Monday, September 25, 2006

Kill Bill, vol. 33 1/3 (or Hothead Clinton, Homicidal Expresidential Terrorist)

So everyone's achatter about the Clinton/Wallace interview. I saw it, and of course dug it. Yay, rah, up yours Faux News, stick it to the man, go team.

But did anyone else but me notice how many times Expres said "kill"? and with such a bloodthirsty glint in his eyes?

He was like Arlo Guthrie with a tie and a better haircut.

I found it really interesting, his choice of words. He said "kill"; not "catch", "capture", "apprehend", "detain", "bring to justice" or "neutralize", but straight-up kay-eye-double-hockey-stick KILL. Make living thing dead. Crush out of existence. Take life from. Kill.

And the way he said it, with that look in his eye, I believe he felt capable of doing the deed with his own bare hands, not simply signing an order, giving a command, pressing a button, flipping a switch.

Either that or he was dangerously close to sending Mr. Wallace himself to join the choir invisibule. It was hard to say.

I don't know what this says about Clinton, that I was prepared to take him quite seriously for the first time in his public life, nor about Bush fils, who sadly lacks credibility on all counts in my estimation - but in any case, that was what stood out for me about the interview.

As always, my question is: What's the agenda? If they speak, they have a motive.
i noticed it, as well. as much as he was criticizing the fox news agenda, it seemed to me that the use of the word "kill" signaled use of Bush & Co language. so he was criticizing the neocons who go after him while also trying to win them over.
It was so "Alice's Restaurant."

I kept looking for him to start jumping up and down saying "kill! kill! kill!"
Yep. I noticed it, too. "Hey! That head shoulda been on my pike!"

Alice's Restaurant. Hee.
kristin - did you notice I commented on something I swore I'd never comment on?

Since he was talking about Bin Laden himself, the bloodthirstiness didn't bother me.

anyway whether it was OBL, Wallace, or some cumulative effect of all the bullshit over the last zillion years, i thought it was pretty genuine.

as per motive: pretty much to defend himself against a gross smear, and of course to attempt to salvage/shore up his wife's ambitions.
yep. totally genuine. and weirdly refreshing in its genuine-ness.
AP~ You didn't *technically* swear you wouldn't.

The whole thing was sketchy. Of course, a) he's a politician, and, b) his pants are notoriously on fire. Let's see what develops in Hilary's campaign inre bin Laden, terrorism, et. al. My bet is they're going to come out stronger on it. Sure, some of it was pride driven, but I think there's more to it. I'm not suggesting I know what the hell I'm talking about, only that it will be interesting to compare his vitriol with that of the Dems as time goes on.
That was something Kerry used to say too during the campaign--that he would hunt the terrorists down and kill them. It was quite a striking use of language, and I was surprised at the time that few people caught on to it. I guess the dem guys want to prove they still own their balls, or something.
Yah, but I never quite believed Kerry; or, well, I believed he'd pursue serious policy unlike Schmuck-Boy, but that pilot light was never on.

and i gotta say i thoroughly believe that at least half that homicidal rage was in fact directed at that smug little fuck sitting across from him as well as everything he represented; and all i have to say to -that- is, i'll hold 'em down for you, Bill, or get the machete or whatever else you need...
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?