She ends with a fantastic quote from Christopher Hitchens, who depressingly predicts a Clinton victory: "there's something horrible and undefeatable about people who have no life except the worship of power . . . people who don't want the meeting to end, the people who just are unstoppable, who only have one focus, no humanity, no character, nothing but the worship of money and power. They win in the end."
Jeepers. How can good, kind, educated liberals vote for Hillary the zombie-queen?
I understand why the brainless part of the democratic base votes for the Hill-bot. I am not confused about why a 65 year old woman named Ethel living in a Scranton blue-collar neighborhood would vote for Hillary. Ethel has probably never been too fond of black people, let alone young black men. Ethel doesn't watch or read much news. Ethel remembers the 90s fondly, when her son, who works in a unionized machine shop, saw his earnings and savings peak. Ethel has worked hard all her life, and she believes Clinton has too, and therefore she deserves to be president. Obama is just a smart, cool lawyer guy, who talks real good. Ethel has no idea what the Harvard Law review is, she doesn't care, and she just doesn't trust him.
But Ethel is the antithesis of Allison F., who is smart, engaged, highly educated. Someone who should know the score.
Noonan cites an Obama supporter, who, on The Root, a really smart new web mag for African Americans, calls it like everyone sees it:
"This is a dirty campaign and since Senator Barack Obama won't say it, I will. The media has not been unfair to Senator Clinton, they have been extremely soft. There are elephants in the room that need to be addressed. Can anyone say Whitewater? How about impeachment? Let's not forget Osama bin Laden. You can bet Republicans will be talking about these issues. So why aren't Democrats? Clinton's central arguments in the campaign are basically a mirage, and they are dangerous ones both for the party and the country."
So Allison F., I hereby invite you to guest-post. E-mail me the answers to the following questions and I will post them on this blog:
1. How do you overlook a lifetime of Clinton scandals?
2. How can Clinton win this without destroying the democratic party?
3. Even if she does win, how can Clinton ever get a mandate from the American people? How will she ever get republicans, African-Americans (not likely to forgive the Clintons any time soon) or the youth vote? How will she make things up to all the little states and red states she has derided for going to Barack?
We have to know Allison. How can smart democrats sit in the back of the Clinton bus, and watch her drive it right off the cliff? Is it all a grand homage to Thelma and Louise? I have to know.
So Allison F., I hereby invite you to guest-post. E-mail me the answers to the following questions and I will post them on this blog:
1. How do you overlook a lifetime of Clinton scandals?
2. How can Clinton win this without destroying the democratic party?
3. Even if she does win, how can Clinton ever get a mandate from the American people? How will she ever get republicans, African-Americans (not likely to forgive the Clintons any time soon) or the youth vote? How will she make things up to all the little states and red states she has derided for going to Barack?
We have to know Allison. How can smart democrats sit in the back of the Clinton bus, and watch her drive it right off the cliff? Is it all a grand homage to Thelma and Louise? I have to know.
6 comments:
As someone who proudly voted for Hill in the Texas Democratic primary, here is why I made my choice:
- Obama has the power to be a transformational candidate, ala, Reagan. That would be bad for Republican. I have to say, however, that the "Obama Sheen" is getting less and less shiny the more the Clinton Machine piles on him.
- Clinton is a poor general election candidate. I seriously think she will have a very hard time winning key, must-win Democratic "blue" states like Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Washington state, against McCain. She would play defense for the whole race, ala, Mondale in '84.
- Clinton sports a tight, fierce, frosted mini-wheat hairdo. The coif is immobile, unyielding and shatter-resistant, sort of like her personality.
- A large chunk of Democrats loathe Hillary. No one dislikes Obama.
To clarify to readers not in the know - you voted for Hillary to help McCain.
Mark,
Today I have 2 sets of childrens' lessons and two birthday parties. So time is very limited for now.
This morning I woke up prepared to Blog (apparently everyone woke up prepared to blog something!) that we need to think about the importance of uniting against McCain.
Last night Steve and I watched Bill Moyers Journal with Mickey Edwards an OKLA traditional conservative and the editor of Reason (the leading libertarian mouthpiece) whose name I can't remember. They They discussing who McCain really is, esp with regard to foreign policy which is possibly the only area he truly cares about and the area in which his political philosophy is more radical than Bush.
Okay the kids are screaming for breakfast...so my guest post response will have to wait for now.
Alison
I can't wait to read your post. Before I can get my mind around uniting with team Hillary to fight McCain, I need to understand what it is Hillary brings to the party, and what it is Hillary brings to the white house. As far as I can tell, she only brings everyone down.
Simply saying McCain is far worse than Hillary is not enough reason for me to vote for her. I need some POSITIVE reasons.
Oops, that last post was me, not jenny.
I have spent the day pondering my “assignment” from Maker's Mark.
My first thought was simply to reiterate that Steve and I like policy and the policies we most agreed with were hers. And people I know who are peers (socio- economically) that voted for Hillary like policy too. And to the extent that Obama’s campaign was getting caught up in its own message of inspiration I felt at greater unease with it.
Now, Steve suggested that we state what outcomes we are seeking in the next Presidency and how Clinton’s policies line up with that. At this point we are especially concerned about the economy.
But that approach, even if we had time for it (which we don’t) would be to take the high road, and as we used to say in grad school, [bracket] the considerations most on Mark’s mind which are more personal and political than policy-oriented.
But I will make one nod in this direction and refer you to the American Prospect cover story on whether to choose a “talented manager” or “visionary” to answer the question of what she has to offer.
Another thought about the assignment is to say, if you want to hate Hillary, I/we can’t stop you. However, you are, in the words of Donald Trump, FIRED, from being an official spokesperson for the Obama campaign for failing to practice his New Politics. You can join Ms. Power outside the camp.
It is not a question of how can I overlook Clinton’s skeletons, but how are you going to do it.
By the way, I am sure you read The Houston Press cover story, Obama and Me. So even folks with short political cv’s have skeletons. [Walker, if you missed this article, look for it online.]
Here is the important irony to consider: facing Hillary is the ultimate field test of Obama’s ideals. Some are advising that he go negative, asking about tax returns etc. I have already posted that that is the wrong way to go negative (i.e. he needs to go negative using the high ground: I’m the better leader because… her record is…)
But why take my word for it. Here is what David Brooks has to say on the topic:
"Unless they (the Obama people) consciously reject conventional politics, the accusations will build on each other. The BlackBerries will buzz. The passions will rise. The Obama forces will see hints of Clinton corruption all around, and they’ll accuse and accuse again. The war will begin to take control, and once you’re halfway through you can’t suddenly surrender because it’s become too rough.
And the Clinton people will draw them every step of the way. Clinton can’t compete on personality, but a knife fight is her only real hope of victory. She has nothing to lose because she never promised to purify America. Her campaign doesn’t depend on the enthusiasm of upper-middle-class goo-goos. On Thursday, a Clinton aide likened Obama to Ken Starr just to badger them on.
As the trench warfare stretches on through the spring, the excitement of Obama-mania will seem like a distant, childish mirage. People will wonder if Obama ever believed any of that stuff himself. And even if he goes on to win the nomination, he won’t represent anything new. He’ll just be a one-term senator running for president.
In short, a candidate should never betray the core theory of his campaign, or head down a road that leads to that betrayal. Barack Obama doesn’t have an impressive record of experience or a unique policy profile. New politics is all he’s got. He loses that, and he loses everything. Every day that he looks conventional is a bad day for him."
But his conclusion is even more significant:
"Besides, the real softness of the campaign is not that Obama is a wimp. It’s that he has never explained how this new politics would actually produce bread-and-butter benefits to people in places like Youngstown and Altoona.
If he can’t explain that, he’s going to lose at some point anyway."
Which brings us back to the Ethel’s of the world who do vote for Hillary and back to the politics of the situation, which includes the fact that real rank and file voters have made this a close race but the outcome is going to be decided by the party leadership. The first order of business is to resolve the MI/FL mess. While I am perfectly happy to exclude MI, I blame Howard Dean bumbling for creating FL situation in the first place. I believe it is only fair that FL get to re-vote or have their delegate status renegotiated.
Question two: How can Clinton win this without destroying the Democratic Party? By “this” I assume you mean the primary. Well, first of all, I am not entirely sure she will win. Being up for a knife fight, notwithstanding. But I am pretty sure that if she offers to be a VP and Obama turns her down, he’ll look like a bit of a shmuck. And I am pretty sure that if she agrees to pony up her half of the money for a FL re-vote and he doesn’t, that won’t look so good either. Let me ask you something, would you be asking this question about a really tough competitor who wasn’t Clinton? Do tough primaries DESTROY a political party? That’s an overstatement. (Although the Party Leadership could possibly destroy it – see above.) Could her nomination alienate some voters? Sure. But , hey, I was completely alienated when the Party choose John Kerry to run last time.
Question three seems to me to be asking: ”If she does win how will she be Barack Obama?” She won’t be.
Good night and Good Luck.
Alison Fairfield
Post a Comment