[NOTE: The title is Italian for "The Prince (Or The Princess)," and is an unapologetic reference to Niccolò Machiavelli's 16th century treatise on proper governance, The Prince. For the unread among you, Machiavelli proposed authoritarian and absolute rule in order to maintain stability; the security of the ruler was prized more than morale or liberties of the subjects. In fact, Machiavelli famously wrote – with some significant qualifications – that "it would be best to be both loved and feared. But since the two rarely come together, anyone compelled to choose will find greater security in being feared than in being being loved," which has since been boiled down to "it is better to be feared than loved;" other maxims of power that could be attributed to him, in spirit, if not in fact, include "by any means necessary," and "the ends justify the means." The overarching theme, if it may be reduced to such, is that a ruler must pursue his own best interests in any case, while making sure to not agitate his subjects excessively; it is a study of how to gain, build, and maintain power for its own sake. Machiavelli stated that he would not in this work discuss republics, but, let's face it, we no longer live in one.]
Back in December, a “holiday card” was anonymously sent out to South Carolina’s GOP faithful. It included a passage from the cultic Book of Mormon that had been obviously selected to color the Mormon church, and by derivation, Mitt[ens] Romney, as inherently and irredeemably racist. [Because we all know there is nothing in the world as bad as being a racist. You could eat your own children and be better off than a racist] It was widely believed, you’ll recall, that this was an attempt by the Mike Huckleberry campaign to pick off Romney from behind, since he [Huckster] had so blatantly condemned Romney and all Mormons by being a Christian™ former pastor.
Another [now largely defunct] blogger commented at the time that this was, without laying blame anywhere, despicable and significant of the worst of political scheming. I replied, thus:
I dunno… Call me a cynic, but it’s entirely possible that the Romney campaign could have sent this, in an effort to smear the other campaigns via blowback. I mean, wasn’t Romney the first to begin attack ads in Iowa?
I know, it seems too Machiavellian to be true. But I have an enduring and absolute faith in the utter depravity of all humanity. And this presidential campaign cycle has from its beginning been a war of attrition on all fronts, a no-holds-barred free-for-all. And no tricks too dirty. [I've seen mosh pits with more decency]
So, now, we have this picture, “broken” by Drudge:
Now there’s a lot of hootin’ and shoutin’ about BO being a terrist, a “stealth Muslim,” even accusing him of being in cahoots with the Very Bad Men. I’ll allow that he’s in cahoots with ‘em, but no more so than Billary, Huckleberry, and Johnny Windsock. Of course, I probably have a different idea of who the Very Bad Men are than those perpetrating these shenanigans. But I digress.
The publication of this picture by Drudge, “provided by a Clinton staff member,” [according to the New York Times] set off a firestorm of accusations of Billary smear tactics, fearmongering, and worse. Billary swore up and down that she had no knowledge whatsoever, and the pic didn’t come from her camp. BO accused. Billary denied. He said. She said. Blah, blah, blah.
To quote Clinton’s own new campaign manager, Maggie Williams, “Enough.“
I would not be surprised to learn that Drudge hadactually received this shot from Clinton’s campaign. The conciliatory moves Clinton’s been making toward him are well-documented, and they could’ve very well been in bed together on this.
But at least as well-documented is Matt Drudge’s dislike for the Clintons, and his love of the neocon war machine. Though he publicly split with Faux News a few years ago [over editorial and journalistic differences], he’s been beating the same drums as most Murdoch vassals. Iran Is Evil, Giuliani For President, Those Pesky Insurgents.
I find it hard to believe that he’d've been able to resist the opportunity to torpedo Billary’s candidacy via a similar blowback smear to the one described above. Obama [or, less likely, Gravel... but I find it hard to believe he's awake and alert enough to find something like this, or come up with such a plan]“leaks” this pic to Drudge with the express understanding that he will plaster it up on his site and cast aspersions on Obama’s religion and loyalties. Since BO is a major player, he predicts that such a move will play out in his favor: he can rely on the Party faithful to launch a red-faced defense of him, on the MSM to forego any questioning of him in fear of appearing racist by implying that people aredifferent, and he can sit back and take calibrated shots at Billary [because he knows that support for her candidacy drops in inverse proportion to the shrillness of her voice].
Of course, there’s always the possibility that this is what it seems to be, and maybe I’m mis-over-estimating BO. And there’s precedent here, as well: Waffle Bill’s “fairy tale” comment, the Bob Johnson ”won’t say what he was doing” thing, the Bill Shaheen “so many openings” comment.
Either way, I think the “brass tacks” is that neither of these two Democrats – nor, for that matter, Huckster or Johnny Windsock – is fit for the Office of the President.
But they’d probably all fit right in at court in a medieval Italian kingdom.
