Kathleen Parker's column in your Friday, August 23rd paper astonished me. Parker's take on Hillary Clinton: She can save the world. At first I suspected sarcasm, but Parker, who is paid to think and write, seems sincere. She reminds me now of the New York Times' David Brooks, who is also paid to think and write, on candidate Obama: "Looking at his pant leg and his perfectly creased pant, I'm thinking, a) he's going to be president and b) he'll be a very good president."
Granted, Hillary was able to save suicide victim Vince Foster's purported-private files from the police and the press by immediately sending her staff to raid his office before any "controlling legal authority" could investigate, but save the world? Hillary Clinton? And didn't Brooks' pant-leg idol Obama already do that? As Obama told us, in his nomination-victory speech, "...this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on Earth." Seems like there's little left for Hillary; saving the world's already been taken up and completely accomplished.
Maybe Hillary could get herself appointed to an impressive government leadership position and, plugging a hole in the line, step up and save the life of the endangered ambassador to a strife-torn country with timely security recommendations. Oh, wait, she already blew that chance. Could she, perhaps, organize and force upon us a massively-bureaucratic, deceptively-expensive, increasingly-unpopular, govern-mandated health insurance? And name it after herself? Maybe that's Hillary's true calling, Kathleen. Or maybe she should have just stuck to (figuratively) wiping up her husband's penis drips and trading shadowed-account, all-losses-covered cattle futures.
Submitted by Virtual Newsroom