Lewis Carroll's 'The Hunting of the Snark' has often been portrayed as a deeply philosophical, even theological search for the meaning of life without truly identifying, understanding or needing to understand what 'the Snark' actually is. Similarly, on Tuesday we witnessed the latest in a series of televised GOP debates as the Republicans continued their own particular quest for a a true conservative that could explain what American life is and as a consequence win against the liberal, libertine and clearly loathsome Clinton. The underlying argument being that the reason why Obama won two consecutive terms was because the Republicans failed to put up an authentic conservative and therefore, their supporters stayed at home. After all McCain and Romney were just moderate, weak and diluted representations of what life really stands for in the United States. Hence, Bush, Carson, Cruz, Fiorina, Kasich, Paul, Rubio, and Trump have all been identified as potentially the 'real deal', the right type of political animal that can lead the nation's search for conservative fulfilment and happiness. If only they can identify themselves?
Unlike the previous TV debates the moderators from Fox Business and the Wall Street Journal largely focused their questions on financial and security policies and not on personalities, interestingly, this approach provided the best evidence to date of the differing characteristics that each candidate offered in this endless search. Rand Paul provided a view that traditional isolationists would have been happy with, whilst Carly Fiorina offered a corporate conservatism that would have sat well with Big Business if not Wall Street. Moreover, Ben Carson seemed to represent a closer, more genuine understanding of this own individual 'hunt for the snark' since the madness that Carroll induces in his allegory is certainly present in Carson's personal insanity as he tried desperately to square the circle between truth and deceit while not understanding the difference between them.
Predictably, Donald 'Duck' Trump offered the 'entertainment' as with his customary surety that comes from being a 'self made man' he noted that the 11 million illegal immigrants in the US should all be sent home - wherever that is - whilst a slumberous, somnolent Jeb Bush on hearing this view suddenly awoke observing this idea to be errant nonsense without truly understanding why. But clearly both these 'hunters' share common ground; they lack any real substance to support their political and social utterances, the only difference being is at least Trump provides some amusing if sometimes offensive nonsense whilst Bush offers little that is close to thought, entertainment or offence. This leaves Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio. Both are articulate, well groomed and informed, but informatively whilst Cruz spoke willingly on the immigration issue through his own particular understanding of the law Rubio chose not too, since these two differ not so much on the meaning of life but on who it is applicable too.
Therefore, the search continues... with Cruz and Rubio probably offering the Republicans with the best opportunity to defeat the dangerous, insidious and demonic Hilary. However, as we start to leave the ' parallel realities' of the TV debates and enter the true world of primary elections we wonder what will come first the madness that is induced by the Republicans searching for a true American Conservative (the Snark) or for the hunting down and finding the real meaning of life? As McCain and Romney learnt to their cost relatively recently it requires one form of lunacy to prove your right wing conservative credentials to the Republican Convention but subsequently, it takes an entirely different form of neurosis to make these views acceptable to the majority of Americans - hey, that's life wherever that Snark might be!
KK
Unlike the previous TV debates the moderators from Fox Business and the Wall Street Journal largely focused their questions on financial and security policies and not on personalities, interestingly, this approach provided the best evidence to date of the differing characteristics that each candidate offered in this endless search. Rand Paul provided a view that traditional isolationists would have been happy with, whilst Carly Fiorina offered a corporate conservatism that would have sat well with Big Business if not Wall Street. Moreover, Ben Carson seemed to represent a closer, more genuine understanding of this own individual 'hunt for the snark' since the madness that Carroll induces in his allegory is certainly present in Carson's personal insanity as he tried desperately to square the circle between truth and deceit while not understanding the difference between them.
Predictably, Donald 'Duck' Trump offered the 'entertainment' as with his customary surety that comes from being a 'self made man' he noted that the 11 million illegal immigrants in the US should all be sent home - wherever that is - whilst a slumberous, somnolent Jeb Bush on hearing this view suddenly awoke observing this idea to be errant nonsense without truly understanding why. But clearly both these 'hunters' share common ground; they lack any real substance to support their political and social utterances, the only difference being is at least Trump provides some amusing if sometimes offensive nonsense whilst Bush offers little that is close to thought, entertainment or offence. This leaves Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio. Both are articulate, well groomed and informed, but informatively whilst Cruz spoke willingly on the immigration issue through his own particular understanding of the law Rubio chose not too, since these two differ not so much on the meaning of life but on who it is applicable too.
Therefore, the search continues... with Cruz and Rubio probably offering the Republicans with the best opportunity to defeat the dangerous, insidious and demonic Hilary. However, as we start to leave the ' parallel realities' of the TV debates and enter the true world of primary elections we wonder what will come first the madness that is induced by the Republicans searching for a true American Conservative (the Snark) or for the hunting down and finding the real meaning of life? As McCain and Romney learnt to their cost relatively recently it requires one form of lunacy to prove your right wing conservative credentials to the Republican Convention but subsequently, it takes an entirely different form of neurosis to make these views acceptable to the majority of Americans - hey, that's life wherever that Snark might be!
KK
RSS Feed
