Why did I do it? Oh, why did I click on the headline in the sidebar at HuffPost that read, Hooked on Hillary? When, wham! Ugh! Eeeeeek! Ooooooh! Nora Ephron's self-indulgent pining appeared before me:
I would like to put myself among the growing chorus of people demanding that Hillary Clinton withdraw from the election. I don't really think it's fair to ask her to withdraw, and I certainly don't believe she's going to; she'll hang in there till the last dog dies, or till she runs out of money, whichever comes first. I'm not asking her to withdraw because I prefer Obama, and I don't think she should withdraw "for the sake of party unity," or whatever current bromide is being flung at her to get her to pull out. I think she should withdraw because I'm losing my mind. [Emphasis added.]
Sweetie, darling, you have already lost your mind.
Nora goes on and on...oh, the dizziness... about how "I used to love [Hillary] and I no longer do, but unlike what usually happens when love dies, I still think about her far too much." The pathos, "the Rorschach process," the obsession, like Meg Ryan in Sleepless in Seattle only without the happy ending.
Why, oh, why did I click on that damn headline?! I blame BDBlue! It's your fault! Damn you! May the plagues of a thou... Nah, just kidding.
Actually, I was reading an excellent article at HuffPost by Wayne Barrett thanks to BDBlue who posted on a hot subject last evening, Gullible Democrats: How the GOP Rigged MI & FL:
For a depressing treatise on how to lose a general election with a 48-state strategy designed by the opposing party, go read Wayne Barrett.
And do read Barrett's deep-into-the-history of the MI and FL primary nightmare, which plunges into the DNC cock-up and Howard Dean's finagling followed by the hazing of the Democrats by the Republicans in Michigan and Florida. We know the GOP does not have the Dems' best interests at heart so WTF were they thinking? One of many Democratic kickers of the self-injurious kind, unforgivable really:
The Democratic national committeeman who introduced the motion on the party's Rules Committee to deprive Florida of all its delegates -- a precursor to the Michigan decision a few months later -- was Ralph Dawson, a New York lawyer who was Howard Dean's Yale roommate and an advisor to Dean's 2004 campaign. Dawson's role was seen as a signal of Dean's appetite for a kick-ass rebuke.
As much as the DNC tries to pretend otherwise, it had choices. In fact, it later showed understandable leniency to three other states who changed their primary dates--New Hampshire, Iowa and South Carolina -- seating all their delegates. The tough love treatment was reserved for Michigan and Florida.
Does anyone recall a presidential election in the past few decades that turned on the Electoral College counts of either New Hampshire, Iowa or South Carolina? Ahem.
The national party had tried -- before New Hampshire's case wound up on its docket -- to leave the impression that zero tolerance was automatic once violations of the schedule occur. Back in June, a DNC spokeswoman, for example, told the Associated Press that neither Dean nor the Rules Committee "has the power to waive the rules for any state," explaining that "these rules can be changed only by the full DNC." Yet a few months later, on the same day that the Rules Committee stripped Michigan of its delegates, it waived the rules for New Hampshire, Iowa, and South Carolina, each of which had also moved up their primaries.
Barrett offers gracious plenty more analysis and facts that could make your hair set afire.
But if you head over to read Barrett's report--and I highly recommend that you do--don't click on "Hooked on Hillary." I played an April Fools' joke on myself. Spare yourself.
UPDATE: I refreshed the Wayne Barrett link to an archived copy of his HuffPo article at Common Dreams.
|