When Bill and Hillary Clinton were bare knuckle fighting the Conservatives in this country, the liberals all bought in to their "vast right wing conspiracy" theory, but now that their tactics, lies and underhanded tricks are being used against the other members of the left, lo and behold, the liberals are starting to notice some thing they don't like about the Clinton Duo.
Poetic justice and greatly amusing at that.
Let me start with Hillary's latest gambit which is causing a little firestorm on the left side of the blogosphere and then I will get into the harshest outright criticisms of Hillary and Bill, about their "character, again using the words from liberals.
I did a few pieces on the DNC refusing to sit the party delegates in states broke the rules and moved their primaries forward and I even asked if they were slitting their own throats by making Michigan and Floria feel irrelevant, but they did and they agreed not to campaign there and in Michigan most even took their names off the ballot because of those agreements.
Hillary didn't.
Now Hillary wants to change the rules midstream, and you don't have to take my word for how the left is seeing through this gambit, we will show you how liberals are seeing it themselves.
Erza Klein, a liberal, thinks this little game of Hillary's has the potential to tear the party itself apart:
This is the sort of decision that has the potential to tear the party apart. In an attempt to retain some control over the process and keep the various states from accelerating their primaries into last Summer, the Democratic National Committee warned Michigan and Florida that if they insisted on advancing their primary debates, their delegates wouldn't be seated and the campaigns would be asked not to participate in their primaries. This was agreed to by all parties (save, of course, the states themselves).
[...]
But if this pushes her over the edge, the Obama camp, and their supporters, really will feel that she stole her victory. They didn't contest those states because they weren't going to count, not because they were so committed to the DNC's procedural arguments that they were willing to sacrifice dozens of delegates to support it. It's as hard as hardball gets, and the end could be unimaginably acrimonious. Imagine if African-American voters feel the rules were changed to prevent Obama's victory, if young voters feel the delegate counts were shifted to block their candidate.
This next one shocked even me, because some liberals as I will show below, might not like the Clintons, Hillary especially, but would be willing to hold their noses and vote for her anyway to keep a Republican out of the White House...... not so with shamanic from NewsHoggers and if you have ever read NewsHoggers you will already know they are so far to the left that they cannot even SEE the center anymore.
This is tough stuff for me to stomach, wanting a politics of aspiration and hope and progress. Call me crazy, but I have this thing that I do where when I agree to something, I do my best to fulfill my obligation to the agreement. I'd like to think it's possible to elect leaders who also do their best to fulfill their obligations.
But I look at Hillary Clinton's campaign and I see people lacking in goodwill, overcome by raw ambition, and devoid of principle. This is exactly what drove my parents and tens of millions of other Republicans crazy during the 90s, and I'm not looking forward to a repeat.
I'm crossing my fingers for John McCain if Clinton wins the nomination. I disagree with him on everything, but I'll take him over four more years of this kind of shady, leave no opponent standing politics.
Take a second to let that sink in, this radical left liberal would not just sit home on election night if Hillary was the nominee, but would actually go vote for McCain!!!!!
Pretty much makes Erza's point above, wouldn't you say?
Lawyers, Guns and Money, perhaps not as radical as NewsHoggers, but still a liberal blog from the few times I have read it, starts off with "this is pretty appalling":
It's dirty business on the part of the Clinton campaign, no question. And cloaking the nasty little power grab with the language of democratic inclusion irritates me even more. I can't say that I'm completely surprised, but I would have preferred if Hillary had demonstrated more appreciation for party unity than this; it amounts to an effort to steal delegates.
As a side note...click that link and take a look at the comment section. They are even harsher, calling her her out on exactly what she is.
You can find more liberals taking Hillary to task for this at Carpetbagger, Talking Points Memo and Rolling Stone.
That is simply but a small sample of the reactions against Hillary on the far left liberal side of the blogosphere and media.
Now for the meat and potatoes of this post, a very surprising article caught my eye from the Los Angeles Times Opinion page, from a liberal writer who seems to have just discovered what and who the Clintons are and finding their character, ethics and morals, seriously lacking. (Notice this is written without mention of her latest little slight of hand about the Michigan and Florida delegates)
The title itself gave me a huge chuckle when it asks "Is the right right on the Clintons?"
The sub header is just as amusing "Hillary's campaign tactics are causing some liberals to turn against the couple."
Something strange happened the other day. All these different people -- friends, co-workers, relatives, people on a liberal e-mail list I read -- kept saying the same thing: They've suddenly developed a disdain for Bill and Hillary Clinton. Maybe this is just a coincidence, but I think we've reached an irrevocable turning point in liberal opinion of the Clintons.
The sentiment seems to be concentrated among Barack Obama supporters. Going into the campaign, most of us liked Hillary Clinton just fine, but the fact that tens of millions of Americans are seized with irrational loathing for her suggested that she might not be a good Democratic nominee. But now that loathing seems a lot less irrational. We're not frothing Clinton haters like ... well, name pretty much any conservative. We just really wish they'd go away.
It goes on to say that the turning point for them was when the Clintons misrepresented what Barack Obama said about Ronald Reagan, they mention Hillary's email tactics against Obama before the New Hampshire primaries, and goes straight into the robocalls happening now in South Carolina against Obama...lastly they find themselves "the Clintons' habit of surrounding themselves with the most egregious characters: Dick Morris, Marc Rich and so on." (That was in relation to the Black Entertainment Television founder Robert L. Johnson invoking Obama's youthful drug use.)
The Clinton campaign is trying to make it seem as if the complaint is about negativity, and it is pointing out that Obama has criticized Hillary as well. That's what politicians are supposed to do when they compete for votes. But criticism isn't the same thing as lying and sleaze-mongering.
Am I starting to sound like a Clinton hater? It's a scary thought. Of course, to conservatives, it's a delicious thought.....
I am stopping there because I have no problem admitting that yes, it IS a delicious thought as well as poetic justice and the irony comes into play also.
But the conservatives might have had a point about the Clintons' character. Bill's affair with Monica Lewinsky jeopardized the whole progressive project for momentary pleasure. The Clintons gleefully triangulated the Democrats in Congress to boost his approval rating. They do seem to have a feeling of entitlement to power.
With all that said, they acknowledge that if Hillary ends up the Democratic nominee, with all those negatives they just listed themselves, they would probably hold their nose and vote for her again.
Talk about a lack of character...
Pot. Meet. Kettle.
From the right side of the blogosphere is some justified snark at the very fact that it has taken members of the left 16 years to finally start seeing Bill and Hillary Clinton for what they are.
Captain Ed titles his piece "Rules? The Clintons Don't Need No Stinkin' Rules!" and PoliGazette asks if "Anyone really up for four years of this deceit?" That piece is appropriately named "Cheater".
Macsmind put the figures out there, a reminder of what happened under Bill Clinton when he held the office of presidency:
- GOP seats gained in House during Clinton: 48
- GOP seats gained in Senate under Clinton: 8
- GOP governorships under Clinton: 11
- GOP state legislative seats gained under Clinton: 1,254
- State legislatures taken over by GOP under Clinton: 9
- Democrat officeholders became Republicans under Clinton: 439
You can keep up with the firestorm of comments, blog posts and discussion about Hillary, Bill and this latest salvo in dirty politics, and left against left, over at memeorandum.
A quick note to the far liberal left here: You knew what they were and you didn't care as long as those tactics were only used against the right, so quit whining, quit bitching...... You are getting exactly what you deserve.
.
