| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Hillary Clinton: no eye will be left un-gouged! |
| 2008-05-22 |
| Jules Crittenden It's a party apparently having a hard time figuring out what it is about, which is how the sideshow ended up being the main event. That would be the battle of gender vs. race. More of the usual "Clinton out now!" this morning. We'll get to that in a minute. First, NYT sums up why, politically, it makes sense for her to stay and touches on that sexism thing everyone has been overlooking in their rush to condemn pervasive American racism or anti-Obamism or whatever it is. Rebuffing associates who have suggested that she end her candidacy, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton has made it clear to her camp in recent days that she will stay in the race until June because she believes she can still be the nominee — and, barring that, so she can depart with some final goals accomplished. . . . It's an eye-gouging thing. But the irony is, it is not Clinton's actions but Obama's own that create the opportunity. At the rate Obama keeps nicking himself, having to explain away absurd and offensive utterances and associations, there is no reason to think he might not yet critically gaffe himself, spill enough blood into the water that superdelegates start scrambling away in a panic. NYT fails to make the very legitimate point that the Washington Post's Richard Cohen made yesterday … The Clintons know Americans ultimately will have more respect for a tenacious, diehard loser than a quitter. About the sexism, I suspect we'll finally see a serious mainstream examination of that once Obama’s clinched it and the buyer's regret sets in. Politico’s Roger Simon misses all of the above points in a vapid Obama fawn entitled "What is Clinton's Argument Now?" that ends bizarrely with the inconclusive conclusion that "The Democrats will battle on because it is just so gosh-darned exciting!" Actually, the Democrats will battle on because they have mistaken the politics of personal ambition and vanity clothed in race and gender issues for matters of substance and have turned it into a race to see which will trump the other. Which is bizarre not least because race and gender concerns in 2008 are far from the most pressing issues of the day. There's a heck of a soul-searching due, and a lot of people will be (are being) smeared before its done. . . . This one's interesting. Jonathan Chait at LA Times, "Not Supporting Clinton isn't an Attack on Feminism." How about "Not Supporting Obama Doesn't Mean You're a Racist." Dickerson at Slate, "Lady, You're in My Way. Can Obama Do Anything to Get Clinton Out of the Race?" has this great line: How long can a body exist in a state approximating motionlessness without actually stopping? But otherwise is astonishingly uninformative and fails to engage on its own line of questioning with the natural followup. What is the effect of the gross impotence Obama is experiencing/demonstrating? Is America going to want to be entirely ruled by a party with such a marked record of indecision and ineffectiveness, and a candidate who can't close the deal? What happens in the spring is usually forgotten by fall, but if the Democrats have not exactly chosen a candidate yet, it may be because they can't decide whether they fear one more than they want to spare the feelings of the other. Well, that's their problem. I'm with Politico: It's gosh-darned exciting! More from Jules here. |
| Posted by:Mike |
| #12 Oops! That's #8 Grunter. |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2008-05-22 20:42 |
| #11 Why, thankew, #3 Grunter. We do what we can.... :-D |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2008-05-22 20:41 |
| #10 good idea, Steve, because McAmnesty is still on the pander: http://hotair.com/archives/2008/05/22/quote-of-the-day-273/ I'll vote for him because he's better than the other option(s), but I won't give a dollar to teh jerk if he continues with this shit |
| Posted by: Frank G 2008-05-22 20:16 |
| #9 I dunno, Alan. It's one thing to say, five months before the election, that you'll never vote for the person who bested your favorite, it's another thing to stay angry through November. McCain has to hold service: if he wins the Red states Dubya won in 2004, he's the President. Apparently not just Ohio, but Nevada, Nebraska (???), New Mexico, Colorado, Virginia and Iowa are in play if the race is Obama v McCain, and Bush won all those last time. Even if some of the Hildebeast migrate to McCain, Obama has mobilized a lot of 'new' voters who he thinks will vote in the fall. That's his plan, anyway, because he can't be under any illusion that he'll win the rural vote, the white ethnic vote, and perhaps the Jewish vote. And McCain does well with Hispanics. So Obama has to get the latte liberals, the ultra-loyal Dems, and not just 95% of the black vote, but 95% of a larger than usual black vote. I think McCain wins, but I'm not ready to put money on it. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2008-05-22 19:36 |
| #8 I think Barbara deserves a vote of thanks for all this excellent popcorn. |
| Posted by: Grunter 2008-05-22 18:53 |
| #7 If Hildbeast loses, I expect a significant vote for McCain from her followers. If Obamaramadingdong loses, I don't know what to expect, but I don't see a shift to McCain. More likely they sit it out, possibly there's some minor rioting. What do the RBers think? |
| Posted by: AlanC 2008-05-22 15:15 |
| #6 it's all set up for the establishment to slide whomever they want into the seat Thing is, there is no clearly-defined 'establishment' now. It's a symptom of a thirty-plus years' power struggle within the Democrats. But you're right - half will be angry at whatever the result is. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2008-05-22 14:18 |
| #5 yeah, sex with the beast will be like minor cryogenics |
| Posted by: Frank G 2008-05-22 13:08 |
| #4 Quagmire! |
| Posted by: anonymous5089 2008-05-22 12:39 |
| #3 Think she was fun to live with before this, Bill? Never thought I'd say this, but I pity your sorry ass... |
| Posted by: tu3031 2008-05-22 12:34 |
| #2 I think they have an interesting problem, but not from the racism/sexism angle that the news keeps harping on. Popular vs. Delegate vs. Super-delegate votes, Michigan and Florida's loss of the franchise, it's all set up for the establishment to slide whomever they want into the seat. Half the party is going to be pissed off no matter who wins the primary. I don't know about an Obama/Clinton ticket either, that sounds too bizarre to picture in my mind after all this . |
| Posted by: bigjim-ky 2008-05-22 12:32 |
| #1 Rowrrrr! Fttt! Fttt! |
| Posted by: Vinegar Cloque2153 2008-05-22 10:00 |