Skip to main content

The Debate Bender: A Cynic’s Appraisal


Q: It may or may not have been the most significant presidential debate in living memory, but it certainly was the most touted presidential debate in “Click Nation USA.” What are your general impressions?

Cynic: In Oscar Wilde’s “The Importance of Being Earnest,” one character says to another, “I hope you have not been leading a double life, pretending to be wicked and really being good all the time; that would be hypocrisy.” Neither of the presidential candidates this year needs worry about that. Hillary Clinton’s presentation, more than Trump’s, was unbearable pretentious. She needed to confess but boasted instead of her essential goodness. She is not a good person – never has been, never will be. But she is a Democrat and, in our time, political affiliation is a substitute for moral rectitude.

Q: Is she evil?

Cynic: No, she lacks the energy to be evil. The root is old and dry. Vladimir Putin is evil. That little runt in North Korea is evil. Donald Trump bubbles with energy. But his is a narcissistic personality, and his understanding of politics is shallow.

Q: So which is the lesser evil, Clinton or Trump?

Cynic: Trump, hands down.

Q: Why?

Cynic: Hillary is an accomplished politician; Trump is a rank amateur, which is to say – he’s teachable. The moral sense hasn’t been routed entirely from his soul. I am using the word “politician” in its negative sense, as when Mark Twain said of the politicos of his day, “An honest man in politics shines more there than he would elsewhere.” Trump has plugged into the Twainian disdain for politics as usual. His message – “They don’t know what they’re doing” – strikes a responsive chord in the hearts of all true patriots.

Q: Now then, you are using the word “patriot” in its negative sense, aren’t you?

Cynic: Samuel Johnson said patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels. He was referring, of course, to revolutionists in America like Tom Paine. We don’t consider Paine a scoundrel, because he was our scoundrel.

Q: Who won the debate?

Cynic: Probably a draw. Debates no longer matter in our political lives. The Lincoln-Douglas debates are ancient history. Indeed, the Nixon-Kennedy debates are ancient history. Indeed, yesterday, for many Americans, is ancient history. We’ve lost or memories, our minds and our hearts. Who needs a memory when you have Google? Who need rhetoric when you have Twitter? Who needs a conscience when you have Mark Cuban sitting in the front row, unnerving Trump? Now in its second or third year, American sensibilities have been numbed by this seemingly endless campaign. That may be a good thing, because the future – both domestically and internationally – promises to be brutal. More anesthesia please!

Q: My, my – you ARE a cynic.

Cynic:  In our time, cynicism is the last refuge of saintliness.

Q: Speaking of tweeting, Trump tweeted after the debate – no Benghazi, no email, no Clinton Foundation. True?

Cynic: Sadly, yes. This is what I mean when I say yesterday is ancient history. Let me amend that: both yesterday and tomorrow are ancient history for the Clinton crowd. Benghazi and Hillary’s illegal top-secret heavy emails and the corrupt Clinton Foundation, a personal piggy bank for the Clinton clan, are yesterday and tomorrow’s news, not ancient history. One supposes the moderator – who is, after all in the news business – might have been able to craft a question for Hillary that touched on any one of these subjects. Her response would have been newsworthy. But the left of center media has been in the Clinton bag for decades. They are, most of them, progressive leftists who resent intruders. But Trump, you know, could have turned the table on Hillary when the subject of internet safety was broached. She is the queen of internet hazards. An illegal and unsecured private server – hacked, she supposes, by Russian intelligence. How did that happen? For six years as U.S. Senator, Hillary handled top secret information; she was intimately familiar with classification protocols. Trump did not walk through an opened door. Political inexperience maybe – an altogether endearing quality, but deadly in a debate with a practiced politician, using the word, of course, in  its negative sense, as when Mark Twain said , “There is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress.”


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

Powell, the JI, And Economic literacy

Powell, Pesci Substack The Journal Inquirer (JI), one of the last independent newspapers in Connecticut, is now a part of the Hearst Media chain. Hearst has been growing by leaps and bounds in the state during the last decade. At the same time, many newspapers in Connecticut have shrunk in size, the result, some people seem to think, of ad revenue smaller newspapers have lost to internet sites and a declining newspaper reading public. Surviving papers are now seeking to recover the lost revenue by erecting “pay walls.” Like most besieged businesses, newspapers also are attempting to recoup lost revenue through staff reductions, reductions in the size of the product – both candy bars and newspapers are much smaller than they had been in the past – and sell-offs to larger chains that operate according to the social Darwinian principles of monopolistic “red in tooth and claw” giant corporations. The first principle of the successful mega-firm is: Buy out your predator before he swallows

Down The Rabbit Hole, A Book Review

Down the Rabbit Hole How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime by Brent McCall & Michael Liebowitz Available at Amazon Price: $12.95/softcover, 337 pages   “ Down the Rabbit Hole: How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime ,” a penological eye-opener, is written by two Connecticut prisoners, Brent McCall and Michael Liebowitz. Their book is an analytical work, not merely a page-turner prison drama, and it provides serious answers to the question: Why is reoffending a more likely outcome than rehabilitation in the wake of a prison sentence? The multiple answers to this central question are not at all obvious. Before picking up the book, the reader would be well advised to shed his preconceptions and also slough off the highly misleading claims of prison officials concerning the efficacy of programs developed by dusty old experts who have never had an honest discussion with a real convict. Some of the experts are more convincing cons than the cons, p