Send this article to a friend:

January
31
2018

Such a Bizarre Tantrum
Malice158

Just a quick thought here. I should have written this note a couple of days ago. I would say immediately after the Grammys, but I was too busy shaking my head. 

I don’t watch award shows. None of them. But, I did see the clips of Hillary Clinton, smartest women in the world, reading passages from “Fire and Fury” like a demented grandmother ready to devour her children. This was surreal. This was bizarre. 

I understand that anyone reading this knows what happened. How can you not? Those of us who paid attention in the 90’s were bombarded by the useful tools in the media about how Hillary Clinton was “the smartest woman in the world!” Of course, smart women in the world snickered and laughed at this, but, hey! - who was going to question it? Certainly not CNN. 

Regardless, I am now convinced that The Smartest Woman in the World is also the most bizarre and deranged person in the world. Or close to it. I'm not just talking about the stumbles, the trips, the “deh duh dohs” of some of her public appearances, but of the bizarro nature of her behavior since losing the election. And her little performance (that’s what it was) the other night at the Grammys was just plain bizarre. 

It certainly was an odd political statement for the beautiful people to invite Hillary to the show. I mean, why would you? Who really wants her  - anywhere? Obviously in the land of cocaine and personal body guards it is easy to overlook one’s shortcomings in the name of politics (helllloooo Harvey). But Hillary’s shortcomings are so many. And so vast. And so…gross.  

It is alleged that John Podesta, Hillary’s campaign chair, wrote in an email that The Smartest Woman in the World emitted an odor that smelled like “boiled cabbage, urine and farts.”  snopes.com says this is not true, so if Snopes is saying that, it must be true. I don’t doubt it. 

So why would the prettiest cocaine-hopped egos invite Hillary to the Grammy’s?  I don’t know - your guess is as good as mine. That is part of the bizarreness. 

When I was in college I went to a small party that was hosted by a friend of mine. Also invited was a friend of hers who recently broke up with her boyfriend. At about 2 in the morning, as the scent of body odor, stale beer and urine kicked out some of the more sober of partygoers, her recently separated friend started to read aloud old love letters from her former beau (this was before email was popular. And texting - what is that?). 

“He loved me - burp! - and he wanted to marry me - hiccup!- but now the bastard is with someone else!!! Fu*k him!!! Oh, but I love him….why did he dump me?? I miss him and want him back - hick!-” Then she threw up. 

Uhh….he dumped you because you are a lunatic. And, this is bizarre. And, in any state of sobriety you are an idiot to get up and read these letters. Not very smart. Especially for The Smartest Woman in the World. Because, that is just plain bizarre. 

our mission:

to widen the scope of financial, economic and political information available to the professional investing public.
to skeptically examine and, where necessary, attack the flaccid institution that financial journalism has become.
to liberate oppressed knowledge.
to provide analysis uninhibited by political constraint.
to facilitate information's unending quest for freedom.
our method: pseudonymous speech...
Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. it thus exemplifies the purpose behind the bill of rights, and of the first amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation-- and their ideas from suppression-- at the hand of an intolerant society.

...responsibly used.

The right to remain anonymous may be abused when it shields fraudulent conduct. but political speech by its nature will sometimes have unpalatable consequences, and, in general, our society accords greater weight to the value of free speech than to the dangers of its misuse.

Though often maligned (typically by those frustrated by an inability to engage in ad hominem attacks) anonymous speech has a long and storied history in the united states. used by the likes of mark twain (aka samuel langhorne clemens) to criticize common ignorance, and perhaps most famously by alexander hamilton, james madison and john jay (aka publius) to write the federalist papers, we think ourselves in good company in using one or another nom de plume. particularly in light of an emerging trend against vocalizing public dissent in the united states, we believe in the critical importance of anonymity and its role in dissident speech. like the economist magazine, we also believe that keeping authorship anonymous moves the focus of discussion to the content of speech and away from the speaker- as it should be. we believe not only that you should be comfortable with anonymous speech in such an environment, but that you should be suspicious of any speech that isn't.

 

 

 

www.zerohedge.com