Posted by
rycK on Tuesday, December 04, 2007 4:04:39 PM
Frank Rich Expounds on Slick Willie’s Pratfall.
Frank threw this out from the Old Gray Lady two days ago.
“By telling an Iowa audience on Tuesday night that he had opposed the Iraq war “from the beginning,” Bill Clinton committed a double pratfall. Not only did he refocus attention on his wife’s most hazardous issue, Iraq, just as it was receding as the nation’s Topic A, but he also revived unhappy memories of the truth-dodging nadirs of the Clinton White House.”
That was profound.
Here is a stunning piece of ethereal logic from this article worthy of the Pulitzer Prize:
“That history cannot be rewritten in any case, by Bill Clinton or anyone else. But future history is yet to be made. In the year to come, it will be written by the candidates and the voters, not by those journalists who, as the old saw has it, lay down history’s first draft.”
Wow!! Clinton lied and the NYT cannot redact the facts as Walter Duranty (The NYT’s most famous Pulitzer Prize winner) did so well to make a few critical political points for Bolshevism. All this surges forth as fact according to the authoritative Frank Rich. Apparently, Churchill, George Bernard Shaw and Leon Trotsky and others were mistaken about who controls history and the facts must remain frozen in the unmolested pristine state. Sir Winston was a journalist. Is this the end of political spinning? They have to tell the truth now? Does Rich now denigrate or abandon his chosen profession? Bill Clinton has already rewritten history: Read My Life and have a few laughs. No truth-dodging nadirs in that tome. Hillary Clinton never lied under oath about Castle Grande or the missing Rose Law Firm billing record, subpoenaed by the courts?
If we insist on the pure truth in journalism the jobs of journalists will go the way of the buggy whip designers.
A piece of misdirection, always required in propaganda efforts, pops up here in the midst of all this rushing river of truths and that is that Iraq is not ”… his wife’s most hazardous issue.” Did Frank misdadir here? The issue that will sink her is the incessant mongering for more and higher and punitive taxes. Next to that, a close second, is her waffling on immigration and her urgent need for illegal aliens to vote en masse.
But, we can give Frank Rich partial credit for proposing that ultimate truth must somehow be commingled with notions using the future past perfect subjunctive tense adjusted with the appropriate location with respect to the nadir. We understand where he is coming (or going?) on that one.
I counted two pratfalls on Frank’s part above. Anybody get a higher count?? Just think: “But future history is yet to be made.” But, I wonder if future history is really certified and authentic future history if the New York Times argues otherwise. The spinners and spin doctoring are back in vogue and essential to propagandists, methinks. They can durantyize anything with impunity.
rycK