I've repeatedly made the mistake of assuming that my disgust with the Clinton campaign has peaked. I thought it had peaked in South Carolina, where the Senator's husband gave us a nod-wink explanation of why his wife's loss there didn't really matter.
(I have yet to hear anyone explain how you could accept Mr. Clinton's remarks without being drawn to the clear inference, "Black votes don't matter. Unless they're voting for a Clinton.)
I thought it had peaked in Rhode Island, when the Senator in an awkwardly distateful diatribe clearly took great pleasure in mocking Obama's near-universal inspirational qualities as the rantings of a shallow and hollow manipulator.
I thought it had peaked last week, when the Senator informed us that Senator McCain has been tested, that she has been tested, but that Senator Obama simply "gave a speech." In other words, if she can't beat Obama, she recommends John McCain for president.
Obama, having failed to support an illegal war of agression that has morphed into an absurdist abattoir which consumes lives, money, and logic at every-greater rates, was clearly far too naive to be trusted. America's punishment for rejecting Hillary Clinton, then, would be a McCain presidency.
I thought it had peaked earlier this week, when the Senator and her husband offered Obama the vice-presidency. Only people as comprehensively narcissistic, as pathologicaly solipsistic, as the Clintons would tell the man who is winning by every measurable metric that they, in all their benevolence, would be willing to accept his victory as their own.
There is no small amount of an uppity nigger dynamic at work here. I am usually not given to calling people racist, but there is no other adequate explanation for this. "Oh, you've won 30 states! You're beating us! Good for you! Now, why don't you run off and wait your turn. Cool your heels for a few years. There are some great seats in the back of the bus. Let the grown-ups deal with this. Noone your age could handle this job. Unless his name is Bill Clinton."
I though it had peaked two days ago, when the Senator's surrogate, Geraldine Ferraro, told us that Obama was only winning because he is a black man. I now know that my disgust with these people will never bottom out.
Hillary has tried it all. Obama's not a Muslim, "as far as I know." Classy. The three a.m. television ad, subtley reminding us that only Hillary Clinton can save your sweet sleeping children from some unnamed horror. Priceless. Because of all that experience, of course.
Obama's only winning because he's black? Let's take this step by step. If Obama is only winning because he's black, it would be the first time in the history of the United States that someone won something because of his blackness rather than in spite of it. In such an instance, could we at least feel happy for such a person, a person who turned black into gold for the first time in 400 years in this land? Apparently not.
That being said, if Obama is winning because he's black, surely we can measure this. He's winning black votes largely because he's black, of course. Just as Hillary Clinton is winning the votes of professional white women. I also assume she is doing quite well among self-absorbed, vindictive, petty elitists.
Bush won the evangelical vote because he claimed to be one of them. Hillary wins white female votes. Obama wins black votes. Since there are more white women that black people of either gender in this country, Hillary clearly has gained the most from self-identification voters.
Have white men voted for Obama because he's black? Only someone as shameless as a Clinton would say that with a straight face. To say that blackness is a benefit in America, that only white-on-white fights are fair fights, is......well, it's classic Clinton. It betrays a self-pity that literally knows no bounds.
If, at the beginning of a campaign, your last name is Clinton, if you have more money than any prior candidate for president, if you have the backing of the entire Democratic establishment, if you enjoy the rolodex of a globally popular ex-President, and you can't beat a black man whose name rhymes with "Iraq Hussein Osama", then honey, it's not him; it's you.
And what about the converse? What about Hillary Clinton? Is she not winning just because she's a woman? Further, is she not winning just because she's a Clinton? What if Hillary Clinton had the same resume, same personality, but were named Frank Wilson?
Well, Hillary Clinton with a Y chromosome and without the last name is John Kerry. But way less qualified to be president, far less experienced, and without the ability to conceive of things larger than one's self that is so fundamental to capable leadership.
Has every president to date in American history been elected only because they were white men? In part, yes, but we didn't just pick any white man; most of them had other things going for them. Jefferson, for example. Pretty decent writer. In Hillary Clinton's world, however, once that mold is broken, its illegitimate. Unless it's her.
If it's Barack Obama who breaks the white male stranglehold, we just like him because he's black. While previous presidents were more than "just white", and while Hillary is so much more than "just a woman", Barack Obama is "just black", and if he were not black, he would be nothing. He is a token. He is cynically manipulating the largest obstacle to personal achievement in the history of this country. Of course.
What does it say about Hillary Clinton that she is running a blatantly racist campaign? What does it say about her that she openly mocks, ridicules, and insults the man who is beating her? What does it say about her when she makes it very clear that, if she can't win, she would rather destroy Obama and the Democratic Party than see him in the White House?
This is a dangerous person. This is a person unworthy of authority. This is a person so self-centered that she probably takes the weather personally. This is a woman who must be rejected and, if need be, humiliated. Not just because she's white. Not just because she's a woman. Just because she's Hillary Clinton.
No comments:
Post a Comment