Whackadoodles Here,There and Everywhere

How whacky is it to reject all the scientific evidence that confirms biological evolution in favor of an unseen, unheard big guy in the sky that created all life just as it is today?    To believe that the earth is 5,000 years old and the geological record is false?  That Jesus was in favor of torture and capital punishment?  That Saddam had WMD that were going to come and get us?  Or even that Saddam was involved in perpetrating 9/11 when there was no shred of evidence for that?  

A hell of a lot more Americans believe or once believed one or more of the above whacky ideas.  Are they "whackadoodles?"   If I reject all those whacky ideas but have had a relationship with a "whackadoodle," why would that reflect on me?  By that standard, we’re all "whackadoodles."

Pat Robertson claimed that the big guy in the sky caused 9/11 to happen because of abortion, gays, feminists, etc.  in America.  Why don’t we see endless video loops of that Republican "whackadoodle" minister‘s statement on TV?  US foreign policy "chickens coming home to roost" may not be true but there are facts that could lead one to that conclusion.  Or is Chalmers Johnson another "whackadoodle" for having written Blowback ...?

It’s a bit rich to hear Hillary and her supporters claim that they would have left a church performing countless good deeds because on occasion the pastor sounded a bit whacky.  And for Obama not to have left indicates that he has poor judgment.  Would all Clinton supporters have remained married to a serial philanderer?  If staying in such a marriage demonstrated good judgment, would they also have enlisted others to cover-up the spouse’s philandering and trash the character of the "other <women" that couldn’t be silenced?  </p>

At Hillary’s direction [in ’92], a special "defense team" was established to deal with allegations about Bill’s history with the Selective Service System, women claiming to have had affairs with him, and other personal aspects of the Clinton’s lives.  Betsey Wright was dispatched to Little Rock from Washington to research the underlying facts -- including and beyond Gennifer Flowers -- about women in Bill’s past, ...including hiring detectives to check the backgrounds of the women ---...

A Woman in Charge p. 197

Betsey Wright had been close to the Clintons since ’72 and the McGovern campaign and had worked on Clinton’s ’82 campaign and after that became Governor Clinton’s chief of staff.

For five years, Betsey had watched and listened as Bill make arrangements for assignations and slipped out of the office for meetings with various women. Sometimes the troopers gave her sly heads-ups.  She had no doubt that a few of them were soliciting women for him.

ibid - p. 178

In ’87 after Gary Hart’s presidential campaign was derailed by an affair, Clinton was being urged to run.  Betsey Wright was more than a little concerned about Clinton’s problem with women.  Days before his scheduled announcement that he was in the race, Wright confronted Clinton.

Specifically what I said was, :"Let’s walk through all of the women who might decide that they had a bond to pick with you who might emerge I the middle of the campaign.  And of course I was horrified because I thought I knew everybody.  And he came up with these people I didn’t know about.

ibid p. 179

From that information and as a woman, I would never conclude, suggest or imply that Hillary condoned Bill’s behavior or that by tolerating it, she was okay with it.  But isn’t that what she and her spokespeople are saying about Obama?  That he should have found a new church because his pastor said something Obama disagreed with, but it’s audacious and presumptuous  for someone to suggest that she should have left an unfaithful husband.  Neither is a wholly hypothetical question for me.  

I listened to and  tolerated a lot of crap spoken by priests (albeit none that I would characterize as fiery rhetoric).  When the negatives outweighed the positives for me, I left.  Yet, I know damn well that I wouldn’t have left because I disagreed with a few sermons.  Nor would most members of a church in such a situation.  (Of course we can’t evaluate what Hillary’s spiritual advisor, Doug Coe, has said in the past because outsiders and cameras aren‘t allowed when he speaks.  If he has nothing to hide, why the secrecy?)  Far easier for me is the question of what to do with an unfaithful spouse.  Being kicked in the gut once was enough for me; still it’s not for me to say what others in that situation should do because each of us have different tolerance levels in all of our relationships.

Barack has said why he understands that Rev. Wright would say certain things.  Hillary has said why she understands that Bill has strayed.  Fine.  The difference is that Barack didn’t try to cover-up, silence or control Rev. Wright or anyone that had heard what he said.  Whereas, Hillary has been covering up for Bill and silencing others for decades as well as tying to control many of them.  The most egregious part was the smearing the "other women."  But it was good experience for one that is willing to trash anyone that gets in his/her way.

Had enough?  If not, vote McClinton, either one will insure that the DC pundit circus will be there to continue poisoning us with their swill.    

   

  .