I have noticed that, historically, many blogs want to cut not just to the chase but even more bare bones than that.

They’ll make an indifferent or obtuse reference to an idea or a concept, mandating that you click on a particular link or series of links to discover what it is that’s their specific point.

I submit: those bloggers, which would include some Major Players, ARE LAZY. Further: obfuscation sucks.

I would submit, in terms of blogposts:

You don’t, you lose potential readers.

Maybe That’s Now, perhaps That’s Cool.

At Bloviating Zeppelin, if I have something to say I’ll write it UP FRONT and I won’t make you DIG to “discover” my point.

Life is too short for TechnoBullshitBabbleLinks.

By, of all places, Vanity Fair magazine — not a customary outlet for either much truth or Conservatism.

With this apparent glaring exception; I suspect this may create quite the Left Tsunami.

In the July issue of Vanity Fair, author Todd S. Purdum writes in part:

But among the not-so-small cadre of Clinton friends and former aides, concern about the company the boss keeps is persistent, palpable, and pained. No former president of the United States has ever traveled with such a fast crowd, and most 61-year-old American men of Clinton’s generation don’t, either. “I just think those guys are radioactive,” one former aide to Clinton who is still in occasional affectionate touch with him told me recently, referring to Burkle and (to a lesser extent) Bing. “I stay far away from them.”

Another former aide, trusted by Clinton for his good judgment, said, “On the sort of money, women, all that stuff … I’m the bad guy. All this stuff is kept away from me. Whatever they’re doing, they definitely view me as somebody you cannot confide in.”
A longtime Clinton-watcher, who has had ties to the former president since his first campaign for governor of Arkansas, said of Clinton’s sometimes questionable associations, “I don’t know what to make of any of that, if it’s a voyeuristic experience, or if he’s participating in it.”

Yet another long-serving Clinton aide said simply, “If you figure it out, would you let me know?”

Bill Clinton’s relevance—and his presence in public life—is as close to permanent as any politician’s can be. Before touching off a string of controversies in his wife’s campaign this year, he was among the most popular figures on the planet, one of only three Democratic presidents in the 20th century to serve two full terms. His looming presence will make him a factor in the Democratic vice-presidential sweepstakes, the fall campaign, and every future presidential election of his lifetime, whatever his wife’s fate.

One of my very first posts on this blog, made on June 22nd of 2004, I wrote:

Sigh. I repeat, at the risk of being repetitive (The Department of Redundancy Department): this is in fact the Legacy That Won’t Go Away — though not for lack of trying on my part.

It really is quite sad. I have no true animus towards Mr. Clinton. He is a lamentable and pathetic creature, plagued by his upbringing (I shall not even go into the paths created by divorce here) and inflated sense of self esteem and worth. A brilliant mind, yes. A wonderful manipulator, yes. But a legacy?

Here it is: here is Mr. Clinton’s “Legacy:”
— Semen stains on a dress.
— “I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.”
— Impeachment.

And, oh, Bill? Guess what? You only have yourself to thank for that.

Purdum writes further:

To know Clinton is, sooner or later, to be exasperated by his indiscipline and disappointed by his shortcomings. But through it all, it has been easy enough to retain an enduring admiration—even affection—for a president whose sins against decorum and the dignity of his office seemed venial in contrast to the systemic indifference, incompetence, corruption, and constitutional predations of his successor’s administration. That is, easy enough until now.

This winter, as Clinton moved with seeming abandon to stain his wife’s presidential campaign in the name of saving it, as disclosures about his dubious associates piled up, as his refusal to disclose the names of donors to his presidential library and foundation and his and his wife’s reluctance to release their income-tax returns created crippling and completely avoidable distractions for Hillary Clinton’s own long-suffering ambition, I found myself asking again and again, What’s the matter with him?

But the abomination continues, Purdum writes in fini:

Clinton benefits handsomely from Truman’s foresight. His presidential pension has totaled more than $1.2 million since he left office, and despite his fantastic private-sector income, an analysis this spring by the Web site Politico showed that he has taken almost as much in taxpayer dollars for his post-presidential existence as the other two living ex-presidents—Jimmy Carter and George H. W. Bush—combined. Since 2001, Clinton has received more in almost every category—pension, staff salaries, supplies—than any of his colleagues in that smallest of clubs. Before Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford died, Clinton’s telephone and rent expenses came close to exceeding the comparable expenses for all four then living former presidents combined. Part of the difference is that Clinton served eight years in office, entitling him to a federal health-insurance plan and a higher pension than Ford, Carter, or Bush, and part is that his office space in Manhattan is more expensive than space in Atlanta or Houston.

Omigawd; these are truths that the Demorats and MSM shall do their best to quash. Only took them 9+ years to come to fruition?

So he spends his time veering between feeling sorry for himself and working to help others, between doing good and giving his enemies fresh ammunition, between vindicating his legacy and vitiating it. “So much of modern culture is characterized by stories of self-indulgence and self-destruction,” Clinton writes near the end of Giving, from which he earned $6.3 million and gave away $1 million (or 16 percent) to charity. “So much of modern politics is focused not on honest differences of policy but on personal attacks. So much of modern media is dominated by people who earn fortunes by demeaning others, defining them by their worst moments, exploiting their agonies. Who’s happier? The uniters or the dividers? The builders or the breakers? The givers or the takers? I think you know the answer.”

I used to think he did, too. But substitute the words “my life” for the words “modern culture” and “modern politics” in the passage above, and you’ll have a pretty succinct summary of what Bill Clinton has, at last, become.

Four former Clinton aids said Clinton was seeing any number of babes “on the road” these days. It is clear that WJC has encountered even a towel and some KY quite more frequently than his very own wife. These are all political risks. Asked about the only two-term Demorat president to exist in 80 years, the Demorats have clearly indicated they are willing to not only kick Bill to the curb, but Hill as well.

We’d best, as Conservatives, take this into account — and you read it here first.