply the result of what we have thought?"
And that probably, more than anything else, explains how the United States has arrived at this moment where the duopoly has promoted two candidates who still can't, even after winning their primaries, promote hope.
Clinton tears down Trump -- and in the process, the Americans who support him. He turns around and does the same to her and those that support her.
And this failure of leadership in campaigning does not translate well into what leadership in office for either might actually mean.
But at this point, even aspirations and dreams served up by either candidate would be met with skepticism.
That's due to the 2008 campaign of Barack Obama which promised so much but delivered nothing.
Universal healthcare?
The country still waits as ObamaCare repeatedly reveals itself to be a disaster.
John Stauber
None of @TheDemocrats dare admit #Obamacare was always a scam and now is a dying failure. US needs #singlepayer.
The country still waits for Barack to end the Iraq War -- the one he promised would be ended 10 months after taking office.
The country watches as the Afghanistan War continues -- with another US service member killed in it last week.
The country still waits for Barack to close Guantanamo Bay's prison as he promised to do in his 2008 campaign.
Last week, White House press spokesperson Josh Earnest stumbled trying to come up with an answer for how Barack could close the prison now in the few months Barack has left as president. As he failed to offer anything concrete, it was pointed out that Democrats controlled the House and the Senate during the first two years of Barack's presidency and a reporter wondered why it was done then?
It's the question many Americans ask.
And they wonder why Barack spoke out against The PATRIOT Act only to demand its renewal when it was the president.
And they question why Barack called out illegal spying when he was a US senator but increased it when he became a president.
There's so much blame to go around for arriving at this moment in time when universal suffrage turned into universal suffering. No wonder so many are considering the campaigns of Jill Stein (Green Party presidential candidate), Gary Johnson (Libertarian Party presidential nominee), Jerry White (Socialist and Equality Party nominee) and Gloria La Riva (Peace and Freedom Party Candidate).
No wonder at all.
