Your Turn: The Week In Carolina (or: Always The Cheerleader)

I see the school disciplinarian scanning the assembly, checking out who’s naughty and nice, reading glasses locked and loaded to cross-verify actual seating with the assigned seating chart in his lap. Behave, that look says, or you’ll be pounding erasers in detention when everyone else is going home.

Dunno — it may be too facile, but I see an aging man looking wistfully at a bunch of young women on display.

I see the attack dog. I loved Bill as president but am so irritated with him right now. Hillary should be at this event with Bill, not covering two states at the same time. I see someone running for president again and that bothers me.

To characterize Toni Morrison’s labeling of Bill Clinton as the “first black president” as affectionate is to completely misunderstand the point of her article.
http://ontology.buffalo.edu/smith/clinton/morrison.html

He’s very absorbed in those women. The glasses look is sharp. Haven’t seen that before. Calling him the first black president is the biggest fairy tale I have ever heard. It’s outrageous. Give me a break, etc….

To characterize Bill Clinton as the first ‘black president’, was to misunderstand Morrison, as Trada points out, and then have the MSM run with it because it was, and remained, a very easy narrative to shove down America’s throat. And it came, I would argue, with a very, very, subtle hint at racism…i.e. as the story was often played out: “yeah, and the brother fucked up too…got caught with his pants down.” His near fall somehow seen as endearing to blacks. Much of this portrayed by whites in MSM, about as familiar with blacks, as I am with the wind velocity on a yet unnamed star. Fast forward to now…
Now we have “angry Bill….his face is even red!”. “Jealous Bill” (he wants the spotlight) brought by the same MSM. “arrogant Bill” (he wants to be running for President himself) We are being played people, once again, by the MSM. They are creating a narrative that has grains of truth to it—-this is what the hell happens in campaigns—-and then the magic of 24/7 news needs, and the equally magically ability of unorginal people to run with the popular narrative, people are buying it. Both are good candidates. As is Edwards. Bill Clinton has a brain. He will be helpful to Hillary. As she was to him. They are a team and have always been a team. As, it appears Obama and his wife are, though I know them a much shorter time, and then, only through the media. She seems like a bright and down to earth woman, who appears as sharp as a nail to me. Good…let her help Obama. Either one gets the nomination, I am with them a 100%. The GOP talking points, and the corporate media, are not gonna cleave me from supporting the nominee. I know they are not perfect…the candidates that is. But I am geared to be an infenstestial part of a fist that delivers a knockout blow (Hoover type defeat)on the BushCo bastards. And for the record…I don’t have a clue who, or what, he is looking. To say nothing of having a clue as to what he is thinking. And Johanna, if calling him a “black president” is the “biggest fairy tale” you have ever heard……you have a lived a sheltered life.

To follow up Johanna’s comment, one reason I think this image takes Bubba downtown has to do with a background reference to the candidate’s spouse as having more of a “cheerleader” role. This shot frames Clinton (if not looking at “us,” his gaze seems to line up almost directly with the breasts of the center cheerleader) as potentially ogling one instead.
I should add, I don’t mean to be that completely literally. Instead, the point I’m making is that, by even remotely evoking Clinton’s “Lewinsky” side (paired with that hard glare, and the fact he is clearly of sync with the audience), the feeling is there that Bill’s character problems are evident in the way he’s conducting himself in this campaign right now, and it’s right there to see.

The expression on Bill’s face is priceless: the old lecher remembering his salad days. I’m sure the MSM likes this because it reminds one and all of Monica/”is”/impeachment and Hillary’s humiliation. That’s why it was published. Don’t think we need to ask the editor on this one.
But I also think that his lack of judgment in those days is being reflected by his lack of judgment today in the way he is conducting himself on the campaign trail. It’s bordering on the line between ridiculous and obscene. And the MSM can be counted on to blow up all the little tiffs because they don’t want anyone to notice that Edwards is also running for the title. I’m not saying that Obama and Hillary aren’t doing their part to give them ammunition, and maybe that is the plan……they don’t want Kucinich or Edwards mucking up their nice campaigns. I also think that one of the things that irritates people about Hillary is that when she started she acted like she was, of course, entitled to this nomination by the democrats. It’s beginning to look like Bill agrees, and that just reinforces the former.

We are not “being played” by the media when they report on Clinton’s purple rages (once so called by Stephanopolous). This was a formerly SAT ON, underreported fact of his behavior that is now more openly acknowledged by the press. The finger pointing, the laying into people so far below him in power and wealth, is just such an ugly form of behavior it can’t be completely ignored.

I just wish both of the Clintons would go someplace for a long vacation and let us have the opportunity to forget about how vulgar they both are. I am so ready for someone decent to be President, whether Edwards, my first choice, or Obama.

Yes, Johanna, we are being played. The guy has a temper. So what? You ever really listen to how silly and adolescent like Stephanopolous is? Who can imagine what he thinks a rage is? Words here are useless. You think we are not being played. I think we are. Nothing more to say on my end.

Excuses are always made for his behavior. You say “temper”, I say consistently angry person who takes it out on the little guy. I thought you might say he was “passionate.” That’s the excuse word of the moment, not temper.

Mr. Obama has been literally shadowed by Mr. Clinton, as the presidential candidate moves from place -to- place (either the next day, or even the same day) as the ex-president assumes the rôle of counter-puncher : we presume, “to keep his wife = The Candidate ‘presidential‘; ie. ‘above the fray’ of politics.”
Mr. Obama would have been clever, indeed ~ to set up his wife, Mrs. Michelle Obama, as the perfect foil; ie., in the rôle of counter-Bubba ~ rather than engaging the ex-president himself {grin} This FRAME would reveal = lower Mr. Clinton to mere spouse… He would be seen as wasting his energy and esteem in what would then be perceived by the public/electorate as nothing more important than a spat between two presidential candidate spouses.
Such a strategy would also pit Mr. Clinton = male -vs- Mrs. Obama = female, and would likely peel off blind ‘gender identity’ voters for Hillary, as more and more women then recall what a sexist pig = woman unfriendly, weak-willed man this spouse of a strong-willed woman, is

Would that Gonzo had been Obama’s strategist. Lowering Clinton to the role of spouse — perfect. Of course he should have had Mrs. O engage Clinton.

http://www.coachoutletstoresonline-us.com
http://www.coachfactory-storeonlines.net
http://www.coachfactorysoutletsonline.com
http://www.burberryscarfs-2012.com
http://www.coachsfactory-outlets.net