骨鲠在喉，不吐不快
November 4, 2008 was a good day, 'cause we finally saw the light coming from the other side of the tunnel. January 20, 2009 was another good day, 'cause the light moved from horizon to the center of the sky and made the whole world feel warm and hopeful, even though we are still in the chilly winter. I cherish my opportunity to be able to enjoy the bright daylight again, as the rest of the world, or the majority of the rest of the world.
Where there's light, there's shadow. The one I saw hid in the media reports on the C ex-President. Two things in particular: 1) 27% of Americans thought he was a good person, which was then interpreted as 27% thought he was a good President; 2) He himself thought being "the most unfavorable President" in public's eyes proved nothing about his (wrong) doing, other than he is just not popular, and he believes history will prove.
Two big fishbones. And I have to spit them out, one by one.
1. It's not my interest if he is a good person or not. And it shouldn't be American's first interest in him, either. At least not after these eight dark years. "A good person" is a subjective concept, depending on the context, the phase, the emotions. IMO, it is not important or relevant to this country if a President is a good person or a bad person, 'cause there's no uniform standard. But it is important and very relevant to the country if a President is competent--if he or she is a good President. The criteria are clear and uniform: is s/he caring the majority people? Is s/he serving the country? Is s/he making the country better or stronger, and more friendly with the rest of the world? Is s/he truly believing in the constitution and following them? These can be measured and supported by facts and data. I dare to say the C-student-turned-former-President failed again, outside of the Yale campus.
It's not his fault. Just like you can't blame a 5 yr old to start a fire and burn down the house when you leave him matches and papers to play with. Just like you can't blame a blind person driving a bus full of passengers into an icy river. Just like you can't blame a hormone-driving, blood thirst teenager when you leave all your money to him and he would spend and mortgage more to buy weapons and kill neighbor without thinking for one second that the money was needed to provide food and health care for people living in the house, including you.
It's not his fault. It's your fault, "you" the persons who give them something they should be never given to in the first place. And eight years later, "you" still want to fool yourselves by saying "you" 27% of the Americans believed he is a good person, and try to fool us to think 27% of the Americans think he is a good President. Fxxx you!
2) If Yale is as good as her reputation holds, a tiny proof we can see is that even her C student clearly knows how to put on positive spin to reserve his confidence. Yes, the least favorable person in any situation does not necessarily equalize him or her to be a bad person. Yes, certain popularity may prove to be junk when the history moves forward. But NO, the least favorable President does equalize you to be the worst President in the history. But NO, the popularity of your presidency does prove you are the most incompetent President ever. The history will prove. For sure. The history is proving now. The thing is even if when he realizes the history proves what the majority Americans saw on Nov. 4, 2008, it doesn't really matter, cause I bet he'll say, "So? That proves nothing!"
Hopeless. It proves that.
With the light pointing to hope, the shadow lies with the hopeless.
Where there's light, there's shadow. The one I saw hid in the media reports on the C ex-President. Two things in particular: 1) 27% of Americans thought he was a good person, which was then interpreted as 27% thought he was a good President; 2) He himself thought being "the most unfavorable President" in public's eyes proved nothing about his (wrong) doing, other than he is just not popular, and he believes history will prove.
Two big fishbones. And I have to spit them out, one by one.
1. It's not my interest if he is a good person or not. And it shouldn't be American's first interest in him, either. At least not after these eight dark years. "A good person" is a subjective concept, depending on the context, the phase, the emotions. IMO, it is not important or relevant to this country if a President is a good person or a bad person, 'cause there's no uniform standard. But it is important and very relevant to the country if a President is competent--if he or she is a good President. The criteria are clear and uniform: is s/he caring the majority people? Is s/he serving the country? Is s/he making the country better or stronger, and more friendly with the rest of the world? Is s/he truly believing in the constitution and following them? These can be measured and supported by facts and data. I dare to say the C-student-turned-former-President failed again, outside of the Yale campus.
It's not his fault. Just like you can't blame a 5 yr old to start a fire and burn down the house when you leave him matches and papers to play with. Just like you can't blame a blind person driving a bus full of passengers into an icy river. Just like you can't blame a hormone-driving, blood thirst teenager when you leave all your money to him and he would spend and mortgage more to buy weapons and kill neighbor without thinking for one second that the money was needed to provide food and health care for people living in the house, including you.
It's not his fault. It's your fault, "you" the persons who give them something they should be never given to in the first place. And eight years later, "you" still want to fool yourselves by saying "you" 27% of the Americans believed he is a good person, and try to fool us to think 27% of the Americans think he is a good President. Fxxx you!
2) If Yale is as good as her reputation holds, a tiny proof we can see is that even her C student clearly knows how to put on positive spin to reserve his confidence. Yes, the least favorable person in any situation does not necessarily equalize him or her to be a bad person. Yes, certain popularity may prove to be junk when the history moves forward. But NO, the least favorable President does equalize you to be the worst President in the history. But NO, the popularity of your presidency does prove you are the most incompetent President ever. The history will prove. For sure. The history is proving now. The thing is even if when he realizes the history proves what the majority Americans saw on Nov. 4, 2008, it doesn't really matter, cause I bet he'll say, "So? That proves nothing!"
Hopeless. It proves that.
With the light pointing to hope, the shadow lies with the hopeless.