Tuesday, October 02, 2007

Meet a typical Hillary Clinton supporter:

Froma a pro-Hillary blogger:
Hillary Does Good on Iran

I was annoyed by her refusing to answer questions about Social Security and voting for the Kyl-Lieberman amendment, but there’s news that she is sponsoring a bill with Jim Webb that “prohibits the use of funds for military operations against Iran without explicit Congressional authorization (S. 759).” This is some good stuff, I wonder how Elizabeth Edwards will try to tear it down. Is Clinton not “showing leadership” by co-sponsoring the bill? I wouldn’t put it past Edwards to say some wacky stuff like that.
This comes less than a week after Clinton voted for Kyl-Lieberman.

Speaking of Clinton's bold stance on the issues, remember this? (in December 2005)
Clinton is co-sponsoring a bill that would make it a crime to destroy a flag on federal property, intimidate anyone by burning a flag or burning someone else’s flag.
It's not an amendment to the constitution, so it's okay, supposedly.

Had enough of this triangulation?

CODA: If you read posts and comments defending Hillary, you get the impression that people have bonded emotionally to her, since the arguments they use don't make any sense. Take this commentator, reacting to critics of her vote for Kyl-Lieberman:
Well, Hillary Bashing Right Off The Bat.

Get her early and often. Disregard the psychos who are going to do this regardless of motions and amendments and whatnot. I know she was the only person on earth who voted that way, right?
Apparently, it's unfair to criticize Hillary unless she cast the only vote for Kyl-Lieberman. Or something like that. This kind of "reasoning" reminds me of similar defenses of Bush and Republicans. It's dismissive of facts and logic.

I think some of the Hillary adoration is a transfer of Bill-love, since he was a political magician who hypnotized some Democrats and the spell hasn't broken.


I think you have this a bit wrong. Defending Hillary is a way that people (who though they may not be of the left still see themselves as such) seek to defend their own honor.

It's not that I really like Hillary or her politics, but I'm pretty sure she's going to be the Dem nominee. I'm going to reflexively defend her because the Dem nominee is the only thing really standing between us and President Giuliani. But more than that, I have fifteen years experience of hearing black-hearted Hillary jokes, insinuations that Hillary is ugly/fat/a conniving bitch/a communist, and through all that time the republicans and conservatives in my life and shouting on the television and radio have used Hillary as a bludgeon against me, so reflexively defending Hillary feels necessary.

It isn't some Bill Clinton voodoo that's bonded me to Hillary, but Limbaugh's misogynist slime etc.

That said, I don't really like Hillary. I think she's a hawk for the foolish reasons that a lot of Dem Senators are hawks. I would much prefer that either Obama or Edwards get the nomination both on the merits of their politics and the fact that running Clinton feels like fighting the last war.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/02/2007 5:12 AM  

Post a Comment