WWTSBQ 2.0 – A Neverending Series

Cross-posted from The Global Sociology Blog

My blog bookmark listing is getting thinner every day. That goes along with the shrinking respect I had for some bloggers in the past. Boy has this primary been a reality check. Here is someone who used to be one of my favorite bloggers, Hilzoy, subbing for Kevin Drum at the Washington Monthly :

“This might or might not be true in the abstract. In the actual world, however, everything depends on how Hillary Clinton conducts herself. She can continue to make her case in a constructive and positive way, trying to show that she is the best candidate while doing her best to defuse the idea that the nomination was somehow stolen from her, and to reconcile her followers to the idea that she lost fair and square”

Well, from where I stand, actually listening to Hillary’s speeches, she has consistently done that: making her case to the voters, discussing the issues, adopting a populist stance that is in synch with the core Democratic base. She is making a positive case for herself and for votes to be counted. At the same time, she has repeatedly stated that once the primary is over, the party will be united behind the nominee (“whoever she might be”… it was a funny line, but there is no sense of humor among the self-righteous, so-called progressive bloggers and the creative class… humor, along with irony and self-awareness, was thrown under the bus long ago. The only humor left is the neverending sexist jokes that can told about pantsuits and whatnot).

She is always the gracious one at the debates or in speech. And yes, she is campaigning, that means promoting her candidacy. It ‘s not her job to campaign for Obama or refrain from nudging him when the opportunity presents itself. And trust me, nudging him is all she’s ever done. The man has been treated with kid gloves.

And by the way, losing fair and square means once ALL the votes have been counted and ALL the arguments (including those about electability and popular votes, etc) have been made and discussed out in the open. “Fair and square”, by definition, involves fairness.

But apparently, we live in a different universe:

“Or she can try to undermine Obama’s claim to be the legitimate nominee, if he wins. “Staying in the race” describes both options. But only one of them “will help unite the Democratic Party”, and make “everyone (…) more likely to rally around the nominee.” Hillary Clinton has not chosen that option.”

Because, as you see, Obama has no agency here. The only way he can be undermined or promoted is NOT through his own actions but through Hillary’s behavior. Who has been systematically alienating the core of the Democratic party demographics? Who has allowed rabid misogyny to be unleashed and is now out of control across the blogosphere? Who has made the wildest accusation of sinister motives about the Clintons (the latest absurd iteration of which is the RFK fauxtrage)? Who has been trashing the democratic brand and running away from the liberal label? Who’s more than willing to discard the core Democratic base in an attempt to attract conservatives and evangelicals even if this means throwing women’s rights and LGBT causes under the bus while doing so? Good grief.

And let’s continue in that line of “It’s all the Bitch’s fault” argument

“I just heard someone on one of the talk shows say that it must be hard for Hillary Clinton to give up her dreams. I appreciate this fact, and I do not envy her. However, as I wrote a few days ago, Hillary Clinton is a responsible moral agent. She has the power to decide which of these two approaches she will pursue. Moreover, she has now had several months to get used to the idea that she lost. If she were an adult , she would deal with it. The fact that she seems instead to require our indulgence while she sorts through her emotional issues just gives me one more reason to be glad she lost: Presidents are often confronted with crises, at 3am and other times, and they do not always have the luxury of working through all the stages of grief before coming up with a response.”

Emphasis mine. Oh my God, there is so much bullshit to go through here, it’s unbelievable. Where does this come from? Some talk show? Because, God knows how much talk shows have been reliable sources of information and analysis in this primary.

And here comes the sexist part: Hillary is not a grown woman, she’s a little girl who has to give up on her dream, but dammit, us adults have work to do and we can’t attend to her emotional needs… I think we can soundly blame Bill for that! And what is this paragraph based on? Nothing. There is absolutely NO evidence to support any of this. Oh, and by the way, if the primary was over months ago, how come the Annointed One has not reach the proper number of pledged delegates yet? Why haven’t the Democratic leaders stepped in and declared the primary over?

And when has Hillary EVER required our indulgence? What she has asked for? Our votes. Something Barack Obama has yet to do. And it’s a bit rich to infantilize Hillary when the whole Obama campaign has been like a fratboy wet dream. Loaded with sexism and contempt for older voters and people who have to struggle to make a living. And where coolness and quasi-religious revivalism has been what passes for substance and policy. But who needs that when you have a “movement”.

“In the actual world, the only way Clinton can win the nomination, absent some genuine catastrophe, is for the superdelegates to decide to give her the nomination. If that happened, would she be more electable? She might have an edge over Obama in Appalachia, but she would surely be at a serious disadvantage among African-American voters. This might not have been true had she won the primary on pledged delegates: in that case, Obama’s supporters would probably be disappointed, but would manage to get over it.”

I’ll let Paul Lukasiak deal with that one if he wishes. He has done great statistical analysis showing that this is pure BS.

But for all the talk of the “real world”, what is missing from this post is, well, the real world.

The real world where the media is in the tank for Obama and has not hesitated to carry the most prurient narratives, along with the so-called progressive blogosphere.

The real world where absurd accusations of racism were thrown around so idiotically that now, Republican and conservative groups will be able to put out actually racist materials, and when the Obama campaign whines about it, it will be seen as crying wolf yet again (“they were whining about it with Hillary too, already”).

The real world where racist discourse is unacceptable (thank goodness) but vile sexism is used and reused in polite conversations (and not so polite, white bitch!), in the media, across the so-called progressive blogs without any concerns for the real consequences of such discourse.

The real world where the Democratic leadership either sees Obama as a gigantic ATM (victory in November be damned) or just got caught up in the hipness of the “movement”, with a complete disconnect to what happened to the kind of candidates Obama represents (McGovern comes to mind, of course).

The real world where the DNC has its collective thumb solidly on the scale in favor of the Senator from Illinois.

The real world where Obama has no coattails because the Democrats for a Day he has brought along are interested in voting for HIM, but now in downticket races.

The real world where the half of these great turnouts has voted for Hillary.

The real world where Obama can no longer be seen as a legitimate candidate , all by his own doing because there has been no such thing as “fair and square.”

But I guess, it’s all Hillary’s fault. Only she has agency. Obama sits on the mountain, basking on the lovefest, deigning to make a few noble pronouncement when it does not matter anymore (RFK again) and the wankfest has already taken place.

We need more than a blogosphere 2.0. We need Liberalism 2.0.

Bookmark and Share

Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to WWTSBQ 2.0 – A Neverending Series

  1. katiebird says:

    I know what you mean — exactly. I think TalkLeft is lost to me after this weekend. I love Jeralyn, but the stress of reading the other frontpager at that blog is just too much for me. His logic is a joke: a twisted game and whenever he’s called on it, he slides away and strikes someplace else.

    His response to the whole RFK thing exposed just how shallow he really is.

  2. Frenchdoc says:

    You’re right. And I guess I just don’t get BTD. I think both his main arguments (Obama as more electable, the Obama/Clinton ticket as only option) have been soundly defeated by now but he won’t budge one way or the other.

    And yes, Jeralyn rocks.

  3. JP says:

    yikes! we are supposed to be winding down the nomination process, not getting everyone fired back up with the racism/sexism crap again. Clinton’s campaign has not been an example in sainthood, and neither as Obama’s. But to use the excuse of one crazy ranting post to create another just adds more fuel to the fire. We all need to take a deep breath, step back, and let this race finish. Just a couple more weeks and it’s going to wrap up…we’ll have a nominee…we can do it…breathe…

  4. gqmartinez says:

    JP, the problem is not an isolated blog post. It’s Keith Olberman. It’s Obama’s pseudo-declaration on May 20th that he is the nominee. It is Jonathan Alter. Howard Fineman. The New York Times. Much of the so-called liberal blogosphere.

  5. gqmartinez says:


    I think PB2.0 should define what 21st Century Liberalism is. PB1.0 never bothered to do that. It was mostly a reactionary movement against Bush and the GOP excesses. I have to dig up the article (or was it a blog post) where I warned that once liberals lost Bush, they would have no direction. I warned that it had to define itself in a positive manner, not “anti-bush”.

    I just found it. I’ll post it soon.

  6. Frenchdoc says:

    JP: as long as pro-Obama sexist and contemptible drivel will be written, we’ll go after them, for as long as it takes. If they want unity, they’re going to have to work on it better than that. In the meantime, we, Hillary supporters, don’t have to put up with it.

    If it offends your sensitivity, you can always do something else with your time.

    GQ: we will definitely need to work on PB2.0… or as I put it at Corrente “FDR Liberals 2.0″… look forward to reading your article/post.

  7. coldH2Owi says:

    Thanks for going all BTD on me Pamela. & Frenchdoc is not going to help your own sense of pragmatism & hope on this blog.

  8. coldH2Owi says:

    “If it offends your sensitivity, you can always do something else with your time.”

    Jeez, all grown up & nowhere to go.

  9. JP says:

    so what you’re implying is that if Obama wants unity in the party, he needs to get control of all the bloggers that support him and maybe all the MSM also and get them to clean up their act? you’re implying that you—and possibly other Cinton supporters–will hold your general election vote hostage for some yet undefined action by these Obama supporters.

    that is utterly ridiculous and you know it. come the general election you’ll have to decide if you want to support Democratic values in the white house of if you want 4 more years of Bush. if you let the ramblings of some Obama supporters keep you from voting Democratic, then you’ve lost your way…

    supreme court nominees, stewardship of the environment, health care, women’s rights, transparent government–do all these things can take a backseat to your petty arguments with others on the web?

  10. JP

    Paul Krugman said as much today in his NY Times column.

    Obama and his supporters need to get that there are some deep wounds – like it or not and those wounds need to be healed.

    Likewise, if Hillary were to pull off the nomination at this point, she, her campaign and supporters would need to do the same things.

  11. JP says:

    Pamela–i couldn’t agree more. but the rant the frenchdoc posted just adds fuel to the fire, it doesn’t work to bring us together. that’s my point.

  12. JP

    As I pointed out to Coldh2owi last night in another thread, the Disclaimer at the top of the page says it all:

    The opinions of the authors and contributors on The Democratic Daily are their own and not the opinion of the Editor.

    As much as I see the need to get our nominee elected in November and will continue to encourage that, I also very clearly see the perspective of fellow Clinton supporters like Frenchdoc, which is why I invited her to blog here.

  13. coldH2Owi says:

    But Pamela, you will censor comments by not allowing them to be published. I have taken my share of insults on this blog, but you protect your writers by censoring some of my comments. It is your sandbox, that’s true, but don’t go all freedom of the press on JP & me. He’s absolutely correct about Frenchdoc’s over-the-top diatribe that adds nothing to the political discussion on this blog. We all want harmony, at least I think we all do, but harmony by censorship is very J. Tito. Now, you know I’m not talking about useless racist, sexist, etc., stuff. But if you & Mr. Gilbert can laugh at me in public comments, it only seems democratic that I be allowed to respond. At some point, we actually will move beyond the Sen. Clinton had the nomination stolen from her or Sen. Obama had the nomination stolen from him. Then what? Will Mr. Gilbert move to Iowa & work really hard to have them abandon the caucus method of electing delegates? Will Frenchdoc work really hard to get a spot on the Rules Committee of the DNC so she can have a say in what rules are promulgated? Actually, I hope so, but given what I’ve read of them here & at other blogs, I’m not optimistic. I believe they will work hard to start another political party. Well, good. Maybe, if Sen. Clinton also decides to leave the party if she doesn’t prevail, she can be the leader of this new party. I, for one, am glad all of the Democratic greats of the past – from FDR to McGovern to Dave Obey to Russ Feingold – Barbara Boxer – all chose to stay.

  14. Cold

    FYI — I am working today. Regardless of the fact it is a holiday, I have orders that have to ship out tomorrow.

    Given that, I do not sit here 24/7 moderating comments on this blog. I have a business to run and a life.

    If you weren’t so damn contrarian here 90% of the time, I never would have out your comments on moderation. If you dislike our bloggers and disagree so often, why not find another blog to comment on where you find like minds.

  15. coldH2Owi says:

    Because that is not the point. The last thing you ought to wish for is an isolated, preaching to the choir mentality on The Democratic Daily. Why is it you think I want the same sort of life as we see on TalkLeft, which used to be on my list of favorites, or Taylor Marsh, an unfortunate discovery via this blog. Or maybe Lambert Strether, that mighty guy who thinks sexism trumps everything. BTW, Chicago Dyke has a great post on getting over it. Frenchdoc, however, feels insulted & appears to be taking her talents elsewhere. I guess if we all wind up in our own monasteries chanting some hymn (please pardon the way that word is pronounced) nobody else understands, that will make us all free. I’m am delighted that you find me 10% helpful, or at least non-contrary. It’s a beginning, maybe.

  16. Cold

    Personally I don’t blog so I can spend time bickering with commenters who disagree with me. That’s not my thing. Life’s too short to be bickering over things.

    Frenchdoc brought her talents here because I messaged her on Facebook, after seeing a link to one of her pieces that I enjoyed.

    Again you are all over the place assuming all sorts of things and misconstruing most or all of it.

  17. JP says:

    i’m not knocking this page Pamela–i quite like it. i come back here because i think most of the posts are quite intelligent pieces. and I’m an Obama supporter, and i realize that most contributers on this blog are Clinton supporters. that doesn’t faze me, because i always felt this was a strongly Democratic group of individuals and that comes out in the values expressed by most of the posts.

    as an Obama supporter, i have the luxury of supporting a candidate that it looks like is going to win the nomination, so i guess you have to take what i am going to write with a grain of salt. but if the roles were reversed and Clinton was winning, you would not find me here moaning and groaning about this or that perceived inequality with the race. i would be disappointed yes (i’ve gotten used to disappointment these last 8 years), but i would not see a benefit in further tearing the party apart, when that is the last thing we need. we have to unite if we are going to stop the republican machine this november. i pray we can all unite and do this.

    so…while i respect you for bringing in many diverse voices to post here, i hope you respect my right to fire right back at them and say that enough is enough, let’s pass the peace pipe, remember we’re Democrats, and beat the pants off McCain this fall. (and hopefully take the lessons we’ve learned from this primary season and fix our nomination system)

  18. JP

    I think the uniting will happen. It’s going to take some on both sides however. I also think the blogosphere is not a clear picture of the reality on the ground. Out here in the L.A. area there are a lot of Clinton supporters. Many I talk to don’t read the blogs and they have no idea about the supporter wars going on.

    As I have said here, I saw what happened when disgruntled supporters of other candidates didn’t put their all into supporting Kerry in ’04. For that reason I continue to try to be the voice of reason here, while still giving Clinton supporters a haven to support the candidate of their choice.

    None of us really know what the next few weeks will bring, but I agree with you there are issues on the table that ultimately trump all and it will be tantamount to fight like hell to put a Dem in the White House.

  19. JP says:

    i wish i had been able to work on Kerry’s campaign in 04. i will never forget the moment i realized that we weren’t going to take Ohio…i literally could not believe this country would vote for 4 more years of Bush. i hope all Democrats remember that moment and are motivated as hell to make sure it doesn’t happen again this year. i was unable to work in 04, but this year my family and financial life is such that i think i can swing some time to work for our nominee. better late than never i guess.

    i dont’ want to fight with Clinton supporters here–that’s not my purpose in commenting. and i’d like to think i’m a rational Obama supporter…these next coupe weeks are going to be extremely trying for our party, but i have faith that be it Clinton or Obama, we are going to come out with a winning team. we are blessed with 2 outstanding candidates, it could be a lot worse!

  20. JP

    Thank you – I think you are a rational Obama supporter. And I agree, we are blessed with 2 outstanding candidates. That’s what I hear from a lot of people off the blogs.

    I keep in the back of my mind most days the gracious words of a member of Kerry’s staff when I let them know I was endorsing HRC. I was told that one way or another we’d all eventually be on the same team. It was a tough choice for me not to follow his lead after working so close with his staff after ’04. It was really nice to know my decision was respected and understood.

    I also made a point here of urging other front page bloggers to endorse whoever they wanted to here on The Dem Daily. Eventually we just became a Hillary haven, which is fine, because other blogs have not been so supportive of her. I also remember only too well what it was like to be one of the few early Kerry supporters on the blogosphere (in Spring ’03) and likewise to remain a Kerry supporter after the election. The Dem Daily was started in fact, as a haven for Kerry supporters.

    This too shall pass… I hope. And we’ll be swearing in a Dem in January!