There have been some points in the last few decades when we've been tempted to leave this space blank, with maybe this note the only text in the editorial column:
"We just don't know what to say."
We almost pulled that one off a couple of times. Then we thought of something to say. The news sometimes makes us almost speechless. "Almost" being the key.
Late last week we admit to zooming past a story that Drudge linked to. The article appeared on some off-brand website, and that's like diving into a box of chocolates: You never know what you're going to get. But the headline gave it away as some sort of crackpot, conspiracy, kooky-fringe-dark-Web nonsense: Hillary Clinton accuses Tulsi Gabbard of being a Russian asset.
Yeah, right. And the moonshot never happened, Paul is dead, and the Anti-Masons are behind it. Where'z the real news?
But then the strangest thing happened. The real news started reporting the same thing. Apparently this happened. This is a thing.
That crazy, right-wing, anti-Hillary news source known as CNN filed this report:
"Former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton said Thursday the Russians are currently 'grooming' a Democrat running in the presidential primary to run as a third-party candidate and champion their interests. The comment appears to be directed at Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, who has been accused of being cozy with Russia in the past."
Hillary Clinton never used the congresswoman's name, but apparently she left little doubt who she meant. And all these days later, her team hasn't denied or walked back any of the comments. They're letting it stand.
The sound you hear might be political watchers breathing from our mouths.
CNN also reports that Tulsi Gabbard has real opposition in her home state come the next election, few political watchers back home in Hawaii really understand her, and she has the political ambition of a real Macbeth. But if she were a man, would those be talking points, much less negative ones? Besides, those of us in Arkansas know the stories of ambitious politicians, and understand that sometimes one can turn into a Macbeth. Or a Lady Macbeth.
The news should be this: Where does Hillary Clinton get this idea, what proof does she have, and why is she talking to a podcast--instead of the FBI?
Since she lost the last presidential election, Hillary Clinton has held forth a number of reasons for why she's not in the White House. The fact that voters simply chose her opponent isn't enough, it seems. It's the Russians, gerrymandering, social media brainwashing the electorate, and more.
Now, apparently, the Russians are targeting a Democratic congresswoman as some sort of stalking horse next time around. And might have used Green Party candidate Jill Stein the last time out, too.
Jill Stein and Tulsi Gabbard? Combined, they might gather 3 percent name recognition. Or would have before Hillary Clinton put them both in the news again. (See Cal Thomas' column to the immediate right.)
One would think that if the Rooskies were going to put together some sort of Manchurian candidate, they'd pick somebody who We the People could pick out of crowd, such as Elizabeth Warren or Kamala Harris.
But then, that would make sense. This whole episode didn't make sense from the beginning.
And now we've reached it. The point where we just don't know what else to say. Except:
Remarkable.
Editorial on 10/23/2019