Media Note: Hillary Clinton’s Behavior - Guest Column By Zachary R. Wood

WASHINGTON, DC - Hillary Rodham’s well-disguised family weapon — Clinton Foundation — enjoys strategically investing and manipulating cutting edge technology to plant powerful resources in fertile soils of medical health-science, artificial intelligence and highly malleable neurological software.

Clinton Foundation — marred often by Hillary weak or in defeat — suffers blistering criticism from observant critics across the globe. Some call Clinton Foundation a slush fund or demonstrate its unscrupulous tactics and dealmaking. Others focus on range of suspicious activity and possibility of criminal conflict. Note also two notable challenges to integrity of the foundation:

1) The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s 2016 public corruption probe of Clinton Foundation financial expediture; access and donation intermingling.

2) Boston Globe’s editorial board urged the foundation to stop accepting donations of any kind for remainder of her beaten 2016 campaign and shut down entirely if Hillary Clinton had won a presidential election.

What is worse? Bill Clinton’s sleaze and sewage pride, but necessarily that evisceration calls for a vivid book proposal I might explore next year.

For time being, I will comment on Ms. Clinton’s behavior and openly encourage writers and journalists to thoroughly interrogate Hillary Clinton’s use and intent in using state-of-the-art technology.

Hillary is the most maligned presidential loser in American history.

Distilling my own impression: She’s a grating woman incapable of discovering sexual interest in her husband; this woman who, for some reason, married a philandering man who feels nauseous at the thought of their intercourse.

What else? Briefly, Hillary is stiff on the stump, curtly arrogant, clueless on social cues; more obviously fake in her every attempt to relate to people. Rodham frustrates because she feigns political adequacy and her deficits breed self-delusion: It’s like Hillary expects applause from all of her Black rapper friends.

I don’t know. I’ve been reading about new technology lately, talking to family, and researching personal experience. My careful review should aim at Hillary Clinton. Novel invisible technology can be designed and used to control cognitive function, trigger cerebrovascular and cardiovascular obstruction — and inflict penile and testicular pain by castration.

I want to know what Hillary Clinton thinks about these excruciating tech capabilities. I want to know if she has access to or has acquired these technologies.

Does she use them?

I want to know if Hillary Clinton embodies so many physical properties of pig manure that she might ever rationalize castrating, say, a former Clinton supporter who grew tired of her abuse and tried to expose her ruthless cruelty.

My hope is that thoughtful scholars and journalists may consider looking into Hillary Clinton’s history of exacting revenge on her political enemies, and people they care about.

Finally — I will think of a woman I care about who knows Hillary Clinton. I do consider close study of every legal means by which I and other American citizens can pressure Ms. Rodham.

There are more details and links to significant online resources in the original article, see https://medium.com/@zacharyw548/media-note-hillary-clintons-behavior-d11b1d16257e

Zachary R. Wood is an assistant curator at TED, as well as a former columnist and assistant opinion editor at The Guardian, a former Robert L. Bartley Fellow at The Wall Street Journal, and a class of 2018 graduate of Williams College. He is the author of Uncensored (Random House, 2019). 

Bill Clinton Ever Sickens: Guest Column By Zachary R. Wood

WASHINGTON, DC - Two weeks ago, I decided to commence research for a large writing project on ex-president Bill Clinton. My first task: Review some thirty or so articles in popular press about Bill Clinton’s flaws and mistakes. After that, I talked to three political scientists at my alma mater, Williams College, about his administrative hallmarks and leadership failures. Then I interviewed Juanita Broaddrick over the phone for roughly twenty minutes. Her testimony was detailed, thoughtful, and sounded credible. The information she gave me about Mr. Clinton was violent, severe, vivid, even startling.

In Ms. Broaddrick’s words, Clinton inveighed after raping her: “Don’t worry I’m sterile. I had mumps when I was a boy. You better get some ice on that (her bleeding upper lip).” Bill, she explained to me, is a man callous with no conscience.

I paused before responding.

Since my conversation with Ms. Broaddrick, I have read another dozen articles about Bill Clinton’s shame and infidelity in The Washington Post, New York Times, The Atlantic, and Boston Globe. Tomorrow I should revisit books by David Maraniss and John D. Gartner that explore Bill Clinton’s difficult upbringing in Hope, Arkansas. I might also peruse some books that parse his muck and sexual repulse for Hillary Clinton. For example, The Case Against Hillary Clinton by Peggy Noonan.

My writing on Mr. Clinton may take as its starting place an interesting story I heard from a former colleague at a dinner party about how Bill Clinton found himself emailing Hillary’s campaign staff with concerns — because Mrs. Clinton did not want to hear from Bill herself. As my friend explained, he emailed Robby Mook about Hillary’s deficits and received no response.

This article for ABC leads me to believe that Bill Clinton was heavily blamed for defeating his wife in 2008, so Hillary tended to ignore pudge of his ego.

Bill’s ego is gaseous and gooey. Imagine a rich spinach dip with jalapeño, cheese, cream, onion, tomato, and green chilies. A blob of fatty acid screaming excess and high cholesterol. Mr. Clinton, as one political scientist told me, was a soft populist with talent who never matured as mama’s boy.

I look forward to more.

Zachary R. Wood is an assistant curator at TED, as well as a former columnist and assistant opinion editor at The Guardian, a former Robert L. Bartley Fellow at The Wall Street Journal, and a class of 2018 graduate of Williams College. He is the author of Uncensored (Random House, 2019). 

Would Jesus Ever Boo God? Thoughts on the Republican Values of Christ

I'm a political scientist, not a theologian. I've been a Democrat and a Republican. When I was a Democrat, I remember I was hostile to Christians. Accordingly, I understand the thinking of Democrats who want to make Christianity less important in our culture. I understand why the Democrats booed the very mention of God at their convention a few years ago.

When I was a Democrat I did conflate Christianity, white supremacy, and capitalism. I saw them all as expressions of the same thing. I thought that the Christian emphasis on God's presence in daily life was a superstitious idea that held back social progress and progressive public policies. If you believe there is no God, then it makes sense that government should take on the responsibilities we would assign to him. The countries that embrace atheism are also among the leaders in creating highly taxed economies that provide massive levels of public services. That makes sense to me too.

Today, I'm a follower of Christ and a Republican. Due to my previous experience as a highly active Democrat - I used to pal around with Barack Obama - it makes sense to me that as I became more spiritual I found a welcoming home in the Republican party.

As of today, I am pro-life, fearful of powerful public employee unions, and vehemently opposed to affirmative action. I see affirmative action as the equivalent of racial discrimination. I do not think it is helpful at all. It leaves its victims enraged and permanently filled with bitterness and resentment.

I am especially concerned about the increased influence and military might of the Communist Party in China. As a former academic, I am concerned about freedom of speech and cancel culture.

In my view, I just do not see how Jesus would be a member of a political party where it is okay to boo God.

I do not see how Jesus would ever vote for someone who promoted abortion.

Everything I read about him tells me he would be hostile to public officials who took advantage of their positions to get rich. He would bristle at restrictions on thought and free speech.

I do not see how Jesus would approve of racial discrimination, especially against young white and Asian boys and girls who have done nothing wrong. I don't think Jesus would be pro-China either given China has a totalitarian bent, strong anti-Christian, anti-religious policies.

As far as I am concerned, an atheistic perspective naturally leads to policies that are favored by liberals and Democrats. Following Christ, however, leads to policies that are favored by the Republican party. As I said earlier, I do not see Jesus being a member of a party that booed God at its convention. If Jesus witnessed that, I suspect he would be tearing down the state flags and flinging around the delegate's hats.

For a good book that helps explain the correlation between religious belief and conservative political orientation, I recommend Thomas Sowell's A Conflict of Visions. His book is particularly helpful in understanding the origins of politically motivated violence and why it was tolerated by liberals and leftists and thoroughly condemned by Republicans throughout most of 2020. John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.

For an excellent book that lays out the political beliefs consistent with the teachings of the Bible, check out Jim Garlow's excellent book, Well Versed. 

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist who has taught at many of our nation's formerly prestigious schools including Williams College in MA. 

Home Disappointment: Still No Home Depot Dishwasher - After a Month of Waiting for Delivery from Temco Logistics

I had a very negative experience with Home Depot - Laguna Niguel. My wife went in for hip replacement surgery on December 22. A week earlier the dishwasher stopped working. We bought that dishwasher from the same store back in June 2018. At any rate, we ordered a new dishwasher. Eventually, they told us we would receive it on January 14, 2021.

The problem is that the crew they sent over from Temco Logistics to deliver and install the new dishwasher was very negative from the start. They didn't call us ahead of time as promised. They just showed up. Then, their lead guy, David, said there was a problem because there was water in the old dishwasher. To me, this seemed like a simple fix. Scoop out the old water. The other technician from Temco Logistics, Juan, seemed nice enough.

Eventually, David asked that I give him some towels to dry it out. Problem solved. Next, he comes backs and says he cannot get the old Home Depot dishwasher out. Somehow he got it into his head that the tile floor was too high for him to remove the dishwasher. He bragged to me that he had 10 years of experience at this and that it was impossible for him to remove it. He implied that we had installed the tile floor after the old dishwasher had been installed.

This was silly. Their own records from Home Depot would show we had that dishwasher installed in June 2018. That crew managed to pull out the earlier dishwasher and put the present one in its place with no problems at all. Even worse, David was insistent that getting the old dishwasher out of there was my responsibility now.

My gut feeling is that I had some leverage over them, but only if I did not accept delivery of the dishwasher. The lady back at the Temco Logistics headquarters ' office was insistent that they wouldn't go out of their way to fix the situation. I only had two take it or leave it choices. They would deliver the dishwasher and leave it with me or they would take it back to the warehouse. I told them to take it back.

So, I called the local Home Depot store and was told to call back in the morning. I called the national office and was also told to call back in the morning because, they said, the delivery company was closed for the day.

I'm on hold right now with my second call with the national office. I'm killing time and listening to their music even as I write this. Basically, it seems to me that Home Depot owes us to fix this. If the old dishwasher is too tight to remove, then this is a problem they created for themselves back in June 2018. Even worse, there are substantial complaints online about Temco Logistics. As far as I can tell, my experience is strikingly similar to that of other folks who have dealt with Temco Logistics. The best advice I saw online was the recommendation to not sign any paperwork until they have your appliance installed, working, and the old one out the door.

At this rate, I'm done with Home Depot. I cannot believe that they would think so little of their customers that they would work with a firm like Temco Logistics. The dishwasher we bought from Home Depot in June 2018 worked for only about two and a half years. It was installed incorrectly - if I believe David at Temco Logistics. Next, we are cheated in terms of the promised delivery date. We are again cheated when the crew from Temco Logistics refused to take out the old one, carry it away, and install the new one. I'm beyond frustrated at this point.

Home Depot was a great brand at one point. As of today, however, I will be shopping elsewhere. Ironically, I got a call from someone at Temco Logistics asking if I wanted to set up another delivery time. In the message, the lady repeated the assertion that my tiles were too high. I'm not returning that call until I get better service from them and Home Depot.

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.