But I must be wrong.
Today, there is a rec-listed diary with oodles of comments that utterly attacks the presidency of Bill Clinton. Many of the comments that follow are even worse. Chief among them one which calls Bill Clinton "dirt".
Now, I was a left critic of Clinton then and continue to be now - even though I voted for him twice. I support Sanders over Hillary Clinton. And many of the diarist's criticisms of Clinton are valid - in isolation. But the diary lacks any broad context - especially political context.
In the twenty years prior to Clinton's election, the Democrats had lost 4 out of 5 presidential elections - two in landslides where McGovern and Mondale each won only one state and two in routs where Carter and Dukakis won only about ten states. The only election the Democrats had won was Carter in 1976 - where he squeaked by with a 2% margin and a small electoral college margin.
Between 1948 and 1992, the Democrats won California only once - in Johnson's 1964 landslide. The left purists here seem to have forgotten that political fact. And it more than borders on hubris to assume that the Democrats have a lock on the electoral college in future elections. Politics has a way of upbraiding such ideas rather harshly.
I am hardly impressed with Hillary Clinton's vote for the AUMF or her close ties with Wall Street. Nor do I like to see any one family have a royalist monopoly on the presidency - be it Bushes or Clintons. But she still is the odds-on favorite to win the Democratic nomination. And if Sanders does manage to pull out the nomination after a bitter fight that paints Bill Clinton as a troglodyte, then the results in November may be baleful.
And November matters.
Both the U.S. House and U.S. Senate have Republican majorities. The House GOP majority is unlikely to be overcome in the near future, the Senate may swing Dem in 2016, but likely return GOP in 2018. And 2/3s of the states have Republican legislatures - many with huge GOP majorities. (The reasons for all of the above constitute another diary.)
Thus, it is imperative that the Democrats hold the White House in 2016.
Sanders' candidacy is exciting. It provides a breath of fresh air in the American political scene and within the Democratic Party, as well. But when Sanders' supporters resort to the negativity seen in this diary while forgetting the larger political context in which Bill Clinton was elected, then they pave the way for a Republican victory in 2016.