Paul Krugman recently wrote about economic rescue plans from the three presidential contenders McCain, Obama, and Clinton. He had this interesting sentence in there:
“Mrs. Clinton, we’re assured by sources right and left, tortures puppies and eats babies.“
I’ve been thinking about this since he wrote it. It’s silly right, kind of funny?
I gave it much thought. Yes, ridiculous, eating an infant, I’ve gone of the deep end. Clearly my opinion of Hillary Clinton is absurd.
Let’s entertain my fancy. Imagine in August, just before the convention in some dark room the final small group of undecided super-delegates gather along with our esteemed senator from New York in secrecy. They bring her to a table with a defenseless baby, and they offer her their votes if she eats the tiny newborn.
Guaranteed the Democratic party nomination, right there, served on a silver platter. What would my imaginary and twisted version of Clinton do now?
Not eat the baby and lose? This cute little thing? She’s shocked obviously. This isn’t right, but who would believe her? The delegates have all sworn to deny the indecent proposal. What if she just killed it without eating she suggested jokingly, and nervous, not really committing but hinting at a serious willingness. I mean what’s a baby when the country is at stake? She doesn’t even know the parents, or the newborn’s name.
What else would go through the mind this supremely evil version of my imaginary Clinton? Would she be revolted at the thought of having to eat the baby, or be horrified for the sake of the baby’s safety? She asks if maybe she could torture a puppy instead? She’s told no. It’s baby eating time; these faceless, secretive delegates want nothing less.
Maybe at this point my evil version Hillary would try a hint of emotion to see if should get one of the people around her to break from the rest. You know, maybe try a tear or two.
It’s absurd. And it took me thinking this scenario through and writing it down to see how absurd it was. Hillary Clinton isn’t evil. Ambitious? Yes. But is she a bad person? Forget the eating infants silliness, but consider the question. I think the answer is no.
I experienced some kind of breakthrough. I find her ‘antics’ throughout this primary distasteful and I find it hard to reconcile this with what I think is a well respected person, liked by many. My overall opinion of her seems to be tainted by irrationality. I can’t form a conclusion about her because I no longer can trust my intuition.
That Krugman thinks highly of her adds to my conundrum. I can’t just blindly resent anyone who backs her. Why can’t this primary be over already. I’m tired of it.
I’ve always respected Krugman, and his positive opinion of Hillary has been ad odds with my own. I’ve veered between disliking him and considering his opinion.
Photo Source
