Thursday, February 21, 2008

Paranoid Cranks for Hillary

This is definitely an overstatement, but I'm of the opinion there are two kinds of Hillary supporters: The sane ones who keep it to themselves and the crazy ones who don't. For example, I suspect that Digby was a Hillary supporter, though is slowly moving in the Obama direction as he's proven his abilities on the campaign trail. Same goes for Atrios. But it's not really that they were Hillary people. Instead, it's the basic fact that this was always Hillary's nomination to lose, and you kept her as your top choice unless someone better came along. And that's been Hillary's biggest problem the whole time: Someone better came along.

And let's face it, there were certainly some crazy Obama people who hated Hillary. I'm fairly sure that at least some of these were either Hillary people trying to make us look bad or Rove people trying to start a fight; but I know of several Obama people who definitely were real people and clearly hated Hillary. And that happens. People have opinions. What can you do about it? Not much. I tried to tell them to tone it down, but they wouldn't. Oh well, that happens. You just can't control what people say.

And so with these crazy Obama people out there, you'd have to be crazy to be all-out in support of Hillary. And I suspect that's what happened, which is why so many Hillary people seemed so entirely unhinged: Only the crazy ones got loud about it. Like someone named Anne at Carpetbagger, who didn't seem like a bad person; but she had a huuuuge chip on her shoulder regarding Hillary and would get heavy criticism for tossing out some of the most egregious pro-Hillary spin imaginable. It's as if Mark Penn had an evil twin.

The Fix Is In

And I was thinking about this just now, while reading a decent post by Michael Berube at TPM Cafe (Full Disclosure: I was once on Berube's blogroll, shortly before he pulled the plug on his blog and left me hanging). The professor was talking about another TPM writer's post on Hillary's next attack, and asks what that attack could possibly be, as the Clinton campaign has shown itself to be "message incompetent." He then goes on to evaluate the Clinton claim that she's proven her ability to face down the Republican Attack Machine; a theory he's doubtful of.

Now, while this is far from Hillary praise, I fail to see how any of this is improper or rude. In fact, only a fool could look at these campaigns and suggest that any of this is untrue. You could quibble over whether Hillary has beaten the attack machine, but it's a debatable point. And no one could suggest that Hillary's done a decent job of attacking Barack or suggest good avenues for her to attack him on. Or if there were such attacks, Hillary certainly hasn't done a good job of highlighting them, as she keeps trotting out the embarrassing ones.

But all the same, the crazy Hillary supporters came out, particularly some dude named "Andrew Strat" (a fake name if I've ever heard one). And Strat insists that Hillary has been "battered by Liberal Democrats" and suggests that because some liberal bloggers like TPM, Kos, and Huff Post say negative things about Hillary and Chris Matthews, MSNBC, and CNN also say negative things, this is proof that "the fix is in."

Because I mean, what are the odds that different people would have the same opinion about the same thing? Not very likely. Especially not if you're a crazy person who only sees things in black & white and can't imagine that anyone could ever have an honest difference of opinion with you. He tells us that some consider him a "paranoid crank" for saying this, but suggests that "maybe it takes a paranoid to unravel the level of opinion manipulation that is going on."

And I would just like to take the "maybe" out of that sentence and replace it with a "definitely." It would definitely take a paranoid to unravel the conspiracy that says Josh Marshall and Kos got with Chris Matthews and CNN to "fix" opinions against Hillary. And it takes a full-time crank to turn this conspiracy into something you'd laugh at rather than fear.

Things I Learned From a Paranoid Crank

Here are some random tidbits from poor Andrew:

If you don't denounce Hillary haters for wanting her to "be a 'lady'", you are "on the bandwagon with it all."

Obamamaniacs are "like groupies, either for one or the other, blind as bats to anything more complicated than that."

If you talk about Hillary's flailing campaign you are trying to "savor the last moments of her defeat; like drinking yesterdays cold cup of coffee." Because we all love to savor old coffee.

The Obamamaniacs are "sanctioned by the Obama campaign."

Obama's "bloviating rhetoric" is part of his "obvious manipulation of the feeble latte drinking yuppy mind." Because latte drinking yuppies are notoriously feeble-minded. And yes, insulting Democrats during a Democratic primary is a great idea; particularly when repeating rightwing attacks against the Democrat.

All "reasonable Liberals" think that "there must be some misogynistic motive somewhere underneath all that asymmetric concern with Hillary’s shortcomings and only adulation for Obama THE MALE."

And finally, in a comment he addressed to me personally, I discovered that if you don't think "the fix is in" against Hillary by Liberal Democrats and the MSM, then you either think this is all an accident, a coincidence, or that "all the media hates Hillary because she is obviously a vile unlovable creature, just like 2+2 is obviously 4." I guess the critical praise of the film Juno was also part of some "fix."

At his profile, I also learned that:

"We liberals go the extra mile for aspiring African American politicians" because we overlook "the cult mentality of the Obama phenomenon. Nay we don't just overlook it, we embrace it." Which I guess is his way of saying we have Affirmative Action programs for black cult leaders, unlike white politicians, who aren't allowed to be popular.

But this won't help us in the general election because "the rest of non-liberal America don't share our eagerness to see the end of racism as we do." Hell, why stop at insulting Democrats in a Democratic primary when you can go ahead and insult everyone else too?

Now, it's possible I got some of these out of context, but for the life of me, I can't imagine what possible context makes any of these better.

Cult of Hillary

The worst part about it is how much he attacks Barack and his supporters, while insisting that all we do is engage in one-sided attacks. But this isn't just him. Lots of the crazy Hillary supporters do the same thing. Their strongest attack against us has always been how we're all irrational Hillary haters in the Cult of Obama and how we should all be stopped from saying negative things about Hillary. And unless we praise Hillary and defend her against these attacks in everything we write about her, we're accused of being Hillary Hating Obama Sycophants; just as I was.

And I'll readily admit that there are too many Obama people who do the same thing. But there is a stark difference: They're not playing the victim. When they debate these Hillary people, they blast Hillary with both barrels; often in ways that I think hurts Obama. But the Hillary people keep insisting they're innocent in everything and start insulting all Obama people with all sorts of attacks on our vile and evil nature.

And you get the same kind of thing from her campaign, and I'm sorry, but that's no way to run a campaign. I don't want a repeat of the 90's, where Clinton remained popular because so many people felt sorry for him. I don't want a victim for president. I don't want to be in constant defense mode, where even our side's attacks need to be defended by me. I want a president who can define the debate, not someone adept at winning someone else's debates. And most of all, I want a president who doesn't need me to protect them against the people whose job it is to tell everyone what's going on (ie, the media).

And that's the worst part about Hillary's campaign and the Hillary people: Ever since she lost in Iowa, we keep being told how everyone is unfairly keeping her down and that they need to stop it so she can get on her feet and fight fairly. And if they don't understand why that's the absolutely dumbest sales pitch for president, then it's obvious why they're behaving so crazy now.

Hillary the Invincible was a decent campaign pitch that just wasn't good enough. Hillary the Victim is simply pathetic. I don't dislike Hillary as a person and I wish her well, but victimization is just not a good platform for the presidency.


Dave said...

Maybe we should begin all posts and comments with, "All praise Hillary, yea Obamabots." Personnaly I like Hillary and at any other time I would be firmly in her camp. This year she's just out classed by Obama. Now Obama isn't perfect, he and Hillary are both too conservative for me but hope, inspiration, a positive message, and inclusionary politics far outweigh "ready on day one" (really?), and 35 imaginary years of experiance. So, if somehow Hillary does win the nomination, I will gladly support her but, I really want president Obama.

Anonymous said...

too bad there are too many men out there who hate women too much. women will never be in power, because men just hate them too much. I hate Obama. if he wins the nomination for democrats, I totally think that McCain will win the presidential nomination. I heard that from so many people that if Hillary does not win they will vote for McCain. It is unfortunate that we wil have republicans once again and 100 years of war in Iraq. too many men hate Hillary and women in general and they will not allow them to be in power. it is unfortunate.
oh and one more thing, have you thought that the people who give money to Obama are the ones who hate Hillary and also the millions of health insurance companies who do not want Hillary to reform the health care because that means they will lose money? So I bet Obama has too much support from the men who hate Hillary, from the African-Americans, from stupid young people who haven't even work yet and they have no idea what life is about, and from the health inssurance and pharmaceutical companies who do not want Hillary plan. This is where he gets his money from too. So sad to see such a big scam in this world.

Doctor Biobrain said...

Thanks anyway, Anon. But I don't think I need any more examples of paranoid cranks supporting Hillary. One was enough for this post. Better luck next time.

John of the Dead said...

Come now, Doc. You can't really expect us to believe the seredipitous irony of a paranoid Hilary crank posting a paranoid Hilary rank *in* a post about paranoid Hilary cranks, can you? This has to be some sort of example of the type of cranks you referenced; a composite paranoid Hilary crank, if you will. Come clean, Doc. We don't need any more scandals. :-)

Adita said...

Dr. B, Paranoid Crank has answered your post (sorta) at TPM Cafe. Be aware that it appears he has started speaking in foreign tongues, and his synapses are obviously still not making some crucial connections.

Having enjoyed this whole exchange immensely, I want to thank you for inviting me over here for your detailed analysis on this new form of wildlife that has taken over parts of some blogs. And I'm looking forward to your thoughts on the new pearls of wisdom that have been dropped upon you.

Doctor Biobrain said...

Glad to have you around, Adita. Yeah, this whole Obama-Clinton thing has been GREAT for business. Not only are more people coming to my blog, but I actually have an over-abundance of things to write about. In fact, my favorite part of the whole thing is that I get to have heated debates with a higher class of people, instead of the loony wingnuts all the time. Sure, some of them are paranoid cranks, but that's still better than when they're ALL paranoid cranks. While I'll be happy once the nomination is decided, it has been pretty fun while it lasted.