The Hillary Hate Factor - Part II

A few months ago, I wrote about the Republican party's rabid hatred of Hillary Clinton, and how it has manifested itself out of thin air. I didn't think I'd be writing a "Part Deux". (Of course, at the time, I mentioned Huckabee in that post and how he seemed to "have his head on straight" and how John McCain had no chance of winning the Republican ticket. ...Boy, how things change in a few months.) But I digress.

The Republicans are down. They've suffered a horrible blow by the neocons and by the betrayal of the Bush administration. They've been embarrassed by scandal after scandal showing the "family values" politicians revealed as hypocrites, from David Vitter to Larry Craig. Evidence of their apathy and disgust for the party they once held dear is clear by the lack of voter turnout on the Republican side in the primaries and caucuses.

Now comes a new op-ed from Stankey Fish and he brings up the incoherent hate that Hillary Clinton draws from the wingnut right. And in my opinion, this is a major issue in this election.

You may dislike her policies (which she has not been reluctant to explain in great detail). You may not be able to get past her vote to authorize the Iraq war. You may think her personality unsuited to the tasks of inspiring and uniting the American people. You may believe that if this is truly a change election, she is not the one to bring about real change.

But the people and groups Horowitz surveys have brought criticism of Clinton to what sportswriters call “the next level,” in this case to the level of personal vituperation unconnected to, and often unconcerned with, the facts. These people are obsessed with things like her hair styles, the “strangeness” of her eyes — “Analysis of Clinton’s eyes is a favorite motif among her most rabid adversaries” — and they retail and recycle items from what Horowitz calls “The Crazy Files”: she’s Osama bin Laden’s candidate; she kills cats; she’s a witch (this is not meant metaphorically).

...Back in November, I wrote a column on Clinton’s response to a question about giving driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants. My reward was to pick up an e-mail pal who has to date sent me 24 lengthy documents culled from what he calls his
“Hillary File.” If you take that file on faith, Hillary Clinton is a murderer, a burglar, a destroyer of property, a blackmailer, a psychological rapist, a white-collar criminal, an adulteress, a blasphemer, a liar, the proprietor of a secret police, a predatory lender, a misogynist, a witness tamperer, a street criminal, a criminal intimidator, a harasser and a sociopath. These accusations are “supported” by innuendo, tortured logic, strained conclusions and photographs that are declared to tell their own story, but don’t.

Compared to this, the Swift Boat campaign against John Kerry was a model of objectivity. When the heading of a section of the “Hillary File” reads “Have the Clintons ever murdered anyone?” — and it turns out to be a rhetorical question like “Is the Pope Catholic?” — you know that you’ve entered cuckooland.

This is why we need someone the likes of Barack Obama, who can bring people together, not that I'm necessarily a "can't we all get along" type of guy (as my friends will attest). I'm sure Hillary Clinton is perfectly capable of leading the country. Judging by the polls and the information gathered after completed primaries so far however, the numbers indicate that Obama can attract more crossover votes than Clinton, moderate Republicans as well as Independents, and in my opinion, the chances of a Democratic victory come November are much better with Obama as the Democratic nominee.

Am I deluding myself in believing that Obama can overcome the racism he will face (and has probably already faced) as we draw nearer to post time? Or perhaps the question should be: Are the American people ready to overcome racism in the face of one of the most important choices a voter will make this generation? Only time will tell.