BEWARE OF WHITE MEN BEARING GIFTS

Mar 17, 2008 06:00

Another James Wolcott piece worth pasting in its entirety:

I've never bought the pre-championship palaver that the Republicans were itching keen to face Hillary Clinton in the fall, that her mere presence in the race would energize their white-dumpling demoralized base into mobilizing into peasant mobs ready to storm Frankenstein's castle. The ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 12

rpeate March 17 2008, 10:29:52 UTC
There's very little rational thought to go around. Of course the Republicans want to run against Clinton. They want revenge. This blinds them to her superiority, and guarantees another defeat.

I fear they will eat Obama alive.

Reply

wertz March 17 2008, 18:53:43 UTC
for breakfast. And that's one area where experience could really matter. Clinton has been through the wringer and come out on the other side stronger - Obama has never run against serious opposition. The phrase "babes in the woods" keeps running through my mind. Of course, he has some serious political operators on his team like Daley's man, David Aexlrod, and Jesse Jackson, Jr., and a host of once rational political commentators and op-ed artistes, but they're all on the offense. He could've used at least one defensive lineman.

Actually, I think the GOP would rather see Clinton die in the primaries - after taking as many hits as possible. Obama would be much easier to defeat in a general election in this enlightened country. And no matter how much they like Hillary abuse, they want to keep the Executive.

Reply

rpeate March 17 2008, 19:16:08 UTC
You're right. I agree they fear her, despite their bluster and bravado.

I keep making the distinction between experience and Washington experience. Obama has experience, on paper enough to be president, but Clinton has Washington experience dealing with Republican attacks the likes of which Obama has not experienced. It is the type of experience that matters.

Much is made of Clinton voting in a couple of ways the Left doesn't like. So? Bill Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act. JFK let the Cuban invaders down in the Bay of Pigs. FDR tried to stack the Supreme Court. If I agreed with everything a president did, that president would be . . . me! And even then, I don't always agree with myself.

Reply

wertz March 17 2008, 21:50:27 UTC
Heh - absolutely. And, during their two year overlap, Clinton and Obama voted the same more than 90% of the time (though it is true that Obama missed 50% more votes than Clinton, so we'll never know exactly how identical their voting records are). Who can say how Obama would have voted had he been the Senate eight years ago? Sure, he made a speech once. I didn't see him holding any press conferences or issuing press releases or attending rallies and marches or signing petitions or meeting with his state's senators and representatives or, well... anything. His words are fine. Actions would have spoken louder.

And, so far as words go, people like Clinton and Kerry were much more vocal in their opposition when the Bush administration did take precipitate action - contrary to the terms of the Authorization to Use Military Force in Iraq.

But, yeah, the type of experience makes a big difference. Apart from two absentee years as a junior senator, Obama has virtually no experience in national politics (not to mention international politics ( ... )

Reply


nypunkeer March 17 2008, 16:42:31 UTC
Yeah, really thank your stars most of the circles you run in aren't populated by college students. It's getting a little ridiculous hearing how they've all been "inspired" for the first time. And not just, you know, Art and family studies majors. A growing group amongst them consist of English, Philosophy, and history majors. People who, by all accounts, should be able to understand how, and why, rhetoric works and functions, in addition to what it doesn't do.
An interesting anecdote though. I have a friend majoring in Math. Politics came up when we were talking one day (i had no idea where she stood) and we got on the subject of Obama. Before I could get much out she said, "He sounds rather slow, like he doesn't have much to say, and he's just stretching things out to fit a time limit. Is there anything wrong with him mentally? He pauses so much; it's maddening."

Reply

wertz March 17 2008, 18:57:33 UTC
Sadly (in this regard), I do run into my share of college students - though, at Penn State, there seems to be a bit more balance (including more than a few McCain supporters). But I've certainly come across enough inspiration by slogan to last the rest of my life.

I thought all those ellipses in Obama's speech were just him holding for applause.  :)  One thing Obama has learned from Rev. Wright is how to work a crowd.

Reply


crustycracker March 17 2008, 22:31:13 UTC
Personally, I don't think either are very electable... and I haven't heard from a single person who "believes" in Clinton. At least from down here, it looks like Obama's inspiration bubble is the best chance to avoid a repeat of the last two elections... but then again, I've lived in Red states my whole life, with GA being the closest to a swing state... and I haven't been around that long.

I think what we have now is two potential candidates who took us from a "sure thing" (to win the white house) to a "well, we'll see".

Reply

wertz March 18 2008, 02:34:02 UTC
I tend to agree - though I think Clinton would have a bit of an edge in the general election. Even if Obama's bubble lasts through the autumn (and such things are prone to bursting), I think there's still enough racism in America for the electorate to end up going with the white guy. Sexism, of course, is equally rampant, but think Hillary Clinton has an advantage by being Hillary Clinton, negatives and all.

Well, we'll see.

Reply

White Guy? jerzyshore March 24 2008, 04:55:37 UTC
The white guy is 100 years old!

Reply


gillen March 18 2008, 04:24:11 UTC
The Democrats did perform admirably in eliminating all the more rational choices until finally left with the two candidates least qualified to hold the office in question.

Reply

wertz March 19 2008, 02:44:05 UTC
Too true - and before Edwards dropped out, they'd reduced the field to the three least qualified candidates.

Reply

gillen March 19 2008, 02:48:24 UTC
No argument there.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up