Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
The Birth of Hillary Nation
Sam Stein collects some comments from Clinton's die-hard supporters at last weekend's Rules & Bylaw Committee meeting:
"[Obama] is a cult. His campaign is an anti-woman cult."
"I will actively campaign against him."
"You know who is backing him is George Soros. It'll be George Soros, not Obama, who is running the country."
"South Dakota is totally rigged for Obama because of Tom Daschle. Obama's going to win South Dakota because he's buying it and rigging it."
"[Obama] is a socialist! You know what the Nazi Party was before it was the Nazi Party? It was the Socialist Party."
The intensity of this fear and venom shouldn't have blindsided me -- I'm the guy who says paranoia appears everywhere on the political spectrum, including the center -- but it did. It makes me take Hillary more seriously, not as a probable president but as a cultural phenomenon: Anyone who attracts that sort of passion is innately interesting. Even if it turns out that the passion was already floating around before it attached itself to a politician.
Bonus video: A rabid Clinton supporter is thrown out of the RBC meeting. On her way out, she calls Obama "an inadequate black male who would not have been running if had it not been a white woman that was running for president."
On a related note, here's a sneak peek at the Clinton campaign's next commercial:
Elemenope|6.2.08 @ 10:44AM|#
"[Obama] is a socialist! You know what the Nazi Party was
before it was the Nazi Party? It was the Socialist
Party."
That's gotta be my favorite. It doesn't get much better than
that...although calling Obama's campaign an "anti-woman cult" is
pretty funny too. I'm pretty sure my fiance would object strongly
at the notion.
Fluffy|6.2.08 @ 10:46AM|#
The bitching about Hillary being held down by sexism has always
annoyed me, beginning with her first Senate campaign.
Reverse sexism helped Hillary even way back then. Hillary
had basically done nothing with her life but be an adequate
attorney for a small state firm for a few years, and then had been
someone's spouse. But Hillary's supporters gave her credit for all
the phantom accomplishments she "would have" had if she hadn't
given up her career to build Bill's. She was treated as if she was
a more serious person than she actually was at the time, because
she was a woman and because of how unfair it was that she had never
actually accomplished anything on her own because she gave it up
for Bill. That looks like reverse sexism to me, unless we're going
to start picking random men out for Senate candidacies based on
what they "would have" done if only history was completely
different from what actually transpired.
|6.2.08 @ 10:52AM|#
I have been saying this to people for years and few listen to
me; a lot of people like Hillary Clinton. It is hard to explain to
the haters out there, of which I have long been one, but she is
very popular among a certain group of people.
What is amazing about this election is how people keep voting for
Hillary in huge numbers despite the near universal conclusion in
the media that she can't win. People like to be associated with a
winner and want to stand behind the party once a winner has been
selected. By all rights, Hillary's support should be wilting away.
Instead, she keeps winning primaries by big margins. I have never
seen anything like it.
Taktix®|6.2.08 @ 10:53AM|#
Her father failing to return, and ignorant of Lynch's
designs on her, Elsie goes to the mulatto leader for
help.
Oh, great idea for a pool: Let's bet on which right-wing windbag
will, by Nov. 4, get fired for using the term "mulatto" to describe
Barack Obama.
I have $100 on Michael Savage.
|6.2.08 @ 10:55AM|#
"Oh, great idea for a pool: Let's bet on which right-wing
windbag will, by Nov. 4, get fired for using the term "mulatto" to
describe Barack Obama."
Is Mullatto considered a racist term these days? Seriously, it is
antiquated and rarely used anymore but I have never heard that it
is considered racist. You make it sound like it is on par with
"oreo" or something. Maybe it is and I am just out of touch.
J|6.2.08 @ 10:59AM|#
I've never really been at the ground level of politics. Is it always that crazy?
Elemenope|6.2.08 @ 11:00AM|#
I have $100 on Michael Savage.
Nah, it's papa bear all the way, baby. Bill "they eat with forks,
too?!" O'Reilly FTW.
|6.2.08 @ 11:02AM|#
No one is going to call him a "mullatto" and even if they did, it wouldn't be racist as much as just strange and out of date. It would be like calling him "colored". Hard to claim that the term is racist considering that it is still used in the name of the NAACP. But it would be very odd for anyone to actually use the term in conversation. Using either term wouldn't illicit outrage as much as a WTF.
|6.2.08 @ 11:03AM|#
Heh, that lady sounds like Kitty Farmer defending Jim
Cunningham.*
*if you get this reference, you should be either proud or very,
very ashamed.
ed|6.2.08 @ 11:05AM|#
It was entertaining to watch "the party of unity" fray at the edges Saturday. It's still early and their victory in November is probably assured, but wasn't Hillary's nomination also a slam-dunk not too long ago?
Taktix®|6.2.08 @ 11:11AM|#
No one is going to call him a "mullatto" and even if they
did, it wouldn't be racist as much as just strange and out of
date.
Hey, I don't need you guys mucking up my fun with your "facts" and
"common sense."
Jeez.
|6.2.08 @ 11:15AM|#
Who would have thought that "Headband Hillary" would end up the political heir of Louise Day Hicks?
Elemenope|6.2.08 @ 11:19AM|#
Heh, that lady sounds like Kitty Farmer defending Jim
Cunningham.
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion!
|6.2.08 @ 11:25AM|#
I agree with John about Hillary's support.
I used to think that her big lead in the early polling was just an
artifact of name recognition, like Joe Lieberman's in 2003. I
assumed her support was a mile wide and an inch deep.
Uh, not so much, really. It shouldn't be too surprising that there
is a great deal of residual Clinton love in this country, or that
some of it accrues to Hillary. The 90s were a great time, Bill left
office with high ratings, and he's only looking better in
comparison to Dubya.
Come to think of it, it's tough to think of an ex-president whose
reputation hasn't risen over the past 8 years.
|6.2.08 @ 11:26AM|#
Of course, Kitty Farmer was funny, but that lady sounds like a 10-pack a day smoker and she's off her meds.
|6.2.08 @ 11:27AM|#
It was entertaining to watch "the party of unity" fray at
the edges Saturday. It's still early and their victory in November
is probably assured, but wasn't Hillary's nomination also a
slam-dunk not too long ago?
I think the election is going to be close, actually. The electoral
map almost dictates that, regardless of the candidates. And
millions of disaffected Hillary supporters are a very bad thing for
the Democrats.
I suspect a lot of their anger will have cooled off by November,
but it's a good question as to how many of them will follow the
elegant and dignified Ms. Christian and vote for McQueeg.
|6.2.08 @ 11:30AM|#
Episiarch|6.2.08 @ 11:40AM|#
because in the last few weeks it seems as if the oppression
olympics have hit an all time high, and it's really fucking bad for
feminism
Oh my, NutraSweet. This is some first-class whining.
|6.2.08 @ 11:49AM|#
A woman who called the Diane Rehm show this morning started off by saying that the 1/2 count decision on FL and MI delegates meant women were being treated worse than slaves, then immediately followed that by expressing her outrage at people who suggest that she's opposed to Obama because of his race. Such a complete mental disconnect between those two statements, made practically in the same breath. It was kooky, to say the least.
Rhywun|6.2.08 @ 11:54AM|#
Using either term wouldn't illicit outrage as much as a WTF.
Are you kidding?? In a society where the word "niggardly" is
verboten?
Rhywun|6.2.08 @ 11:58AM|#
"I will actively campaign against him."
This has about as much chance of happening as "I will move to
Canada" did circa 2000.
Buckle|6.2.08 @ 12:06PM|#
You know what the Nazi Party was before it was the Nazi
Party? It was the Socialist Party.
That wasn't a Hillary supporter, that was Lucianne Goldberg hawking
her son's book.
|6.2.08 @ 12:06PM|#
From TimothyNakayama:
Yes. Men of colour don't give a SHIT about women, even women of colour. Thanks for telling me that about myself and all the other men of colour out there. It's nice of you to speak about us and you probably know more about all of us better than we do ourselves.
Great job.
and
Are you kidding?? In a society where the word "niggardly" is verboten?
I thought that whole flap was goofy as hell when it happened although I'm really impressed that somebody used such a quaint word in a sentence.
JoK|6.2.08 @ 12:20PM|#
You what kind of system doesn't have paranoia as an inherent feature? Direct Democracy! It also has far less wars and no genocide.
|6.2.08 @ 12:20PM|#
Art-P.O.G.,
Many people are perplexed by joe's niggardly use of intellect in
his posts.
Is that a good example?
joe, j/k
|6.2.08 @ 12:29PM|#
I just discovered the word "hexadecaroon."
Octaroon used to remind me of Lorna Doone shortbread cookies.
T|6.2.08 @ 12:32PM|#
Come to think of it, it's tough to think of an ex-president
whose reputation hasn't risen over the past 8 years.
Jimmy Carter?
|6.2.08 @ 12:35PM|#
You know what the Nazi Party was before it was the Nazi
Party? It was the Socialist Party.
Actually, it was the German Workers Party.
And some people say Hillary attracts low information voters!
T, that's arguable. Jimmy Carter wasn't exactly getting his face
added to Mt. Rushmore in 2000, either.
Colin|6.2.08 @ 12:36PM|#
McCain should hire that chick.
I can't understand why they synced Dvorak with that hideous Birth
of a Nation clip.
|6.2.08 @ 12:36PM|#
brotherben...
One of the funniest things I've read was the section of ego trip's
Big Book of Racism (funniest book ever) where they claimed the
names of all sorts of products were racist, i.e. "Advance White"
toothpaste. Even the captions were funny.
T|6.2.08 @ 12:40PM|#
T, that's arguable. Jimmy Carter wasn't exactly getting his
face added to Mt. Rushmore in 2000, either.
I'd say on the whole he's held pretty steady in terms of how folks
view his actual presidency. His actions since then could start an
entire 'nother debate.
Gilbert Martin|6.2.08 @ 1:03PM|#
"[Obama] is a socialist! You know what the Nazi Party was before
it was the Nazi Party? It was the Socialist Party."
LOL
Obama is ineed a socialist - but then again so is Hillary.
|6.2.08 @ 1:05PM|#
Ms. Christian missed a good opportunity, too. She should have
said, "Barack Obama doesn't care about getting mental health care
to the elderly. I'm sure there's some bitter old woman walking
around out there somewhere, without a caseworker and all sorts of
conspiracy theories."
Would have been the greatest performance art in a while.
|6.2.08 @ 1:24PM|#
but she is very popular among a certain group of
people.
She's hated by the right (in multiple usages of the term) people.
If Bill hadn't gotten that lovin' and the resulting backlash, she
wouldn't even be in the Senate. She owes Monica more than Bill.
|6.2.08 @ 1:33PM|#
"You know who is backing him is George Soros. It'll be George Soros, not Obama, who is running the country."
WHAT!?!?!?
According to all my (rightwing nutjob) sources, the Left just LOVES
Soros. Could it be that this is not true? Yet again I have been
lied to by the Conservative media! When will there be fair and
balanced reporting?
Elemenope|6.2.08 @ 1:50PM|#
Obama is ineed a socialist - but then again so is
Hillary.
So which of the manifold utterly retarded and self-serving
conservative definitions of Socialism are we using today, Gilbert
Martin?
|6.2.08 @ 2:01PM|#
The Birth of Hillary Nation
I suppose that would be the great-grandchild of Carrie
Nation?
As in bitter, fanatical, uber-nanny Carrie Nation?
|6.2.08 @ 2:05PM|#
If Hilary can't get the nomination, she ought to quit politics and become a day-time talk show host. She would kill Oprah, seeing as how her fan base of bedraggled middle aged women seems to be pretty close to Oprah's and Oprah's now alienated them all by throwing in with Obama.
Gilbert Martin|6.2.08 @ 2:10PM|#
"So which of the manifold utterly retarded and self-serving
conservative definitions of Socialism are we using today, Gilbert
Martin?"
Nothing is "utterly retarded" on your say so.
|6.2.08 @ 2:25PM|#
McQueeg
Ouch.
That's even better than McCane.
Every time I hear McCain speak, the first thing that comes to mind
is The Caine Mutiny. Has anybody seen Senator McCain's
strawberries?
Elemenope|6.2.08 @ 2:40PM|#
Nothing is "utterly retarded" on your say so.
Well, let's hear todays definition and let the peanut gallery sort
out how retarded it is.
|6.2.08 @ 3:34PM|#
LMNOP,
For your high-test utterly retarted definition of socialism of the
day, you have to check out Tuff Gai on the Barr/racism
thread.
Socialists are people who defend the internment of the
Japansese.
No, I am not making that up.
|6.2.08 @ 4:00PM|#
"So which of the manifold utterly retarded and self-serving
conservative definitions of Socialism are we using today, Gilbert
Martin?"
Socialism is giving taxpayer money to the wrong people.
No Name Guy|6.2.08 @ 4:48PM|#
Socialism is total government ownership of the means of production. Socialism is NOT the welfare state. It really pisses me off how even otherwise intelligent people screw that up.
|6.2.08 @ 4:52PM|#
According to all my (rightwing nutjob) sources, the Left just LOVES Soros. Could it be that this is not true?
If they don't like Soros, why do they take his money?
Gilbert Martin|6.2.08 @ 5:13PM|#
"Socialism is total government ownership of the means of
production. Socialism is NOT the welfare state."
Socialists always say that.
No Name Guy|6.2.08 @ 5:19PM|#
I'm pretty far right. And no, socialists don't say that. People who know something about political science do.
|6.2.08 @ 5:20PM|#
Socialism is total government ownership of the means of
production. Socialism is NOT the welfare state. It really pisses me
off how even otherwise intelligent people screw that up.
You're right.
Socialism is only welfare for the poor. Welfare for the rich is
almost never called socialism and is, in fact, largely supported by
opponents of socialism.
|6.2.08 @ 5:32PM|#
Has anybody seen Senator McCain's strawberries?
He did release his medical records, if that helps.
|6.2.08 @ 5:45PM|#
Well, I oppose both kinds of welfare for the most
part.
So do I, but the job is harder when one type gets a free pass at
being called socialism.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245