We're Now Down to Just the Wretched Silliness of It All

There is nothing left but strained, over-the-top shenanigans in the service of pulling off a mathematically impossible fantasy.

That, or a polite, reasoned withdrawal in the interest of faits accomplis and party unity, leaving her, in eight years, still nearly four years younger than the current Republican nominee.

But let's do go with the shenanigans, right? Pointless, pathetic and divisive they may be, but an epic temper tantrum on the national stage is so personally cathartic.

Is that what "35 years of experience" have taught Hillary Clinton?

At long last, that would seem to be the case. For as the New York Times this morning characterized last night's tenth successive disaster rally, "Mrs. Clinton wasted no time in signaling that she would now take a tougher line against Mr. Obama."

Which answered, as well, Keith Olbermann's sadly less than whimsical questions to assorted pundits last evening: If it turns out that her recent attacks against Obama didn't work, will we see more of them? And if they really didn't work, will we see a lot more of them?

I suppose if the attacks had some meat on their bones -- if, that is, the Clinton camp had some actual evidence of a malignancy in internal opposition that the party faithful were about to foolishly embrace if not stopped in the nick of time -- then one could understand the desperate, down-to-the-wire devilishness of it all.

But Obama's borrowing of a few lines from a gubernatorial friend? This is the scurrilous proof, as Hillary's disinformation minister put it, that "there are fundamental problems with [his] campaign"? Fundamental?

Beware, good citizens of the Republic. There are pols out there actually willing to quote political pals without attribution. Oh, how this scourge of American democracy snakes among us, incomparable in its civic debauchery -- yet, bemoans the Clinton camp, we're so blind.

Asked Monday what effect her linguistic revelations might have on Wisconsin's electorate, Hillary said she did not know: "I leave that to all of you to figure out," with "you," presumably, meaning those sinister members of the punditocracy. But Wisconsin's electorate did it for them.

They figured out that it didn't mean squat.

This may seem like I'm wandering off into inconsequentials and irrelevancies -- wandering off into just plain silliness. But that, I'm sorry to say on Hillary's behalf, is essentially what her campaign now represents.

She can now stay mired in the silliness and do the party a whole lot of damage, or she can crawl out of it and do the party and herself a whole lot of good.

She can, that is, simply withdraw now. The test of Wisconsin was whether Obama would continue taking occupation of virtually every demographic territory once so confidently held by Mrs. Clinton. He did, and he did it decisively.

Since Iowa he alone has steadily mounted an inclusive campaign that can win, an observation reflected in opinions from yesterday's exit-polled: "Obama would be more likely than Mrs. Clinton, by 63 percent to 37 percent, to defeat the Republican nominee in the fall." This, despite his having quoted a friend without attribution. Imagine that.

It's over, Hillary. If you must, leave Bill and go cohabitate with Mike Huckabee and do your hoping for miracles with him. But in reality you'll immensely please God and country only by getting off the national stage and letting the general campaign commence, for every day counts when the opposing army is already rolling.

In eight years you'll be thankful you did, because millions will be thankful you did.

But for now, Hillary, it's over. And the only "inevitability" left is in making it official.

Comments

[shanana]

Hot damn that boy can write! My feelings exactly. But you know, P.M.? She won't do it. Right now she's mulling over whether to unleash her hell hounds with some scurrilous bit of scandal they've dredged up on Obama; untrue of course, but still...if you spread a little bit of poison into the stratosphere, it could work. It worked in the 1990s, (which seem so long ago.) She and her husband are relics of that other time, and they don't seem to realize -- we've moved on, thank God.

[Commonsense]

Jimpin' Jehosophat! That's tellin' 'em. Carpenter if I was wearing a hat I would take it off to you. There is hardly anything that needs to be added to your succinct statement of the present political moment. Unfortunately, it does not appear that discretion will be the better part of valor in this case. An entire nation will continue to be held hostage as we watch the presidency which was supposed to be her hubby Bill's make-up gift further demeaned.

[Mooser]

Wait a minute, Mr. Carpenter (you can wait over there with Mr. Postman) There is still one little sad ritual to be enacted.
What lovely parting gift will be given to Ms. Clinton for playing "Lose this Primary"?

Chief Justice? Vice-President? a post for Bill? The truth is,
she won't leave until you give her a present.

Who does Hilary want not to be President more? Obama or McCain?

[Paul]

Well, I don't feel Hillary would be "holding the nation hostage" as Commonsense put it. I think that's a bit extreme. But obviously, it's over for Hillary.

It's time for her to bow out gracefully and acknowledge a campaign that has won the hearts and minds of progressives everywhere.

Now I'm looking forward to watching Obama roll over the Not-So-Straight Talk Express like so much roadkill.

[Mooser]

And she's really not a heavyweight- just pleasantly plump!

[Mooser]

Not like my esteemed Governor, Christine Gregoire, a woman who knows how to keep her weight, and her state, under control!

[Catfish]

I was an Edwards supporter and not a big fan of the remaining two candidates. I eventually voted for Obama because of the only significant policy difference between the two - the Iraq War vote.

But I would have voted for either in the general election because there is not that much difference on policy and because are good candidates who could be good presidents. At this point in the game, those are the only real measuring sticks.

I am loathe to toss out candidates based on "electability" early in the primaries because that is when we should be sorting out policy. But we have now sorted out those issues. Now is when "electability is THE issue.

If you assume that both policies are near the same and that both would be competent candidates, then the only thing to evaluate is how well would they campaign. To the point, which one can best champion the consensus party platform?

Well, you answer that by winning. Because Obama is winning and winning BIG, he should be the one we choose to sell our ideas.

[David]

Wow who made you God Oh you did and as for the Democratic Party Its already broken and see no way to repair it nor do i care if it is I have been in this party all my adult life 33 yrs and for the first time will not vote for the Democrat we old folk have gotten the message from progressives just go and die we won't do that but will go away and hope that republicans and Independants which decided this primary will show up for Barak but Doubt it they never have before they've just throw the Democrats under the bus!

[Mad VN Marine]

Its time for Hillary to pack it in for the good of country and party. Her time is past, her turn in the spotlight is spent. Time for her to realize the country is not yearning for the past but for hope for the future. Time to go Hillary and to throw your support wholeheartedly behind Obama or admit you would rather see another Republican hack in the White House.

[Colonius]

"There is hardly anything that needs to be added to your succinct statement of the present political moment." -- attrib: Commensense.

I will add one thing anyway: We've been enduring the horrible experience of a president for 7+ years, who will always indulge his own selfish interests and whims over the interests of the country, its people, and his own Party. Now, in this political moment, it seems that Hillary is cast from the same mold.

Either that or her true political inclination (because who can really know what that is?) is that she'd rather McCain be POTUS than Obama.

[Sweating Through Fog]

As I've written about here, watching the "silliness" of the Clintons as they play out the string will be quite entertaining. History has shown they will stop at nothing.

[Sweating Through Fog]

As I've written about on my blog, watching the "silliness" of the Clinton's while they play out the string will be very entertaining. History shows they will stop at nothing.

[Scott]

Fight the good (but clean!) fight through Texas and Ohio. She might as well see it out at this point.

If she loses there, however, I expect a nice, flattering concession speech about "her honorable opponent", "the good Senator from Illinois", and absolutely nothing less.

[Karen]

Be a good girl and let the schmoozer-in-chief takeover and tell all the young people what they want to hear.

I can't wait to watch Carpenter praise all the useless and unproductive sucking up to the GOP will get Obama.

[Thomas Chacko]

Silliness, indeed, PM -- and it's all in your column and the responses!

It's in your contention that Hillary has no moral right to continue competing for the nomination. She'll "immensely please God and country" by pulling out? Sounds like you and George W have the same cellphone service to Heaven!

It's all in the blatant bias of "independent" outlets, such as CommonDreams.org and Buzzflash.com, who serve as part of the Obama campaign machinery. And their obsessive dislike of the Clintons matches that of the mainstream media they keep railing against.

It's all in the amateur, dime-store psychologists who declare that the desperate, power-mad Clintons feel a sense of entitlement to the White House.

It's all in the Obama tactic that says, "Super Delegates" who vote for Hillary are part of some shady deal, but those who support me are reflecting "the will of the people."

It's all in the childish tantrums of Obama fans, some of whom scream that if Hillary wins the nomination, they'll stay home, vote for McCain, or give Ralph Nader another 15 minutes of fame.

It's all in your own childishness, PM! For example, telling Hillary to "leave Bill and go cohabitate with Mike Huckabee." Wisdom fresh from the schoolyard, worthy of talk-radio!

It's all in a cult-like following that is willing to play dirty with anyone who dares to even criticise its saintly folk hero, to the point of passing snide, personal remarks about the Clintons' marriage.

Ah, the wretched silliness of it all. I expected better things from old PM -- silly me!

[KK in FL]

I would support either candidate in the general against any Repug. However, I still think the biggest problem with a Clinton nomination is that it would energize the GOP base. I like them lethargic, personally.

I also don't appreciate her trying to snag the FL and MI delegates after the fact. That just makes her look like a sore loser.

[Larry]

Agree with Scott. From Hillary's point of view, there is no downside to giving it two more weeks. You never know what could happen.

[TahoeProgressive]

I think it's OK for Hillary to stay in the race as long as she doesn't go negative. Continuing to keep the issues alive and in front of the voters will make the eventual winner, most likely Obama, a stronger candidate in the fall.

Going negative in an attempt to overtake Obama will hurt the party in the general election. Hillary can do positive things for herself and the party by staying positive.

As for a spot on the Supreme Court, the only way she can get through the Senate is if there is a Democratic 'super' majority. That is one reason Obama is the better candidate. He has a better chance to win in all 50 states. The way voters are coming out in the Democratic primaries, some to the traditional 'red' states could turn blue this fall and Obama's coattails will be big enough to bring along a larger majority in Congress.

Great comment, Phil... BUT! I wouldn't worry too much about Hillary staying in for now.
To begin with, Obama needs the competition, like a tune-up fight before the big prize-fight. Remember what happens to NFL teams which have two weeks off during the playoffs? Or, worse... teams that fall victim to what Germans and Japanese in WWII called "Victory Disease" - their own arrogance? (Like the New England Patriots going for 4th and 15 yards -when the entire world knew they would have to throw it deep?)
Hillary's mud-slinging is mild compared to what the Rove Rethuglicans will drag up. And, frankly, Michelle Obama's comment the other day "This is the FIRST TIME I have been proud of my country in a long time" is NOT ready-for-prime-time, she will be a weak link in any Obama campaign, and she WILL certainly have to toughen up. (Not just on issue of race - Michelle is extremely young, and doesn't have Jacqueline Kennedy's blue-blood background to wow and mystify the media with.) (Which I mean as a positive comparison, btw, Michelle in same breath as the beloved Jackie-O.)
Also, the Obama campaign has an extremely good ground game, so let them run their operation in future battleground states like Ohio and Texas. Dems might not win Texas in November 08, but a sufficiently energized and well organized campaign there could keep Repubs there from sending money to other, critical states in the general election.
#1. Also, every day Hillary is in the race with her "I don't do live, unscripted TALK RADIO because I can't CONTROL (spin) the message" reminds us (Americans) of what we don't like about the DLC/Rethuglican-lite, election-stealing agenda.
#2, every day Hillary stays in is FREE MEDIA, that will largely evaporate if there is no contest. Media loves "he said, she said" controversy, and for the first time in years, Dems are getting some FREE MEDIA COVERAGE over it. I have long said that by REFUSING TO GO ON THE ATTACK, DLC Democrats give up the judo/jui-jitsu FREE MEDIA ADVANTAGE that can double or triple the value of campaign donor dollars. (A campaign ad lasts only a minute or thirty seconds... the networks will happily play the "She trashed his campaign" story for 5 minutes, for free.)
And, finally, don't worry too much about the money. With the economy - THE BUSH RECESSION - getting WORSE, people will cough up $5, $10, $50, $100 to get a chance of hope to get out from under this horrible Bush economy. Retailers are hurting because consumers, bogged down with credit cards debt and homes worth less than the mortgages, aren't spending. The fed quietly injected $50 billion worth of cash ("liquidity" in Wall St./fed geek-speak) to banks,
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN1821384420080219?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews
to help them survive huge new write-downs
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/19/business/19banks.html
which means the Treasury printing presses are spinning overtime.

Above all, the Hillary campaign REFUSED to use the simple, bumper-sticker terms "BUSH DEFICITS" and "BUSH RECESSION".
I'm tired of Republicans winning the crucial "battle of bumper stickers" (was there EVER a more anemic slogan than "John Kerry... Time for a Change"?), and I hope that whichever campaign prevails in the Dem. primary won't be so reluctant to use such campaign gold... "The Bush Recession" and "BUSH DEFICITS" says everything in 2 or 3 words, that legions of pundits and pontificators have been too scared or corrupt to say!

[neoconned]

Now that the race has distilled to two front runners and two drag anchors representing the two corporatist parties, all we need to add is a stormy political sea (such as the dying American economy) to demonstrate which leaky party vessel will take longer to sink. The only question remaining: will they use us to remain afloat themselves?

[Will B]

Hillary, her husband, her campaign staff, and her supporters show all the reason of a Bonobo in heat. Unfortunately the Clintons feel it’s their God-given destiny to be president(s). Talk about hogs at the trough. It’s really too bad, extreme ambition can blind, even rational people. She is such a talented public figure, whose talents can be useful to support the immense work ahead for the future Obama Administration.

We would all prefer to see her run a straight campaign. Stop continually drawing the differences between her and Barack – that is to say, stop playing close quarter blood-sport tactics and simply speak with conviction about what you believe. Leave Barack out of it. That’s essentially what he’s done and why he’s winning. Each week her campaign’s desperate struggle to define their difference makes them appear like a sinking tourist in quicksand, where their every move sinks them deeper. Their petty attempts to discredit Barack only reinforces the image that she represents the politics of the past which Democrats, Independents, and even some Republicans are rejecting.

[skeptik]

Hillary, after 10 straight losses, do you really think you're the strongest candidate to carry the dem banner? or is that just the self-deluding rationalization from an out-of-touch has-been?

[smchris]

What a coincidence. The Wisconsin hash over on the same day Bush achieves the lowest poll numbers of a modern president. I guess Hillary's "centrism" got her what she wanted -- branded as a Bush Regime collaborator. So now it's "anything." Anything but Hillary as long as it is "change."

Will she spoil the convention? 1) She's the anointed one on the DLC. It's "HER'S" dammit! 2) Breaking the news to Bill that she's quitting would be the worst day in the Clinton household since Bill said, "Honey, they've got this dress...." Could happen but I'm not putting money on Hillary falling on her sword.

[Mena Airport Blues]

Hillary steals lines from Bill Clinton all the time.

[Hotrod]

PM,
Of course you are correct. I expect Hillary to go nuclear as the Clintons are all about themselves-screw everybody else, much as all politicians are, however they take it to the stratosphere. Also, I would bet very good money that the Repugs lean very heavily on the underperformers to get the hell out of the way. The DLC Dems will do no such thing if there is any hope whatsoever of a Hillary recovery. Hillary is a sure thing with the DLC, Obama will take more effort.

[BERTIE SMITH]

Hello there TAHOEPROGRESSIVE, GET YOUR QUOTE RIGHT YOU NIN-COM-POOP

'THIS IT THE FIRST TIME IN MY ADULT LIFE I HAVE FELT REALLY PROUD'
'REALLY PROUD' AS AS APPOSED TO JUST 'PROUD', AND 'ADULT LIFE'
DOH!

[JB]

Go Hillary. Now. Please.

[Linda Timbs]

If Hillary Clinton, or especially John Edwards had got the overwhelming GOOD publicity that all of the media, blogs and pundits have given to a Obama, a bag lady could be winning this democratic primary, but the bag lady wouldn't win the general election, because the same media, blogs and pundits will be writing the obit for the bag lady as soon as she runs against a republican.

[ras]

Pass the popcorn please...