Taylor Marsh – TaylorMarsh.com – News, Opinion and Weblog on Progressive Politics

Clinton, Bloggers, and What an Endorsement Looks Like

There isn’t much intelligent discussion about Clinton in the blogosphere, especially
from people who are allergic to facts. Here are a few notable posts, including
two endorsements, because many of you don’t seem to know what something like
that actually looks like, which includes a few of you who drop by occasionally
to rant and rave. While others call me “incoherent”
because their candidate is running an awful campaign, blaming the messenger is just silly.

Eriposte over at the LeftCoaster has an interesting article up about the planted
question brouhaha, which talks about Edwards’
continual decline into internecine warfare that is a gift to Republicans,
or maybe Barack Obama.

Chris Bowers
on the polls tightening up on Clinton:

I imagine most people reading this blog are either happy that Clinton is somewhat down, or at least not disappointed. However, they should be careful what they wish for. In this case, what appears to be a Clinton drop in the polls was largely fueled by the same media machine that, most of the time, happily reinforces Republican narratives as conventional wisdom. The lesson here, I think, is to remember that the corporate, established media is still very good at creating national convention wisdom as they see fit. While in this case that conventional wisdom might make many people in the netroots happy, most of the time it won’t. It is still a powerful institution that Republicans and conservatives are better able to control than Democrats and progressives, and we shouldn’t forget that. After the fact re-branding of debates remains of the biggest reasons George Bush is President instead of Al Gore, for example. Their after the fact coverage of Howard Dean’s concession speech in Iowa, or General Petraeus’s rosy portrayal of Iraq are even more gratuitous examples. Most of the time, it feels as though the conventional wisdom machine works against us, and even in instances where we might enjoy the conventional wisdom that is being created (and I admit that I enjoy it simply because a blowout campaign is a boring campaign), we shouldn’t forget that.

Now to endorsements and what they actually look like. Me talking about Obama
not being the anti-Hillary is not an endorsement for Clinton. This is part of
a post from Tom
Watson who has recently endorsed Clinton:

Hillary Clinton is not a perfect candidate for President, nor is she the guardian of some imagined liberal purity. She’s a hard-nosed frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, and she compromises on a daily basis to maintain that status. The hard right accuses her of being a socialist who wants to create an all-powerful Federal hegemony over individual liberties. Many on the left accuse her being an extension of Cheney-Bush. In reality, she’s a progressive Democrat with wide streak of political realism about what can and can’t be accomplished within the realm of national policy – a viewpoint that was hard-earned on the national stage, I might add. To all the doubting progressives out there, I’d ask: who’s your favorite Democratic President? FDR, Truman, JFK, LBJ, Carter, Clinton? Which one was pure, didn’t compromise ideals, didn’t moderate his personal views? And of that group, who accomplished the most? I’d suggest it was the man who was the most cunning. Shrewd. Quick. Calculating. Opportunistic. Briefly, to policy. It is my belief that President Hillary Clinton’s administration would mean the following: - No Supreme Court justices like Scalia, Thomas, Roberts or Alito – National health care – A sane foreign policy built upon constant negotiation and real intelligence – Competent management of the Federal government – A best-possible-under-the-circumstances exit from Iraq – No torture and the return of habeas corpus – A stronger dollar, less deficit spending, and the end of the Bush tax cuts – A greener national energy policy – Federal funding for stem cell research

Natasha, whom I met at Blog World, has also endorsed Clinton. It’s
a classic.

That does it. The final, frakking straw. … .. And while I’ve mostly been able to tune the candidates out, I haven’t been able to get away from the persistent annoyances of their attackers. OMFG, a millionaire lawyer who doesn’t go to Supercuts, even though he gives a damn about people who’ve seen the business end of a food stamp! Jumpin’ Jehoshaphat, a multi-ethnic lawyer who went to a funny school in a foreign country and has a name that doesn’t just scream One White Guy! Holy Cannoli, Batman, a female lawyer who’s gotten high dollar campaign contributions from the lobbyists of the industries whose executives just give to her opponents directly! Unfortunately for me, and for you if you’re not a Clinton fan, some of the most annoying critiques of Clinton come from the blogosphere. That, I can’t tune out, which is probably why they annoy me so much. Everyone notices the pebble in their own shoe. Alternately, there’s the rank sexism, though that mostly comes from the pundits. … .. So, because I’ve already included her in my blanket endorsement of whatever Democrat wins, and because it may give people like David Mizner and Chris Matthews screaming fits of high-pitched apoplexy, which will greatly comfort me when stupid Democratic policies are driving me up a wall; I hereby endorse Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination for president in 2008. … .. Anyway, a big thanks to all of Hillary Clinton’s detractors for helping me make up my mind about this. Fences make for uncomfortable seating, and just imagine how much time you’ve saved me sitting there poring over all the policy programs which haven’t a chance in hell of making it as-is through our Russert-whipped, telecom-purchased, twitchy as a cat in a rocking chair factory Congress. Now I can continue putting exactly as much attention into the primary process as I had done before, while getting maximal return on the irritation factor of my writing.

Clinton derangement syndrome is catching, which Natasha is fighting against instinctually. She’s not alone and you don’t have to endorse Clinton to push back on what’s being spewed in the blogosphere and beyond.