Home » divisiveness » Debates: some historical perspective

Debates: some historical perspective

I have no opinions to voice about the debate really as I didn’t watch it. There is a lot of analysis online from people who did endure the debate, and so my impressions, based on what I’ve heard or read are not worth much.

I actually haven’t watched any presidential debates since 2000, I think, which was also an important election for anybody on the right then, because the Clintons and their minions were on the way out of the White House (or so we hoped; if Al Gore had been elected it probably would have been a continuation of the Clinton regime with the same corrupt and venal cast of characters.)

A lot of us on the right then were desperate to get the Democrats out of the White House but the candidates were not inspiring. Most of us who voted for G.W. Bush did so only because he seemed preferable to the other options. At the time the election seemed all-important because so many of us were just living to see the back of the Clintons and their ilk. Even then, mind you, there was talk of Hillary planning to follow her ”husband” as President, eventually. But none of us could have envisioned the situation that we find ourselves in now, with our country in such dire straits, being overrun by immigration, our economy in a shambles, race conflicts at a possible all-time peak. No one could imagine that things could get so bad, so fast. It is dizzying, in retrospect, to ponder how far we’ve fallen.

But again, the younger people among us have no memory of the days of the Clinton scandals and all the corruption and deception which marked those years. If the younger generations know anything about the Clinton years they may know about the ‘sex scandals’, ‘Zippergate’, and so on. They may not have heard of Chinagate, Whitewater, the Mena, Arkansas drug-running allegations, the ‘tainted blood’ scandal which had to do with Arkansas prison inmates (on Bill Clinton’s watch as governor) donating tainted blood to Canada, etc. And what about the White House travel office scandal. Then there was the Arkancides, and let’s not leave out Waco, and the OKC bombing. That’s just the tip of the iceberg.

We then thought that our country had reached a nadir in politics, and that things could not be worse than what we had seen under the Clintons. Yes, we thought the 2000 election was very important, and I remember how frustrating and angering it was that the Democrats managed to contrive a way to contest the election when Bush was declared the winner.

Some may wonder why so many of us were ‘fooled’ by G.W. Bush but the thing is, we thought he was a prince compared to the Clintons, or Al Gore. And the ‘prince’ we elected turned out to be a frog, after all.

Sometimes I wonder if whoever pre-selects our candidates purposely chooses the worst possible candidate on one side to ensure that the other one is elected.

When G.W. Bush started showing his true, globalist/neocon colors early in his first term, I remember on an online forum I used to frequent, quoting from Scripture  “Put not your trust in princes.” Did I catch flak for saying that! I’d uttered blasphemy and treason, as Bush was still above criticism among average Republicans. So I was disaffected with Bush very early on, and left the GOP fold to ultimately find myself where I am now. Wherever that is; on the right side, I hope.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Debates: some historical perspective

  1. VA, I think you are onto something about pre-selecting one side to lose. Hillary seems loaded with the baggage of the ages. Even the leftist media accepts that Hillary has more scandals than Carter’s has pills.

    In last night’s debates, Hillary’s scandals were barely mentioned and seldom if ever by the selected moderator provocateur Lester Holt. Holt simply went after Trump like a boxing match.

    Now that you mention pre-selected, Hillary had a smug above it all smile throughout the debate, as if she knew she was selected to win that night. Perhaps they gave her a night of triumph before selecting Trump with more riots and terrorism in the next few weeks.

    Trump meanwhile had a long face all night. They had a split screen and Trump was woeful look after woeful look like a dog who knew he could not escape a beating.

    Butter could not melt in Hillary’s mouth all night. She radiated condescension onto Trump and the rest of the wheelbarrow of deplorables who are the remnant of the American right in 2000 you speak of.

    The Clinton era events you remind us of seem almost like a dress rehearsal for the world we entered on September 11, 2001. Now the candidates seem encumbered by multiple scandals which somehow don’t matter as if they were completely contrived to satisfy some check-list. The whole campaign since Trump came down the escalator seems like a reality show, ie scripted behind the scenes and presented as if spontaneous and not planned in advance.

    Bush turned out to be a frog as you say. But now the frog Pepe is what we aspire to be. All thought of princes is gone in the times we live in. Frogs are our leaders and deplorables are we the followers. Almost as if we were ruled by a group that delighted in degrading both leaders and followers alike. They seem to enjoy humiliating them and us for entertainment.

    I can’t see our rulers as secret guardians. The last 50 years of destruction of morality, cities and countries can’t be for any good purpose. It reveals the delight in destroying what can’t be remade. On purpose they end a civilization and a race that they hated all along.

    Like

  2. OA – Your comment should be a blog post. Good insights there. As I didn’t watch, I feel as though I had, almost, after reading your take.
    I saw some clips of the debates and in those brief glimpses I saw what you describe of Hillary and her smug, arrogant demeanor. I didn’t see much of Trump’s rejoinders or his side of the debate. It did look as though she was very pleased with herself, supremely confident.
    I am seeing talk of there being some kind of signal system going on between Hillary and Lester Holt, as if they had a pre-arranged code, when she signalled he would interrupt Trump, etc. It’s hardly even being hidden, apparently, but then we’ve known for a long time that the media are obviously just the propaganda arm of the regime.
    -VA

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s