Another in the “First Post” series as published over at the legacy site yesterday. Enjoy:

I know full well that most all of you are tired of this little game. The simple fact is: I don’t care. I really enjoyed the initial walk down memory lane as kicked-off by Mr. Alexander. So much so that I extended the game under my own rules.  Now I’m back to do it again…but this time there is, as always, a tie to my ever present agenda. I hope to weave some of this into the post I want to do this weekend. So be sure to study the review material well.

Some background: I “published” my first post about a month after joining but, if the official Ricochet archives are to be believed, it wasn’t until my seventh post almost thirty-nine months later that my work received even a single vote for promotion. As recorded in those same archives, it took until my eleventh post almost five years and ten months after my first effort to manage something that took that “important” leap after it received a whopping 26 votes for promotion. Here is that post:

___   ___   ___

With a hat tip to Instapundit, I bring you today’s winner of the internet:

“If you want to know what power looks like, watch a man safely, even smugly, do interviews for decades, without ever worrying whether he will be asked the questions he doesn’t want to answer.” — Monica Lewinsky

While I did hesitate a bit to bring that to you because the topic easily slips, a mere two decades hence, into the all too common (and, for the most part, intentionally — either consciously or unconsciously) misunderstood Clinton impeachment arena that embarrasses far too many (even in this neighborhood), there is a whole lot of awesomeness in that one sentence. For those rather new to the news-junkie game (i.e., less than a decade of really paying attention) this hits hard at the serial dishonesty that our politico-media class has operated under since 1992.

“We” all had to pretend not to notice the rapist just off the stage in order to allow the victim-bashing, enabling wife to try her hand in the big leagues too. The unrelenting repetition of that pretending went on for so long that it became a learned habit for some and the primary mode of unthinkingly observing the game for a whole new generation or more. So much so that far too many don’t even flinch at the similar serial (and oh-so-tiresome) dishonesty of the “Trump-Charlottesville-Racialism” types on either side of the aisle. But, I digress.

And yet, as a commenter at Instapundit mentioned, the word “power” just isn’t correct. As I have written about before, the most magnificent demonstration of real power to slip into the public arena (while at the same time remaining mostly unnoticed), and the one that must serve as the definitive demonstration of the term for all time, can best be summed up in these [eighteen] words:

I can only imagine the immense collective power that resides in [the still anonymous] Clients #1 through #8

That previously mentioned commenter suggested “privilege” as the more proper term but, while I cannot improve on that at this time, I do suspect improvement is possible. Any thoughts?

___   ___   ___

I do like that one. I have used some of that material on this bandwidth before and since (see here and here) but I do like seeing this one in full. The sad themes are even stronger (and spread across an even wider pool of filth) today than four short years ago when it was posted. 

I do want to point out that it is comment sections after the post that I really enjoy the most. (It is not the number of comments that counts, it is the quality.) It is there that I hope to turn for tie-ins to my next post. Specifically, I am focused on the “selective speakers-of-truth-to-power” line brought to the conversation by TBA.  Of course, that will all to naturally lead into the anti-intellectual era of un-seriousness that is now all around us and that I have posted about much over the years since. Could be fun (unless I decide to hit the cocktails early and often this weekend.) We’ll see…

Again, study the review material.