OK, confession time:
The reasons I decided to support Obama in the primary were two-fold.
First, I thought he was the least likely to get us involved in another war. Hillary’s views on foreign policy have bugged me for a long time, and I wanted to support someone who had been against the Iraq disaster from the outset.
Second: Obama was a media darling during the early part of the primary, whereas the press corps hated Hillary’s guts. Because I’m a complete idiot, I assumed that Obama’s charm would be a stronger bulwark against the press corps’ sickening McCain man-love.
Welp, I’m still standing by the first reason. The second reason is obviously in complete tatters and I’m a moron for not seeing it coming. I’d forgotten that our press corps at its heart has nothing but contempt for any politician to the left of Joe Lieberman, and that they love to paint them all as great big elitist phonies. The belief that Obama could somehow get past this shows a remarkable naiveté on my part. But that’s not the worst bit.
While I think I’ve been justifiably pissed off at some of the shenanigans that the Clinton campaign has pulled against my preferred candidate, I’ve also turned a blind eye toward some of the really horrible and sexist bullshit that our press corps – and even some progressive bloggers – have been propagating against Hillary Clinton. Just take a look at this astounding collection that Melissa McEwan has compiled. Click through all 75 of those links and be utterly appalled at some of the misogynistic garbage that’s been uttered about Hillary. Hell, you don’t have to sympathize with any HRC’s policy positions to realize that this sort of crap should be completely out of bounds to be used against any woman. Some lowlights:
- Ariana giving Mickey Kaus’ brother space to accuse anyone who was upset about David Shuster’s “pimped out” comment of lacking a sense of humor.
- The LA Times trashes Hillary for “focusing on women’s and children’s issues.”
- Randi Rhodes calling Hillary “a big fucking whore.”
- Maureen Dowd. No further explanation required.
- Roger Simon. Again, no further explanation required.
Melissa also writes:
I mean, how great has it worked out for conservatives that the reality-based community has failed utterly to perceive a comprehensive reality about either of its remaining candidates, not to mention cast aside all that rigorous adherence to fairness, accuracy, and cynicism about the media and rightwing frames on which the leftwing blogosphere was ostensibly built?
Maybe, just maybe, we shouldn’t have been so quick to stomp the shit out of her, or slay the golden calf for him—and hand to conservatives the perfect opportunity to make us look like we got it backwards, even if we didn’t.
We’re going to go into the general election with what looks to be a weak candidate either way, when we had the chance for the total opposite. And that won’t be Barack Obama’s fault, and it damn sure won’t be Hillary’s, no matter how many of the numbskulls who got us here try to blame her for their own idiocy.
And you know what? Yeah. I buy that.
Unless a Democrat is an asshole of Joe Lieberman proportions – that is, unless they repeatedly throw everyone in the party under the damn bus – then they deserve to be defended from BS right-wing attacks, no exceptions. While I’ve rightly come down hard on HRC’s campaign for employing hard-line tactics against Obama, I haven’t properly called out the Obama campaign for some of its dishonest BS, most notably this nonsense that fed into the worst wingnut memes about the Clinton health care plan. Also, dude, it might be unwise to knock Clinton for her ties to lobbyists since you don’t exactly have Russ Feingold-type credibility on that issue.
So here’s the deal: there’s nothing I can do to make up for being a dumb-ass in the past except to apologize and to try to do better in the future. Thus from now on, I’m going to call out both campaigns when I see them engaging in dumb bullshit that hurts the party’s chances in November It does none of us any good to positively hate either of these two candidates because both of them are very close on policy issues and neither of them is nearly as wacky as St. BBQ. None of this changes the fact that Armando is a prick, incidentally.