Paglia strikes again : LUSENET : TB2K spinoff uncensored : One Thread

Camille Paglia is one of the sharpest wits writing today, IMHO. Her latest is a worthwhile read, but perhaps too large to include here in it's full length.


As I file this, the first presidential debate between George W. Bush and Al Gore has not yet aired, so by the time you read this, you will know whether Bush stumbled and bumbled or held his own and whether Gore demonstrated his IQ and expertise or came off as a pretentious jackass.

What I am certain of, without benefit of the debate, is that I cannot in good conscience vote for either one of them. While Bush would probably, if elected, be a conscientious, affable chief executive who would restore bipartisan cooperation to government, I simply don't feel he has the basic skills or mastery of facts to be a major party nominee at this stage in his life. The Republican Party seems adrift: it's still weighed down by skanky, provincial blowhards like Sen. Trent Lott, Rep. Dick Armey and Rep. Henry Hyde, while its sharpest, shrewdest, most dynamic members seem to be women -- from Pat Harrison, Co-Chairman of the Republican National Committee, and campaign consultant Mary Matalin to outspoken Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine.

Gore, on the other hand, may be ethically undeserving of the highest office in the land. Until his guttersnipe primary fight with Bill Bradley (for whom I voted), I thought of Gore as a smart, competent, if unflashy public-affairs specialist. Since I've always liked his spunky wife Tipper, even during her campaign for music labeling, I gave Gore the benefit of the doubt and assumed he'd shine once he emerged from Bill Clinton's shadow. But week by week this year, as I watched Gore bob, weave, pander and lie, I came to detest him as an empty suit who, like Hollywood Hillary, has no deep convictions beyond a lust for personal power.


Snip: The level of gullibility is such that major newspapers unskeptically reprinted the claim in a new book about the Clinton presidency that lawyer David Kendall had to break the news to Hillary that the president really did have an affair with Monica Lewinsky. What a load of horse manure! Wasn't it obvious from the start -- simply by the legalistic language Hillary used in her infamous "vast right-wing conspiracy" interview -- that she knew perfectly well the Lewinsky story was or could be true? The Kendall mission, if it ever happened, was clearly a setup to ensure her deniability. If the commander in chief of the U.S. armed forces was too timid and overwrought to face his own wife, then national security was at risk, and he should have immediately resigned. And if Hillary, after 25 messy years of her husband's philandering, was that naive, she's as dumb as a post and has no business running for office.

Do yourself a favor and click through the link, Paglia is always refreshing.


-- Uncle Deedah (, October 05, 2000


Mary Matalin, self-described "Republican chick", is my secret knob-throb. I have emailed her many times with outstanding offers but she prefers that Democrat "serpent head" guy. In the immortal words of Mickey and Sylvia, "Love is Strange".

-- Lars (, October 05, 2000.

Even if they break even in the next 2 efforts, algore lost the election Tuesday night.

His sneering attitude and outright laughing at GWB left a bad taste in the mouths of those who go by impressions. Remember JFK won because Nixon didn't shave. algore lost his "credibility" with the soccer moms who left the Reagan /Bush side to give Clinstone a shot twice.

All they want is some proof that GWB is not a throw back to the 1800s and all GWB has to do is point to his Austin staff and campaign troops filled with females when questions are raised about GWB's views on women. Toss in that GWB actually knows something about World Affairs and Business and he gets back the soccer moms who think of algore as that "nice guy but a DC insider".

In short, a lot of swing voters are looking for a reason NOT to vote for algore and he just sneered and snickered his election away. The fastest to switch are the "independent" swing females and the shift showed up right away in two polls. Good bye algore.

Elections are won by elimination and "who do you trust" to be "Presidential". In order to establish that and 'make the sale', the Image is everything. The slightest glitch in the presentation of "The Image" is magnified a 1,000 times with TV and the news hounds dying for a story. After Tuesday, the "talking heads" forgot their "opinions" about who won......don't matter. People (75 million of them) saw it and can gather their own thoughts without the spoon feeding from either side. THAT was where algore made his critical mistake. He somehow must believe his BS that he is the "qualified candidate" when in reality, he has never done a thing but collected paychecks from the Fed Gov. for the last 24 years while establishing an almost vacant record aside from "initiating the internet". As the "Greenies" boy wonder in DC, he talked a lot but as VP, he delivered nothing. OTOH, he is still their captive and that is something he doesn't want shown now, the record of a dangerous radical greenie symph. So, he posed as "the Centrist/Popularist/Greenie/whatever". THEN during the debate he SNEERED AND SNICKERED at GWB. BAD MOVE.

algore is now on algore version 12.01? Does anyone believe the American people can't see the "phase shifts"? Normally, for a Pol, phase shifts are little problem because they 'synch' them as needed. Clinton was /is a meister at that as was Reagan. However, algore's shifts are "out of phase". They are not "natural" and the PHONINESS comes to the surface. THAT is what the Swing Voters will be looking for in the next two debates and algore will not be able to hide his one "true role": robo-Al.

Contrast that to G.W. "I'm not perfect but I do try" Bush. You did not see a multi-second lip lock nor any of the other surface "preening" that algore does.

Nobody expected GWB to handle himself as "presidential". Most DID expect that of algore and now all GWB has to do is merely ask: "where was al for the last 8 years?". Hammering that home will show algore up for the DC "hanger on" he is.

-- cpr (, October 05, 2000.


I hope you are right about woman's reactions to Gore but I doubt if you have any better insight into soccer mom's than I do. Whatever possessed so many women to vote for Clinton, the ultimate disrespecter of women, in the first place? I would feel better if some of the females here concur with your view.

BTW, regarding women and the Republican Party, in addition to Paglia's views above, I think there is an interesting comparison of the candidates wives. I am impressed with Hadassah(?) Lieberman and with the Tipster but I am even more impressed with Lynn Cheney and Laura Bush.

-- Lars (, October 05, 2000.

I enjoyed the article. Thanks, Unk.

cpr, interesting analysis. A question, to what extent would you fault Gore for failing to deliver as VP (a position of limited scope), versus his failure to have tempered his promises accordingly.

-- David L (, October 05, 2000.

Whatever possessed so many women to vote for Clinton, the ultimate disrespecter of women, in the first place?


I made an attempt to explore that issue in my over the top thread about Why allowing women to vote will eventually destroy America

Personally I think that many "soccer moms" are overworked and harried to the point that they have only the time to respond to platitudes and media spin. They are too worn out to explore in depth and so accept what Peter Jennings tells them. Combine that with the major media's tendency to lean left and there you go. Overworked people want help with their heavy workload, and the Dems are more than willing to give help in return for power. Both parties are guilty of this to a degree.

One last thought, Clinton's troubles are bedroom stuff, Americans do not want their bedroom stuff waved about the media, and thus gave little credence to the issues behind Bill's "bedroom stuff". Lying was OK, perjury was OK, it was afterall bedroom stuff.

-- Uncle Deedah (, October 05, 2000.

The bottom line is that Shrub is against abortion, and for that reason, he will lose the votes of many women. In a race this close, that factor might be one of the deciding aspects of this election.

-- (raven@never.more), October 06, 2000.

"..."where was al for the last 8 years?"..."

Huh? Where was he supposed to be? Do find me (in your vast spectrum of research) a V.P. who was visible during his term as V.P. (And Quayle doesn't count; he was chosen as the V.P. just in case -- wink, wink -- and his reasons for being "visible" aren't necessarily flattering; though they have made for some pretty funny jokes over the years.)

"..."I'm not perfect but I do try" Bush..." and "...Nobody expected GWB to handle himself as "presidential"..."

Uh, Presidential material isn't supposed to "try", they are supposed to do and be; this isn't Avis vs. Hertz, for crying out loud. And you are wrong -- **OH-SO-WRONG** -- because Dubya is supposed to "handle himself as "presidential"" -- um, he does want to be "President", doesn't he? Well, if his "performance" was any indication of his "presidentialness", then he's screwed.....and rightfully so.

I'm still trying to figure out what debate all these people watched, because the one *I* watched had Dubya looking more than ever as if he should have been the star of Clueless (even my leaning-to-the-Republican parents thought Dubya looked like a kid who hadn't studied for the test and now it's too late). "Sneering"? "Eye-rolling"? I sat there doing exactly the same thing, but mostly at Dubya. Jeez, I thought the guy had "prepared". Was he that lost without that tape? (((snicker)))

FWIW, I cringed at quite a few of Gore's "answers". It drives me insane when they don't answer the question(s) posed, and he's just as guilty of that as the rest of "them". But Dubya simply looked like he didn't belong there. Yes, "alBORE" looked a little to slick for my tastes. But at least he was comfortable and prepared (which are two of the hallmarks of "presidential material") and, aside from his "stories", I liked what he had to say (when he actually answered the questions). If I had to bet, I'd put money on the probability that the Republican Party PTB sat there watching the debate, wondering why John McCain wasn't at that podium.

BTW, Unk, Camille Paglia is probably my favorite "personality" (and has been for at least seven years now). No one talks facts without bullshit rhetoric like she does. She'd have my vote for President in a heartbeat, regardless of her politics.

-- Patricia (, October 06, 2000.

Further quote from Paglia's article:

>> My decision to vote for Ralph Nader was strengthened by C-Span's live broadcast two weeks ago of the massive Green Party rally in Minneapolis, which drew 12,000 ticket-buying supporters. Democratic partisans who claim that a vote for Nader is a "wasted" vote are betrayers of authentic democracy. There is no such thing as a wasted vote. The only wasted vote is the one not cast. Every vote is an expression of principle and an exercise in free speech. Too many Democrats are bowing to peer pressure from friends and associates and suppressing their revulsion from the gross ethical lapses of the Clinton-Gore administration. <<

-- Brian McLaughlin (, October 06, 2000.

Dems--I urge to vote your brains out for Nader. Your vote will not ne wasted. LOL.

-- (Dubya@Austin.TX), October 06, 2000.

Yes Brian but we are voting for the CEO of the Free World, not the best representative of consumerism.

I think a glance at the records of Gore and Bush reveals some successes, some blunders, and mostly two guys who were born with silver spoons in their mouths.

Difference is, at what levels have these two played? I think fundamentally GWB unqualified frankly especially when compared to Al Gore to lead at an international level.

I also do not think one cannot ignore the issue of having a stacked legislative body of both a Republican Prez and Repub Congress. One may not see any difference in the parties, I do. We need at least this balancing if only on minor issues.

I also think the issue of Supreme Court appointees critical. GWB simply is dangerous.

A vote outside of the two majors is a wasted vote, let us not kid ourselves. Terrible situation but this ain't Disneyland. We have to work within the system as it is.

-- Doc Paulie (, October 06, 2000.

Doc, that is unmitigated horseshit. The only wasted vote is a vote not cast.

-- Uncle Deedah (, October 06, 2000.

>> We have to work within the system as it is. <<

Yup. I am "working within the system as it is." So is Nader. I don't read nothin' nowhere that states that politics must be conducted through the Democratic and Republican parties. As much as they want to believe it, and want you to believe it, they are not "the system."

It used to be that the Whigs were big heat in national politics and the Republicans were upstart nobodies. But the Whigs kept to the squishy middle on the issue of slavery for so long that the people got fed up and turned their backs on them. No doubt, back then, if there had been pundits, they would have been repeating ad nauseum that a vote for the Republicans was a wasted vote.

-- Brian McLaughlin (, October 06, 2000.


is not

-- Doc Paulie (, October 06, 2000.

Is too.

-- Uncle Deedah (, October 06, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ