Among the many objections being raised concerning the nomination of Hillary Clinton to be secretary of state is the potential for “conflict of interest” with her husband's many world-spanning “charities”. I'll bet she wishes she'd thrown the bum out when she had the chance; all he is now is an anchor. But, I suppose he's good for offering some advice from time to time on, say, how to con people into giving you even more power and money. And of course he's an ambassador (albeit without portfolio) in his own right – especially in countries like France, where they consider all that fuss about Monica etc. to be so much American stuffiness. Hey – we're talking about a place where, when a prominent politician dies, his funeral is attended by his current wife, former wives, current mistress, and former mistresses... and they all get along just fine, thank you. How soon do you think Hillary is going to “kaffee klatch” with Monica, or any of the other “Bimbos of Bill”? Not real soon, is my guess.
The odd thing about this “conflict of interest” issue is that it should be the least of Hillary's worries. Won't a single, solitary soul at the confirmation hearings bring up the subjects of Whitewater, cattle futures, billing records, “Travelgate”, “Clinton care”, Vince Foster, Waco, or any of the scores of other black deeds that Hillary was intimately involved in back when? Or is that all considered “ancient history”? Funny how things like that go in the memory hole when Watergate or Iran-Contra don't. One might almost think the media had a biased point of view on these things...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment