--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradh...@...> wrote: > > Paglia nails it again. Great article. <snip>
If she > gets as little traction in world affairs as > Condoleezza Rice has, Hillary will be flushed > down the rabbit hole with her feckless husband > and effectively neutralized as a future > presidential contender. If that's Obama's clever > plan, is it worth the gamble? The amusing thing about Paglia and her Obama- idolizing, Clinton-hating fans is that in order to continue to demean Hillary as an uncredentialed, incompetent drama queen, they are automatically demeaning Obama as well for having chosen her for SOS. This is an example of "cognitive dissonance" *par excellence*. They have to *block out* what it would say about Obama's character and judgment if he had gambled with the country's welfare, at this extraordinarily critical time in its history, by using the position of SoS as a token in a clever political game. When you hate somebody so much that you're willing to demean someone you greatly admire just for the sake of dumping on the hatee, you're in very deep psychological doo-doo indeed. <snip> > Given Obama's elaborate deference to the > Clintons, beginning with his over-accommodation > of them at the Democratic convention in August, > a nagging question has floated around the Web: > What do the Clintons have on him? Poor Obama, what a wuss! <snicker> FWIW, I haven't seen this "nagging question floating around the Web," and I read a *lot* of blogs. It appears that Paglia *wants* it to be "floating around the Web" and is hopeful that she has been able to launch it successfully with this comment.
