From the "Oh For Pete's Sake, Can We Just Hang These Idiots Right Now?" Department:

Here is Krauthammer (I believe a Washington columnist) on the Clinton's Presidency:

"This is no Teflon presidency. This is Velcro. Everything sticks to this man -- Flowers and Jones, Whitewater and Filegate. But it does not matter. Expectations of presidential character have fallen so low with Clinton that the people can believe the worst about him and still want him where he is."

Perhaps Krauthammer thinks so. Obviously, since he is using trendy words like teflon and velcro to make his otherwise slippery point. But who are the people Krauthammer is talking about? Certainly not people like me. He must actually believe all the polls that have been taken recently. Personally, I will vote for anyone in the wide world--Zhironovsky, Kahlil Gibran, Dwight Smuck, even a respectable space alien who might not be quite as slimy, before I will ever vote for Clinton.

Clearly, the media (think petri dish and smell formeldahyde and you'll sense the beginning of my opinion of these "people") think that if they repeat this kind of thing time and again, and then call up doorknobs, landfills, and baseball bats and ask them tricky questions, and call that "scientific opinion polls" and repeat the results ad nauseum, that they can then glibly say these things in public without getting hanged from telephone poles at the very opening of their lips.

I'm not so sure they are correct in their assumption. Not with my temper working the way it is. And I think the nation's temper as well.

I don't even blame most of the country's problems on politicans anymore. Personally, I think we need to put the night-vision and the microscope onto this "media" and see what makes their tails waggle and their pocketbooks gape and swallow and their lips swivel the way they do. Could it be that Forked Tongue Disease has hit hard all over? What makes these people tell us the tales they do?

What, after all, are these "scientific polls" that give Krauthammer the absolute gall to say that we don't care about what this means to us? How dare he imply that we as a people do not care about character? It is obvious that the media doesn't, but the media's fine and dandy opinion of themselves is shared only by themselves. The issue is not so much that this president is so much worse than any other--even though he is. We have had more honest presidents in the White House before--Nixon, for example--and we can all tell the difference. This particular president would NOT have even made it to the White House without his "media" to float him in--think of the most polluted water you've ever seen, and you'll see what I think about this. Using polls, the media sold us this Clinton presidency. They're still selling him.

It isn't even this columnist that has gotten me so riled, except for his public stupidity in saying that we don't give a damn about honesty and character. What is giving me this fit of snit is the buildup of this kind of trash passing as "objective journalism" or "ethical journalistic opinion." As far as I can tell, their "science" of "polling" is significantly less scientific than the science of falling over dead drunk on the floor. The results obtained in media polling proves my point: "the people can believe the worst about him and still want him where he is." Who does Krauthammer and other cheesemongers like him think they're kidding? The Russians? The Aliens? The Baseball Bats?

For pete's sake, the conventions--where supposedly the candidates are picked--haven't even occured yet. Although the media have obviously picked their golden boys. Who are these Clintons and Doles? They are not even the candidates of their respective parties yet! And their respective parties had better take a BIG CLUE from the clue box that I, for one, am not going to have anything to do with either of these creatures. Not now, not ever.

Horsemalarky!

I'm going to bed. Better wake me up gently in the morning.

July 10, 1996

© Patricia Neill, 1997

---