In the summer of 1999, Bay and Pat were invited to lunch with Rep. Chris Cannon of Utah. “We think it’s great you’re going to run,” Bay remembered him saying on behalf of the House Republicans. “But in no way must you go after George W. Bush.” George Bush was the governor of Texas, and the son of Pat’s old enemy from ’92. “He’s going to be the nominee,” said Cannon. The GOP establishment had lined up all the money and necessary endorsements. They had a timetable for victory in the primaries and they intended to dictate media access, coverage, and message.
“Do you know where he stands on the issues?” asked Bay.
“We don’t care,” Cannon replied. “When he’s elected, Congress will control policy. We’ll just send him the bills to sign.”
Timothy Stanley, The crusader: The life and tumultuous times of Pat Buchanan. (Amazon.)
In february 1987, Pat [Buchanan] announced that he was stepping down from the Reagan administration. There had been one last exhausting fight over the State of the Unions address and, again, Pat had lost [frente al ala moderada del gobierno de R.R.].
… pero yo lo escribo con la misma convicción:
I read The right stuff [Lo que hay que tener] as a reader. I was said it was terrific, but that proved to be a understatement. It was just a mastery piece of work, one of the more exciting reads I’ve had in a decade.
I have found those who work for TV broadcasting companies to be the most disagreeable people that I have ever encountered. I far preferred the criminals whom I encountered in my work as a prison doctor, who were more honest and upright than TV people.
In my experience, TV people are as lying, insincere, obsequious, unscrupulous, fickle, exploitative, shallow, cynical, untrustworthy, treacherous, dishonest, mercenary, low, and untruthful a group of people as is to be found on the face of this Earth. They make the average Western politician seem like a moral giant. By comparison with them, Mr. Madoff was a model of probity and Iago was Othello’s best friend. I am prepared to admit that there may be—even are—exceptions, as there are exceptions good or bad in every human group, but there is something about the evil little screen that would sully a saint and sanctify a monster.
For the conservatives, the Clintons were the Mr. and Mrs. Mao of the culture war:
“Elect me, and you get two for the price of one, Mr. Clinton says of his lawyer-spouse. [The audience booed.] And what does Hillary believe? Well, Hillary believes that 12 year olds should have a right to sue their parents, and she has compared marriage as an institution to slavery and life on an Indian reservation. [The audience gasped.] Well, speak for yourself, Hillary. [The audience laughed.] Friends, this is radical feminism. The agenda Clinton and Clinton would impose on America—abortion on demand, a litmus test for the Supreme Court, homosexual rights, discrimination against religious schools, women in combat. That’s change, all right. But it is not the kind of change America wants . It is not the kind of change America needs. And it is not the kind of change we can tolerate in a nation that we still call God’s country.”
Han pasado veintidós años y el nombre de Hillary Clinton suena con fuerza para la candidatura demócrata a las presidenciales de 2016. Mala hierba nunca muere, ¿uh? En cuanto al cambio, me parece que de eso ya se ha dicho todo lo que se tenía que decir. Un cambio en el que podemos creer, ¡je!