Gary Stock: UnBlinking

Hillary is the New Ralph


Some of you know about Googlewhack. It's rather the accidental equivalent of a forum's "First post!": odds are, no one has ever put the same words together that way before. Thus, I thought it important to capture these newly-minted phrases -- here, now, first, on 01 October 2007 -- since they don't appear yet in Google's index.

  • Clinton is the New Nader.
  • Hillary is the New Ralph.

And, of course, because by the time they enter the collective consciousness of US voters, it will be too late.

Remember, as always: if you blink, don't blog.

UnBlinking scans the wealth of information on the internet, gathering background on people and events. Using public search engines, UnBlinking collates what may be known (and what may have been forgotten). Please use QuickTopic to share your comments. [Usability note: All links open into the same target window.]


Gore Takes the Prize

Now that Albert Arnold (Al) Gore, Jr. is a co-recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, at least there is some chance the Democratic Party knows where to go for a successful alternative.


Clinton is the New Nader

Hillary Clinton will lose the 2008 presidential election to a Republican. Too many people simply don't like her. I'm not sure I could cast a vote for her -- and I stand smack in the middle of several of her target audiences.

Unfortunately, Clinton is the New Nader. That's the version we'll see in most headlines. This model is popular, as Press Esc aptly noted in "Bush is the New Dick," which acknowledges its forbears in The Diagram's Is The New. Everything old is new again.

Certainly, "Hillary is the New Ralph" has its uses as well. Not only does it add the human touch Clinton so desperately needs, it conjures the image of all of us kneeling in our own vomit on the night of November 4, 2008.

Most media venues already have offered up Clinton's pre-coronation. They've avoided the words "Hillary will be the Democratic candidate," but that is always their subtext. Thus, only after the convention... only then will we begin to discuss whether she can be elected. She can't.

If the pundits have it right, then Clinton will stand against [Name Republican Here], the specifics of which won't matter, because that person will be male. They will be no more likable than Clinton, but they will be non-female, and so they will win. Geez, don't blame that attitude on me! I'm just telling you what's happening. If you don't want to hear it, that's not my fault!

Late Tuesday, 04 November 2008, we'll all be able to hear Hillary Clinton echo speeches by Ralph Nader in 2000:

"...people all over the country are now telling us maybe they should have voted for us. But I know they wanted the least of the worst."

Even when he knew better, before the presidential election in 2004 Nader said he was:

"...driven to run for president out of the fervent desire to make the doors open so Americans can have a chance to improve their country."

I tend to believe Nader when he says (later in that interview) that he was "driven by justice" -- but the other 49% was pure ego. The problem with Clinton is that the other 70% is pure ego. She needs to get out of the way, or put Al Gore on the ticket, or do something to avoid handing the White House back to the Republicans.

Once either headline appears in the New York Times, you'll be able to discuss it in a million places. For now, let's use use Steve Yost's cool gizmo, Quicktopic.


Privacy Policy   -   Site Copyright © 1995-2009 by Gary Stock. Commercial use prohibited.
May be excerpted, mailed, posted, or linked for non-commercial purposes.