Reconciliation: Part I
by Frederick
Over at the Daily Kos they’re holding an all day symposium on “Why Clinton lost.” I have my own views on the matter; Bryan of “Why Now?” has his, but let me first highlight one of the most pervasively wrong reasons, as illustrated by Carl from Simply Left Behind:
…The most important outcome of your candidacy, perhaps it will be your Pyrrhic victory, is the acknowledgment, finally, that even the Democratic and Progressive movements are not fully free of misogyny. Just the comments at this blog alone demonstrate the hatred white men have towards you, but the Tennesee Guerilla Women can cite chapter and verse the hate spewed by the Obombersand their media co-horts.
Perhaps it’s not race that needs a dialogue, but how fully half the population can be so denied of their legitimacy by the other half.
When those two numbnuts in New Hampshire (I think) held up an “Iron My Shirt” sign, people laughed.
Imagine if that sign had said “Pick My Cotton” at an Obama rally?
There, right there, is why you lost, Mrs. Clinton. Despite your overwhelming qualifications for the Presidency, despite your dynamic and well-thought-out agenda for your administration, despite every piece of evidence that says Senator Obama will be a disaster in the White House, if not just the campaign trail, you were the butt of savage sexist jokes.
He was not the subject of savage racist jokes, at least none that were accepted in the mainstream media. Even his pitiful speech on race, which so many have touted as a watershed in American politics, ultimately did nothing to advance the cause of equality, because the Senator did not even repudiate those on his side of the colour line who spew hatred towards American. And white women, so amply demonstrated by the Rev. Pfleger.
Carl brings up a few different things that have more than a small measure of legitimacy, but they mostly get washed away by his other outrageous claims that have no basis in reality. There was sexism, misogyny, and racism all throughout this primary. But that’s not why Clinton lost nor why Obama won. People have sited various reasons for her loss; she had the wrong position on Iraq when it mattered most, her fundraising machine relied on big donors who maxed out their contributions quickly, the generational divide. All these reason have been, and will continue to be, mulled over for years to come. The media did what the media does. Bloggers did what bloggers do. It all comes back to the fact that Obama played it straight.
Set aside the rabid grassroots supporters, the bloggers, the media, various low level campaign advisers. At no time did Obama’s candidacy try to delegitimize Clinton’s in the ways that Clinton’s run tried to undercut Obama’s. The experience and electability question has been put to bed. The call for reconciliation and unity has been made by both camps in a real and compelling way. Time to move on.
To be continued…



Comments
i don’t get why you even pay attention that deluded douchebag. he clearly lives vicariously through the lives of famous people he’s heard of.
What a perfect segue to part ii. Remember Serrach, we must use the term “cobag” in place of douchebag, it’s more gender neutral. *snicker, snicker, snark, snark*
Just a fun cartoon….
http://anarchyinyourhead.com/2008/06/07/how-sincere-is-she/
I say, who needs ‘em? Once they help McCain get elected, the Clinton buzz will wear off and they’ll be wondering “My god! What have I done!?!”