Join or Die: Hillary Democrats for McCain on WordPress

One of my regular commenters recently noted the upswing in pro-Hillary, anti-Obama rhetoric among WordPress’ politics blogs (thanks for the tip!). That’s a disappointing trend, but the actual sites he pointed to are even more disappointing, ranging from the racist to the delusional. I’ve noted before – just click that little “previous post” button above you – that it’s partly worrying, but mostly confusing, to see so many people turn from the Democrats upon Obama’s nomination. It suggests to me that the Clinton supporters who cling to her candidacy were never really about the issues in the first place. America is at a crossroads, and to let anger and resentment at Hillary’s loss defeat us in our last best chance to undo the damage of the Bush years borders on the absurd. It’s cutting off the nose to spite the face, it’s throwing a temper tantrum, it’s..

Irresponsible.

More on the worst offenders, below the line.

“Obambi” is probably the worst. First, while reveling in the namecalling in this latest post, take note of the banners around the site. Obama is a terrorist, Obama is a racist, Obama is… black, is really what it all boils down to. It’s so funny to see someone complain about sexism torpedoing the Hillary campaign, while trying to use racism to torpedo the Obama campaign. Two wrongs, comrade, make a right-wing Presidential term that America may not survive. Also, does someone want to call the copyright police?

The next site is somewhat more serious. Or, at least, it thinks it is. “Democrats Over Nominating Elitists” (DONE) is so self-important and, for lack of a better word, elitist as to inconsistently capitalize the Nouns (and – oops! – Pronouns) in its own Manifesto. Half-way to a nice touch. It even evokes the Revolution… at least until you get to some of the odder passages about the “self-masturbatory appetites of the Elite.” I cannot say that I see Thomas Jefferson penning those words, and not in so futile and self-aggrandizing a manner, either. Looking at the whole, it really seems to evoke a different Revolution and a different Manifesto entirely. But let’s skip those little pieces of prurient prose and get to the business passages of the “manifesto”:

Be it forcefully RESOLVED that we oppose Mr. Obama’s candidacy on grounds including but not limited to differences of ideology, principle, character, judgment, policy, and qualifications and not due to spite, anger, or revenge;

Be it RESOLVED that we accept as a compromise candidate and transition President the Republican nominee, himself a credentialed, centrist-conservative, competent Patriot…

Misdirected on the first, and wrong on the second. While the policy objections aren’t laid out, the “qualifications” objection is common enough, and easily rebuttable: what this little tirade seems to be more about, in general, is anger and offense at “elitism.” No doubt it was a long and bitter campaign. Nasty things were said on all sides, and by supporters on all sides, but some of the real dirt of this election was said and perpetrated by Hillary Clinton’s staff. But this isn’t about who started what and when. If you’re not clear-minded enough to rise above the dirt and think long and deep about the issues, then you’re not an intelligent voter. You’re just angry. I decry the voters and supporters that are still trying to rub salt in the wounds of Hillary supporters, and I wish both sides would cut the anger and try to unite behind the candidate that won. And don’t get me started on the Michigan and Florida crap. But really, from here on out the election should be about liberal and progressive values beating out the tired old fundamentalist, neoconservative right. If those at DONE can’t see past the cult of Hillary personality to get to the real issues… then that’s just sad, and McCain is one step closer to winning.

I would go through the last site – TexasDarlin – in depth, except for the fact that it’s really all been said. Mostly harping the same points as DONE, it does seem to be a little more heavy into rumors – Obama is a gay heroin addict, quick, call Hannity & Savage! – and a little more delusional. Free Hillary to fight… for what? And then there are your conspiracy theories. But what really gets me is this final closing indignity: dammit, they’re using my favorite WordPress theme! Cutline is MINE! I totally called it! It’s like showing up at prom with the same dress as your best friend, but much much worse (I imagine – being a dude, I never had that exact prom experience).

For readers who think that this post is a little more of a rant than typical for this site, and a little less staid than usual, you’re probably right, and I apologize. I’ll be back to normal soon. But I can’t stand to see Democrats sell our ideology and our country down the river for the cult of Hillary. I think she would’ve made a fine president. But she lost. I deeply apologize on behalf of all Obama supporters, if I’ve ever participated in the gloating and rubbing-salt-in-wounds that you complain of, and I hope all other Obama supporters call it quits. But for God’s sake, there’s something bigger at stake:

Beating John McCain. And packing the Supreme Court for decades to come. Won’t somebody please think of the Justices?

18 comments

  1. Ooooh, the posting icon is golden. Very witty.

    Update: Oh dear. I seem to have blogged while angry and low on blood sugar. But I still stand by it!

  2. Timothy · ·

    something wicked this way comes

  3. Andrew Slominski · ·

    So you’re arguing that Obama isn’t an elitist? His wife is a member of the CFR and he has spoken in front of it on multiple occasions. I can’t think of many groups with a agenda more elitist than CFR.

  4. Is it all of a sudden bad for Presidents and their spouses to be educated and participate in elite groups to discuss policy? Because I kind of thought that’s what politics is. If you’re arguing politics is elitist…. is that what you’re arguing?

    Or might my sarcasm sensors be missing a blip?

  5. Andrew Slominski · ·

    By elitist I don’t mean ‘let’s sip on fine wines and discuss difficult books and obscure works of art’. I mean the kind of elites who would buy up all of American media in the beginning of the 20th century and start a massive propaganda machine in the US. The type of elites that would do anything to erode national sovereignty for personal gain and global goals. Don’t believe me? Do some searching on the history of the CFR and its role in politics.

  6. didionsmommy · ·

    well, andrew, the carlyle group is right there, too … and the bush family is plugged into the carlyle group from head to toe.

    bill clinton has addressed the cfr, too.

    bottom line: if you think elitist organizations are new to this century or the last or the millennia before or are ever going away … well … let’s just say i want my president to be able to move fluidly among and between all groups and organizations.

    i wonder, too, if “elite” is the new “black” … not in andrew’s comments, but in general …

    hillary clinton’s life has been and is in a rarefied realm … so is john mccain’s … of course, all of the bush family … and the bush cabinet …

    why aren’t any of them ever widely called “elitist”?

    in fact, since kennedy, the only two presidents who were NOT educated in elite institutions at — at least — the university or post-grad level are LBJ and reagan …

    the only member of w’s inner circle who is not similarly plugged into elite strata either by birth, education, or continued professional work is karl rove …

    he, apparently, still prefers to be in the back rooms and alleys devising dirty tricks …

    if obami-dot-com is not part of a larger rovian plan, i’ll be shocked … i mean, look at the amount of ad space relative to content (quantity, not quality) … with just enough left-leaning links to look convincing … i dunno, but ames, i’d avoid giving them any more free attention …

  7. You’re probably right on that last point. I was just royally pissed off. And thanks for coming to my aid on all the others :-)

  8. Barack Obama · ·

    I think the larger point is,

    Have you SEEN what Whole Foods is charging for arugula?

  9. Collin, your IP address is showing (to me, at least) :-).

    Anyways, the larger point IS that anyone who runs for president these days is going to be an “elitist” in that they enjoy doing rich people things, and are rich. The only problem is that some talk about it, thus violating the unwritten rule of American politics: thou shalt pretend to be poor.

    That the American people fell for the whole “Bush is a Southerner” thing boggles my mind. Clearing brush sounds all rural and rednecky until you realize it’s his personal billion acre ranch, and one of a few vacation homes his blue blood Connecticut family owns.

  10. The elitism thing fascinates me.

    There was talk a few years back about whether Bush could continue to keep wealthy businessmen and rural farmers in the same Republican tent.

    The Democratic party has always had a split of its own too (it’s just as strange that university faculties vote the same way as prisoners and the urban poor; what can I say? American parties are weird.) and I think that’s what this is about.

    Bill Clinton of Hope, Arkansas was in a perfect personal position to chide Republicans as elitists who only protected the powerful and to herald the Democrats’ watching out for the little guy.

    And you don’t have to BE a little guy to get them to like you and to convince them that you have their best interests at heart (See Jack Kennedy and George W. Bush.)

    But you sure can’t make the little guys feel inadequate, as in “you only cling to God and guns because of your Nietzchean resentiment.” And “look at the arugula prices at Whole Foods” in a state that doesn’t have a Whole Foods store and to people who might not know what arugula is.

    Obama is going to have to take a lesson from the man he thinks he’s running against (Bush) and the man he thinks he is (Kennedy) if he’s going to get these efforts to identify with The People to succeed.

  11. …it’s partly worrying, but mostly confusing, to see so many people turn from the Democrats upon Obama’s nomination.

    Why not be honest about the reality? A lot of Dems are not going to vote for Obama because of his race. I know at least three people who are lifelong Dems and are voting for McCain. I would not call any of them racist, but I would call them prejudice. They distrust Obama’s motives and they distrust his cultural background. The biggest fear I hear from them? An explosion of Section 8 housing in urban areas and slavery reparations.

    Another aspect that has yet to be discussed in the MSM is the increasing liklihood that Obama is going to lose the hispanic vote. A lot of hispanics will refuse to vote for Obama. There is no love lost between the African American and Latino communities and they would prefer the first minority president be one of their own. lus McCain’s immigration policy is to their liking.

    Dems can comfort themselves by saying, “We’re better off without all these racist pigs in our party,” but it may mean losing this election. Either heal the division or count yourselves out of this race.

  12. Andrew Slominski · ·

    What we really need to do here is break out of the false left-right paradigm. I do believe Kennedy was one of the few good presidents in recent history. He was trying to do things that pissed off the establishment, which made it not surprising that he was assassinated. Also, don’t forget that Reagan was shot at the beginning of his term and that George H.W. Bush was essentially calling the shots after that. I’m not against specific people (especially presidents, recently they’ve just been puppets) but rather I’m against the AGENDAS of the groups they frequent.

    I urge all of you to look into the CFR, the Bilderberg Group, the Club of Rome and the rest. Look at their agendas.

    If you don’t have much time there are good Youtube clips out there.

    If you have a little more time I suggest that you watch Endgame, it’s available for free on Youtube.

  13. didionsmommy · ·

    i agree with you, pc. i, too, know people who are more than a little uncomfortable with the black issue. but i’ll go further than you and call it what it is: racist. they are racist. they are democrats, and they are racist. no ifs, ands, or buts about it.

    that was what i meant in my earlier comment about “elite being the new black” … that some people might be getting around their problems with “black” by reasoning “elitist”.

    and this vote will turn on the latino vote, for sure, which is no longer a sure bet for the democratic party, regardless of obama’s candidacy, but with obama, it is extra-complicated. the race relations between blacks and latinos are problematic, and it goes way beyond latinos wanting to be first in the minority-president column.

  14. I don’t know that it’s racism. I actually thought Obama was right on the money with his speech about race when he talked about racism verses resentment. I honestly don’t believe that a lot of people are ‘racist’ anymore. But a whole lot of people are prejudice (realistically we’re all prejudice in some way).

    The problem is that the people doing the talking usually don’t separate culture from race. If we are honest we should admit that modern prejudices in America are based on a dislike of another culture, not race. Few people believe that blacks are genetically predisposed to commit crimes, but a lot of people would contend, right or wrong, that crime has become institutionalized in black culture. You wouldn’t call me racist if I said that I don’t like people in NY based on their cultural habits, but I could easily be labeled racist if I said I didn’t like blacks based on their cultural habits. Both are generalizations and neither judgment are actually based on racial characteristics, but because one culture is geographically based and one is racially based, there is a different perception. That muddies the water.

    THAT is how the charge of ‘racism’ gets perpetuated forever. We need to separate white and black cultural from the tension-filled notion of race and have an honest discussion about those cultural differences which cause mistrust. If a white Dem fears Obama will push for slavery reparations, what he fears is that Obama has culturally-based motives that differ from his own. That person is not contending that Obama is genetically programmed to push for reparations. Prejudice verses racism.

  15. didionsmommy · ·

    i understand what you are saying, but “race” itself is a cultural concept. i have to think about this some more …

  16. Yes and no. Anthropologists are willing to contend that are actualy ‘racial characteristics’ that define Asians, blacks, etc. Of course, they also once thought that there was a ‘Scandanavian race’ so our perceptions are always changing.

  17. С Днем тестировщика! С праздником!

%d bloggers like this: