I have been in lurk mode ever since the nominating contest started but I feel that I finally need to say a few things.
I have been amazed at how much negativity and even hatred against Hillary Clinton has spilled on this website. Reading it, I feel as if I am reading entries on a Rush Limbaugh bulletin board. It is a strange and disappointing feeling.
I have been trying to get to the bottom of this as well as analyze the sudden emergence of Obama as a candidate. Follow me below the fold for some thoughts.
First, I can very well understand why a lot of the more liberal, or "grassroots" as you like to call them, Democrats dislike Clinton. Yes, she is not liberal enough for you. Heck, a lot of you will never forgive her husband for NAFTA which (rightly!) challenged the power of trade unions. A lot of you will never forgive Bill Clinton for dismantling large parts of the safety net (unemployment benefits etc) that had been in place before him. And, given that this website has focused obsessively on the Iraq war to the near-exclusion of almost anything else, I can very well understand how the purists among you will never forgive Clinton's vote on authorizing force in Iraq.
However, I think some mix up is in evidence and some clarifications are in order. First, there is a tendency to lump together Bill Clinton's record with Hillary's positions. I think that her agenda on health care, poverty, the rollback of the Bush tax cuts and the environment can withstand even the most careful liberal scrutiny. As all of you know, her first attempt to reform health care was even more liberal than that. Yes she failed at the time but boy do half of you here imply she somehow wished to fail. I think she has learned a lot from that first attempt and I also think that her added political experience from her time in the Senate has become a major asset for her.
The Iraq vote. I mentioned the word "purists," above, and I will mention it again. This website has become a home to an unabashed purist movement that seeks to hound anyone who ever voted for the war. I wish to remind you a few things. First and foremost, at the time, the Bush administration managed to make a compelling case for the war. You may not like it, but there was NOT sufficient pushback to refute the "evidence" that was then presented to the country. I understand how you feel -- because I feel the same way -- but, unfortunately, I cannot think of a single case in human history where a war was stopped by a principled movement on just the basis of "war is bad". And this is what happened. The administration made its case -- it was of course lying -- and the media and the public largely bought it. They did, whether you like it or not. So then we found ourselves in the position of a defense attorney who had been outmaneuvered by the prosecution. And, of course, once the war started the "rally round the flag" effect took hold. Hapless idealists, from Lenin and Trotsky to poor president Hoover have forever expected the "court of public opinion" to react with outrage to the very notion of war and by the very power of its reaction, stop it in its tracks. It NEVER happens. To expect otherwise is to dream unwise dreams. And so Hillary voted for the resolution. I listened to her pained explanation at the last debate. And you know what? I believed her. I find it mindboggling that the same crowd here who have embraced John Edwards and swear by his every word has somehow forgiven him his vote but continue to harp about Hillary's vote. Oh and trust me on this -- you DO NOT KNOW how Obama would have voted if he had been in the Senate. Why? Well, it is one thing to be a state senator, it is another thing to be a US Senator.
I have not met Hillary personally and so do not have the benefit of Markos' insight. He claims she is a wonderful and warm human being. I believe him. But think of all the slime that has been directed at her over the years. Think if this had been you. Wouldn't you have become just a tad more guarded, a tad less open, a tad more steely. WEll, she has. And I love her for it. She has been through the wringer and taken it all with a smile. And -- not to belittle Obama's message of hope -- but anyone who has been through all that and who can continue to fight for what she believes in IS THE REAL INSPIRATION for me. She is a leader I can follow with trust AND hope.
These are not all the reasons I support Hillary. There are pettier ones too. I have suffered through the dark ages of the Bush presidency, foisted on us by the republican party. If she is the one they find most unacceptable -- I WANT them to have her. I want them to sputter every time they see her speak on TV, I want THEM to reach for the Valium when she pulls the troops from Iraq and ends their pretty war, I want them to weep when she appoints liberal judges to the Supreme Court, and to scream in impotent rage when, at the stroke of a pen she will undo most of the Bush presidency. Most of all, I want them to have her because they so fear and abhor a woman with a career, a woman in power. Nothing like a healthy dose of reality to shatter the bubble they live in. And, so there is no confusion, let me make it clear that I am a white male.
Finally, a word on Obama. I have mistrusted mass hypes for a long time. Heck, it took me four years to convince myself to start reading Harry Potter. I have the distinct impression that the Obama candidacy has been created and carefully nurtured by the media. I do not necessarily see sinister conspiracies in this -- maybe they genuinely like the guy. He seems "likable enough." I am really astonished how with all the professed mistrust of the media, so many of you have bought the latest story wholesale. Did I find the right metaphor? How's "have swallowed the hook, lead and sinker..." Well never mind. The truth is Obama is fresh faced, younger and male. And is the less qualified candidate. If Hillary and Obama were applying for a job on the strenths of their resumes she will make the shortlist. He probably won't. I should know -- I do this for a living. But the truth is he is younger, charismatic and male. Did I mention he is male? The media is once again telling us who to vote for. And a lot of you have started to nod in agreement. This is the same media that brought you the "Dean scream" -- longer, louder and uncut, who repeatedly told you of Gore's "exaggerations" and Kerry's flip flops. We can only hope they don't have the picture of our latest Dorian Gray stashed somewhere in the attic for later viewing. Well we know how well hope turned out before.