Not all are Disloyal But Some Are
Some at DailyKos become incensed and indignant when their favored candidates are criticized, questioned or challenged at this site. Say that Wesley Clark has waffled on Iraq and you “must be a troll”. If a DailyKos participant wonders out loud why Gore appointed the abhorrent Lieberman as his running mate then that person must be a "troll". If anyone points out that Al Gore, John Edwards, Wesley Clark, Evan Bayh, Joseph Biden, Tom Vilsack and John Kerry are DLC members or DLC collaborating authors, and that most of them supported the Iraq War Resolution (IWR), then whomever points that out must be a troll, in spite of the fact that it’s true. DK DIARY
Because, who other than a troll would point out the flaws of our favorite Democratic candidates? Well, Markos Moulitsas would, that’s whom, otherwise known as Kos, the founder and venerable leader of the DailyKos blog. DAILY KOS FAQ
On May 7, 2006, Kos declared war on the Democratic front-runner, US Senator Hillary Rodhman Clinton, essentially because her husband has been President twice in the past. Kos blithely disregards the obvious fact: the benefit of successful experience and winning the Presidency and functioning in the job. True, Hillary Rodham Clinton was not the President. And here comes the sexist double-standard: Hillary, to paraphrase Kos, ought not be President because we’re tired of her husband. However, neither are we obliged to acknowledge that with Hillary comes the obvious successful electoral experience of her husband. So, at DailyKos, and as by Markos Moulitsas himself, Hillary is damned for - but not credited with - the successful Presidency of her husband, Bill. KOS ATTACKS LIBERAL DEM CANDIDATE IN WASH POST
Kos launches into all of the mainstream media talking points intended to derail the Presidential aspirations of the only liberal Democratic woman currently running for the Presidency, while Kos and his followers seem oblivious to the embarrassing historic fact that in America we’ve favored an uninterrupted string of 43 consecutive male presidencies, where “women need not apply”.
And Kos apparently has no problem with that, because look at how he attacks Hillary, not only at his blog but on May 7, 2006 on the pages of the Washington Post:
“She is a leader who fails to lead, ” says Kos, conveniently ignoring that Hillary’s exceptional name recognition, and high favorability among Democrats and the fact that she is leading in national polls must be at least partially related to her historic (but failed) attempt to institute national health care back in 1993, during the same Clinton administration that Markos now says is “part of a failed Democratic Party establishment”.
Markos Ignores Hillary Commitment to National Health Care
When, I would like to ask Markos, did Markos ever round up a group in Washington and work with the President to develop a universal national health care plan, as Hillary did? How dare he criticize Hillary Clinton for having done so? Rather than criticize the only person who did make such an attempt, Markos and his followers should devote all of their efforts to doing what Hillary did –working on a national health care plan and at least trying to get it implemented. There is another deeply negative implicit message in Markos’ criticism: Ambitious Democrats should not attempt national health care, because failure will be used against them to destroy their careers.
If Markos opposes Hillary Clinton’s candidacy, then whom does Markos favor for President, to topple Clinton from her perch at the top of the pack? Well Markos implicitly favors supporting another candidate who has NEVER tried to implement national health care, because none of the others have, even as members of Congress. In Markos mind, the men should be given credit for not having tried while the only woman running should be damned for having made an effort.
The determined soldier Hillary Clinton, according to Kos, is “so scarred by her failed health-care reform in the early 1990s that now Sen. Clinton shows no proclivity for real leadership as a lawmaker.” Way to go, Markos, providing talking points against the presumptive leader. But let’s look at the actual facts: John Kerry, John Edwards, Joe Biden, Al Gore and Evan Bayh were all MEMBERS OF CONGRESS without EVER having presented a national health care plan for the nation. Certainly, if they were relatively stronger leaders they would have proposed a national health care plan, as Hillary did? So what, if anything, could make these men relatively better leadership material than Hillary on the fundamental issue of national health care?
The answer is simple. They are NOT better, because while the determined soldier Hillary has lost one battle for national health care, these men have not even been in the war. Now, I say this not for the purpose of criticizing those male candidates, who surely have seen how very difficult it is to attempt national health care and who have consequently decided not to scar their reputations by doing so. Rather, I point this out to show that Markos Moulitsas is manifestly biased against the only woman who famously did try on this particular issue. And that’s simply UNFAIR.
It goes without saying that Markos favors a white man fpr President as opposed to Hillary Clitnon. But, ostensibly, the fact that Hillary is a woman and that all of her opponents are men doesn’t enter into Markos or his supporters’ thoughts at all. And that’s precisely the problem. The same blogsite that claims to represent liberals and conservatives (although polls disagree with them as it concerns Hillary) has abandoned the most fundamental of liberal and conservative ideals. It has abandoned, with respect to Hillary’s case, the quest for societal equity – including equity for women -- for which Martin Luther King, Jr. fought and died back in the 1960’s.
Kos Shows Hypocrisy on Flag Burning Amendment
Consider another issue on which Kos demonstrates fundamental unfairness: Flag-burning. Fourteen Democratic Senators voted in favor of an amendment to the United States Constitution to ban burning of the American Flag. Those voting in favor were Max Baucus, Evan Bayh, Mark Dayton, Dianne Feinstein, Tim Johnson, Mary Landrieu, Blanche Lincoln, Bob Menendez, Ben Nelson, Bill Nelson, John Rockefeller, Ken Salazar and Debbie Stabenow and even Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid.
Among those voting against that Amendment, was prospective Presidential candidate US Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, even when the Senate Minority Leader went along with that Republican Wedge Issue Amendment. So, who gets pilloried on flag burning by progressives? Ironically, Hillary Clinton gets pilloried, because she voted against the flag burning amendment while others voted for it, while Harry Reid is heralded as a progressive leader. In this case, Kos shows a profound and troubling hypocrisy unworthy of progressives in the Democratic Party. SALON MAGAZINE RE: DEMOCRATS AND FLAG-BURNING
Markos Ignores the Historic Quality of Hillary’s Leadership Commitment
Markos apparently could not care less about this, as it concerns Hillary, because even as he takes to the pages of the Washington Post to criticize Hillary Clinton, he doesn’t bother to mention the historic quality of her achievements in the context of an historically sexist nation. She did win a US Senate seat for the Democrats, after all, even though no first lady had ever done so in the past and no woman senator had ever been elected from New York state. Senator Hillary Clinton, who graduated from Yale Law School in 1973, was the first chair of the American Bar Association Commission on Women in the Profession, where she served for at least five years. Are these not also measures of Hillary’s courage, commitment and leadership ability? Shouldn’t we always at least mention these historical facts before discounting and/or denigrating them? MOTHER JONES ON HILLARY CLINTON HILLARY SUPPORTS WOMEN AT ABA
Markos Invites Criticism of His Blog and His Followers
In criticing Hillary in a national newspaper KOS ATTACK ONLY WOMAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE (and thereby inviting criticism of himself at his blog) Markos said:
Money and star power go a long way, but the netroots is now many times larger than it was only three years ago, and we have attractive alternatives to back (and fund), such as former governor Mark W. Warner and Sen. Russell Feingold.
Those guys, Mark W. Warner and Russell Feingold, have lost their nerve for the national race and have backed out, leaving behind them several members or participants of the DLC and/or US Senators who voted for the Iraq War Resolution (Al Gore, John Edwards, Wesley Clary, Evan Bayh, Joseph Biden, Tom Vilsack and John Kerry). With so little difference other than gender on these two issues between Hillary and the other contender, how far afield will Markos now go to find a white male alternative to Hillary Clinton who is not a member of or associated with the DLC and who did not vote for the IWR? Or do those things only matter when the candidate in question is a woman?
Attacking Mrs. Clinton Does Not Excise the DLC from the Democratic Party
All of us are frustrated over the refusal of much of the country to adopt progressive stands on all of the issues, yet opposition to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign is a misguided, unfair and ultimately counter-productive way to express that frustration, if the result it to elect an objectively lesser man, who shares the same DLC/IWR ties, while intentionally perpetuating an exclusively male US Presidency. When all of the other candidates are DLC’ers as well, attacking Hillary downgrades the struggle for women’s advances in America without benefiting the struggle for progressive politics.
If Hillary does become the Democratic standard bearer, then all of these attacks on her character will come back to haunt and embarrass blogsters when the Republicans take up where the blogsters left off. No Democratic candidate will be immune to Republican slings, but why in the world would Kos want to hand them the arrows, repeating in a national newspaper the Republican memes that will come back to haunt us? Although Kos’ criticism was originally published in May, Kos has not changed his tune and – far from disavowing his stance -- the anti-Democrat criticism continues unabated.
One thing is certain, especially to those of us who believe in national health care and want a candidate with an historic commitment to attempting to address that issue. So far on health care, Markos tears down the liberal Democratic woman with credentials in order to build lesser men up who haven’t done anything at all on the issue. On flag-burning, he opposes the woman who voted against the amendment while expressing support for those who voted in favor.
Democrats are people who support equity, even for women. Democrats are people who compare the candidates objectively, giving them credit where credit is due. Democrats are people who give women credit for their experience and dedication, instead of just dishing out derision and scorn. Democrats who refuse to adopt these most fundamental of Democratic ideals are disloyal Democrats, as far as I’m concerned.
AUTHOR'S NOTES: (1) A cursory review of the diarist's DK history will show that he supports the presidential candidacy of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton. That, in and of itself, is not sufficient reason to reject an otherwise sound argument that is based on established facts.
(2) DailyKos participants who disagree with the opinions expressed and facts reported in this diary are encouraged to do so by offering other opionions and facts rather than by deleting the diary Tags that enable other readers to find this diary. Only trusted DailyKos users (TU's) can delete tags. DK FAQ RE: TAGS Deleting Tags is a form of censorship and/or childish vandalism that has no place and should not be tolerated at DailyKos.