Wednesday, August 20, 2008

In a nutshell: Why people hate Obots

Pittsburgh Tribune-Review columnist Salena Zito contributes one of those whistling-in-the-dark pieces designed to convince us that the PUMA movement is dead and all is well in Dem-land. "This convention is Obama's moment," says Zito...
Hillary's job is to bring a casserole dish and to serve it with a smile.
If Hillary had won the primaries, would Zito have written: "Obama's job is to carry luggage, fetch lemonade, shine shoes and smile broadly while saying 'Yassuh, boss!'"?

Zito also quotes Mark Siegel as saying that the current disunity is insignificant compared to the Jimmy Carter/Ted Kennedy battle (even though Kennedy had nowhere near as many delegates):
He says the Kennedy-Carter campaign was much uglier than the Obama-Clinton primaries, especially "with the Carter people making sub rosa Chappaquiddick attacks all through the campaign."
This is revisionist bullshit. 1980 was bad, but not 2008 bad. Those sub rosa attacks must have been pretty damned sub, since I didn't notice 'em, and Seigel cannot cite a telling example. (There were many such attacks coming from the right, but they were not sub at all.) For more, see here.

2 comments:

Perry Logan said...

The Obama people clearly want to put Hillary through a symbolic ritual of female subjugation. They are misogynist to the core--and proud of it.

CognitiveDissonance said...

Since the media were among the ugliest of the attackers, of course they're going to pretend that it wasn't an ugly campaign. And they're going to keep saying that until they've convinced themselves. But the rest of us - the people who vote - know better. We tuned them out a long time ago. I would love to see a poll comparing the public's trust of the media with the public's trust of oily used car salesmen. I have a feeling that the latter would win.