Jozef: <<My point is that, ethical and political issues aside, what makes the story "interesting" to people on Main Street USA is not that Pres. Clinton signed the waiver against the advice of the State Dept., but that he signed the waiver for a company whose CEO was the largest individual donor to the DNC.>>
<<You make it sound like a coincidence.>>
No intention on my part to make it sound like a coincidence or otherwise, Jozef. I think that after this many posts of the same "cutted-and-pasted" parts of various posts, many of the comments are taking on attributes of the kid's game "telephone". Remember it? One person says, "The carpet is yellow." but by the time it's been passed from one persons ear to the last it's become, "The pet in the car says, "Hello"."
Since you're interested enough to post, I'll explain that what I was trying to say was that I think that the "shock factor" of all this news on the general public has to do with the "conspiracy" element. People aren't interested in "boring" or "usual" news; they love the little sneaky, secrety, gossipy things. TV stuff. It seems to be human nature. Nothing interesting about, "I saw Mike at the water cooler". Whole thing becomes very interesting when it becomes, "I saw Mike at the water cooler and he gave Suzie a kiss when he thought no one was looking.".
Sorry to bore you with my explanation, Jozef, but I feel you misinterpreted the point of my post. Easy to do in an on-line chat. I'm not all that interested in the political side of this event. Too much room for misunderstanding, too. I've decided to forgo any more political posts on SI, tempting as it is at times.
Regards. ...Tim |
