Well, the book sat around in her apartment unread as she went about her busy life. It was a bit esoteric and she had no time. So always wanting to be helpful, I offered to take it home, read it, and tell her what it was all about. Let her know if there were any gems of wisdom in it we could put to good use.  

I was blown away.

The book is a collection of Buddhist scriptures and commentary that pertain to the achievement of perfect insight. Though a good deal of the discussion struck me as repetitive, and perhaps for good reason, one simple, basic principle became crystal clear. In order for one to obtain perfect insight, one must relinquish all attachments.

Having studied a good bit of communication psychology, there was a familiar ring to this. Going under numerous names, we also know attachments as filters, bias, inclination, predisposition, prejudice, “things we cling to”, preferences, desires, etc. I think you get the picture. Each and every one of us has a truckload of attachments that serve as roadblocks on the pathway to perfect insight. Rarely do we ever get a good handle on all of them. Perhaps only a sacred few tucked away in some mountain monastery can ever grasp and maintain such an enlightened state.

But that isn’t to say we can’t all make an attempt at getting a bit further along the road than where we normally live. To understand the Buddhist teachings, in a way it seems quite simple. It’s more of a release, than a reaching. More a letting go, than a grasping.

And once we have let go of all our attachments, the world becomes clearer.

There's a passage from Tao Te Ching:

“ Do you have the patience to wait

till your mud settles and the water is clear?

Can you remain unmoving

Till the right action arises by itself?

The Master doesn’t seek fulfillment.

Not seeking, not expecting

She is present, and can welcome all things.”

There’s too much confusion,  I can’t get no relief.

Journalist, they drink my wine,  admen twist my words,

None of them along the line, know what any of it is worth.”

“No reason to get excited,” the chief he kindly spoke.

“There are many here among us, who understand the force of hope.

For you and they, have made this more, and it has become our fate.

So let us not talk falsely now, the hour is getting late.”

All along the circus trail, pundits sold their views,

While politicians came and went, public servants, too.

Outside in the distance, an elephant turns foul,

November is approaching, and the wind begins to howl.

  Cue Jimmy

So what have we learned about Hillary Clinton in this exhaustive, knock-down-drag-out, go-on-for-ever, divisive, contentious, incredibly expensive, not-over-yet, Democratic primary that we can use to make a judgment on her fitness as a president:

1. She surrounds herself with advisors that tend to influence her toward manipulating facts in order to achieve an objective.

2.  She is skilled in delivering misleading statements designed to influence large segments of the population into believing things that are not true.

3.  She employs agents that privately work on objectives that are in direct opposition to policies she publicly claims to champion.

4.  She values individual achievement over party unity and success.

In what ways could these attributes shape a possible, but mostly improbable, Hillary Clinton presidency:

1.  She could lie to the American people over critical matters of state.

2.  She could revel in the awesome power of the office and lose her sense of obligation to the average American.

Do we now know enough to make an informed decision?

The DNC made it clear to the Florida legislature that their delegates would not be seated if the primary date was moved up. This policy supported a valid democratic principle that candidates should start their campaigns in small states allowing for the electorate to get to know lesser known candidates with less financial ability. As their recognition and strength grew, they would be better equipped to challenge more established candidates in the larger states later. That should appear to every Democrat the fair and American thing to do.

Each of the candidates in the race at the time signed off on a pledge not to campaign in the two states if they chose to defy this DNC policy.  The Republican legislature in Florida, with some Democratic participation, proceeded to hold an early primary anyway, putting into effect the signed pledges.

I was under no illusion that my vote for Edwards would have any more effect than an informal popularity contest. This fact should have been well known throughout the state. The vast majority of the voter turnout was for a referendum on a controversial property tax amendment. I imagine there was a significantly low turnout from those who are not property owners.

But now an irrational emotion has been brought to a boil behind the idea that these voters are being disenfranchised. How often does every state in the union get to play a part in the presidential primary process? It is true that the entire debacle should have never happened. But it certainly was not the fault of the DNC or any particular candidate.

What is troubling is the fact that Clinton is intent on retracting her written pledge upon the reason that it would benefit her ailing position. What type of character or crisis management style does this demonstrate? Would she be this quick to go back on campaign pledges or international treaties at the first moment they became unfavorable in any way to her current status quo.  It becomes even more absurd when you look at the delegate math and realize that even Florida and Michigan would still not solve her problem.

And the practice of this principle, as we saw Wednesday night, is not just found in desperate and unscrupulous political campaigns. The Fourth Estate has also embraced it. Or should I say the Corporate Estate? And it too has a campaign to win.

Why should ABC spend two hours of prime time focusing on issues that are detrimental to the interests of its major advertisers or its own conglomerate greed. The mainstream media, instead of acting as the unbiased observer, has a dog in this fight no different from the unemployed factory worker in rural Pennsylvania. Just the odds are a bit off balance.

But it’s probably best to let a wiser and more eloquent writer explain it:

“As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.”

 -Abraham Lincoln

If the Clinton Duo's fall from grace had not already appeared to be leaving the station, I might have been surprised and saddened. Wait. On second thought, I was, and still am, saddened. I used to marvel at Bill's command of political issues and his love for the governmental process set forth in our Constitution. And I withheld no less admiration for Hillary as she stepped out of the role of First Lady and was finally able to apply her well-honed talent.  

But what is this distorted sense of loyalty Bill is desperately clinging to, and no doubt, has Hillary's tacit approval? Has our representative democracy suddenly devolved into a network of feudal obedience with kingpins calling in past favors? Now, I'm certainly not so naive to think this isn't the norm for mediocre politicians and many unfortunately powerful ones. But I guess I just expected more from the Clintons who have built a legacy on setting high ideals for the Democratic Party.

An elected representative's loyalty should be, first and foremost, to his country and the people he represents. It should not be to those in high position with the ability to dish out coveted appointments.  

Bill needs to chill out. He also needs to take some time off and perhaps revisit some of the basics. Maybe a good place to start would be James Madison's Federalist #10 where he warns against political factions.   

Real Patriots use real words to call out their country’s faults. Our Founders used fiery words and much more when faced with injustice. Many of their fellow countrymen, complacent in the status quo and fearful of change, also tried to shame them for their disloyalty. Yet they persevered.  And today, we all owe such a great debt of gratitude to their Obnoxious Belligerence.