Fear And Loathing and Catharsis On The Campaign Trail Of Tears

P.U.M.A.: Pestilential'd Umbrage, Manners Absentia

Since The Times prints only the news "that's fit to print," and since my other sources of dead-tree reading material come anywhere from a week to three months behind breaking events, it was only a few days ago that I heard what P.U.M.A., the women's group of DYE-hard Hillary fans who refuse to support the Democratic nominee, the most excellent Barack Obama, was an acronym for. I immediately thought of the first feminist I had known and had grown up with, my elegant grandmother. I tried to imagine what she might have thought about such uncouth group aggression. Then the inevitable ad for slim cigarettes: "You've come a long way, baby!" Apart from the P.U.M.A. message of bitterness and its painful and potent lack of clarity of thought, as well as the appalling absence of the grandness of soul that traditionally has been incumbent upon losers throughout history to embody: messages and examples of character we wish to inculcate in our sons and daughters, since when did it become O.K. to broadcast the gross "my ass" expression to the world?

However I rue the vulgarity, if ever there were an apt expression to fit the 'Keystone Kops' of the Clinton campaign and its irrationalists, then this surely is it. But the question for this week is: will it be a fitting coda, the operative word here being coda, or will the harpies and sore losers, a k a the "victims" just go on and on and on, refusing to take responsibility? And why ever, do you suppose, do they not expect their own candidate to take responsibility for the fact that she lost the primary fair and square, so to speak, through lapses of judgment (underestimating her "opponent"--as she was so fond of referring to Senator Obama--and overestimating herself, one example among so many others)? Added to this tragic flaw were: her challenged management skills and judgment, a severely impaired and myopically dysfunctional set of warring strategists, a fragmented and inept tactical command and control, not to mention gross financial mismanagement, (broke by February 6), and, dare we say it, her lack of a coherent vision, or at least a coherent vision with enough time left. (Clinton was a quick study of the Obama campaign, just not quick enough.)

Party Unity 'Then' (Versus Now)
Which reminds me of another candidate who was enabled, and I suspect by many of the same women who now are members of the P.U.M.A.Gang of 9 million (give or take a few mill): Al Gore. After the win/loss/theft of 2000, it took dear Al a full eighteen months to meet with Ralph Nader and acknowledge that, "Wweeelll...sigh...yes, Mr. Nader, you were a legal third party candidate;" to tacitly, and mostly on the down-low, acknowledge that he won, lost and allowed the election to be stolen all on his own, without an assist from Mr. Nader in any way; that the people who voted for Nader voted for him because they believed, passionately, in Mr. Nader's message, a message no more and no less than the platform of the traditional Democratic Party: Labor rights, rather than the rights of corporations to be exempt from taxes, to pollute our food, our water, our oceans, our environment; and to be the driving financial (and, apparently, intelligence) engine of our wars of choice: traditional Democratic ideals that once embraced a belief in social and economic justice and the necessity of regulatory oversight over the Dominions of Greed. Mr. Nader's 50-state campaign, (for it was his idea before it was Howard Dean's) met with enormous enthusiasm precisely because of the disappointments of the Clinton/Gore Third Way/Middle-of-the-Road Way, aligned as they were with the Democratic Leadership Council. Centrism may be the way to win elections in America, but what does it accomplish once in office? That is, if one is entirely focused on winning reelection? Yes, I know, Lincoln played the centrist, kept all those crazy factions in line;kept the border states from seceding and joining the Confederacy; placated the Know-Nothings; assuaged William Lloyd Garrison and his Abolitionists, all the while appearing too moderate for everyone... a Centrist if there apparently ever was one...that is, until he took the Emancipation Proclamation out of his hat!

All Mr. Nader pointed out during the campaign in 2000, and then again in 2004, is that little "Georgie" was the 4th generation of Bushes to be "marinated in oil" and was merely a "draft-dodging, chicken-hawk, messianic, militarist." A certain small, ahead-of-the-curve segment of the citizenry was ready for that message. They responded when Nader asked: "How much celebrity drivel, weather reports, local cop chases and corporate cover-ups from the "mainstream media" is enough? (Yes, Markos, it was Nader who first coined the term in 1988, not the conservative talk radio right. Must they get credit for everything? Check with Safire! He first tracked it down.)

But to have broken with "PARTY UNITY" was heresy in 2000. And so, despite the fact that Gore lost his home state--and Arkansas, the state of his 'successful' peacetime prez--(that would be like Kerry losing Massachusetts, or Obama losing Illinois), and despite the fact that more Dems in Florida voted for Bush than voted for Nader, still, today, try having a discussion with any Democrat about 2000 and all you'll get is unreasonable prejudice and lack of fact-based reality, not to mention inaccurate stats or no stats at all. Just character assassination.

Clinton Exceptionalism
Yet, as with all things Clinton, now, NOW, it is OK to say "party unity my ass." Where is a playwright when you need one, an author who could tack on this most perfect denouement for a divisive family's most divisive campaign? I can only hope that when A President McCain "bomb, bomb, bombs" Russia and Iran...and the Cook Islands, for that matter, Hillary, Bill and their P.U.M.A. crew will be as ostracized, as disrespected, as alienated, as Mr. Nader has been. When there is a McCain presidency, will NPR and The Nation blame P.U.M.A. and the Clintons? Will Rick Hertzberg of The New Yorker present his one-woman, (or, in this case, 9-million) theory for all the legless orphans in Iran as being the fault of Hillary and her sour-grapers, as he did with Mr. Nader Vis a Vis Iraq? We shall see what the on going coded messages of the two-night Clinton-freude-fest yields after the convention.

"The Media Did It"
Face the facts ladies, (and grow up?) Stop scapegoating sexism in the media. Commenting on the color of a suit or the sound of an affected laugh, is this really sexism? Let's just take a quick pit stop at "The Media," shall we? Say, at The New York Times, the paper of record, the most respected newspaper in the world? (Repository of aforementioned fashion and cackle critique.) Get ready now...The Times ENDORSED YOUR CANDIDATE, Hillary Clinton! And, before the formal endorsement, The Times Op-Ed page editor gave fourteen paragraphs to the original Miz "Ms.,"Gloria Steinem, herself, on January 8 no less, the morning of the New Hampshire primary, in which Ms. Steinem whined and opined and fantasized that "a woman can't be the front runner," this after Hillary Clinton was not only the front runner but the "inevitable" front runner from way before she formally declared her candidacy until TMAI. (The Morning After Iowa.)

Then there was the Hillary cheering section of pretend-reporters of CNN, dramatized by Mrs. Dan Senor playing the angry Pharisee at the "compassion" forum as she glared at Senator Obama. Even little "neutral" C-Span did The Dirty, showing Obama campaign events at 6:30 A.M. on a Sunday morning more often than not, only to have a Hillary-fest all day most Sundays. Brian Lamb and his fellow conservatives over at the Span really, really wanted another Clinton as a nominee. Obama took a ton of dirt from the Clintons, their spokespeople, their apologists, and their supporters, all the while contending with the assorted bigots and racist blowhards of talk radio. But Obama is a man's man, as they used to say, (when there used to be such a species) and he took it all on the chin, without whining. He doesn't do whining. He retained his dignity and he exhorted his supporters to follow his example. Many of them did.

I will concede one area of media bias: nolo contendere. (And Hail Mary!) And that was in the area of the campaign photography. In the case of the primary photography, it was not a case of media bias as much as media accuracy. The camera doesn't lie. And thanks be to the Lord, we got to see the gorgeousness of the man. We got to fall in love with a BABE. We got to see THE WALK. A policy wonk who's faithful to his wife and carries a handkerchief? The guy's photogenic and graceful. Live with it. After a lifetime of wife-cheaters, we public-policy fanatics, who also happen to be appreciators of male beauty, (woof!) finally got a candidate who instead wears wife-beaters. Oh, oh, oh, oh, oooh. So Mo Dowd and the rest of us crush on him, bad. So, Sue us.

Reap What You Sow, Anyone?
Now, I realize you're women and all, and thus, entitled to be spoiled and bratty and nasty and catty, (See how bad it sounds?) but may I suggest that you put on your thinking caps just for a wee little minute before election day to consider perhaps another overlooked reason for the failure of the Hillary Clinton candidacy? Could it have possibly been that Senator Clinton was the wrong woman at the wrong time? Another woman, without the baggage and without, um, Bill, a woman running, say, I don't know...in peacetime, perhaps?

Just as there were millions of women who got whipped up into the clichéd-cornponed glass-ceiling'd frenzy, there were millions of men and women who just as passionately did not think--and from early on, when Hillary began dispensing quid pro quos from Hill PAC in 2001, that a restoration of the Clinton drama would be desirable in any way. Many were within government and fund raising circles, (Wes Clark in a secret audition luncheon on Brattle Street, anyone?) and quietly, were among Senator Obama's earliest 'instigators.' Barack Obama did not think of the audacious timing of his presidential bid on his own, trust me. He was simply the obvious choice of the power brokers' power brokers, who five minutes after meeting the guy surmised he had the charisma, the intellect and the courage to take the Clintons on. And courage and brains Barack turned out to demonstrate to a dazzling degree. Can't y'all get on board and be good sports, give credit where credit is due?

Stand By Our Man
So, ladies, perhaps it would ease your dear little hearts if you could just grok the fact that Barack Obama and his people ran a superior campaign, one more fiscally prudent, strategically brilliant in terms of delegate counting--And wow, that was some web site and fundraising apparatus! His campaign was staffed by brilliant and unified tacticians and supported by a legion of passionate grassroots corps. (Not "Espirit")

After a humiliating campaign, at least for Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, not to mention Eleanor Roosevelt, all of whom are quite dizzy by now, from all that cut-throat induced spinning they have been subjected to, (This is surely not what the former intended when they met at Seneca Falls, at least not the "My Ass" part,) isn't it time to give them -and us- rest and peace by starting with ...oh, I don't know... a bit of decorum?

And one more suggestion to ponder before you remove those obviously uncomfortable thinking caps: what McCain's Supreme Court will look like. Now I realize that Justice Thomas was approved by a Democratically controlled Congress, and that was unforgivable... but just two words about McCain's favorite Justice: John "Stare-Decisis" Roberts, as what we affectionately refer to him in our house. For you non-lawyers, that is respect for 'settled law,' affectionately known in Republican campaign spin as "not legislating from the bench" which is Orwellian-speak for "undoing legislation already passed by that other pesky branch of government, the Legislative." So think about the laws to which you are attached.

Or, you could go another route: you could think of our ancestors, our descendants, and our peers, not only in our own country, but also women around the world, for we women will all be affected in very real ways by the outcome of this election.

Make them proud and get on board. If you cannot get on board, then can you just stay home? Maybe bake some cookies?

Gotta go. Need to crank up the volume -- Tammy Wynette is singing about our man.

Comments

[michelangelosdavid]

Who is Connie Allenbury? Where have you been all my life?

Brilliant!

More please....

[JessicaVCortez]

Two people in our 2008 political playground express opinions and history in a cogent, stimulating format: Connie Allenbury and Ralph Nader. The others produce unoriginal drivel, cowering in front of their keyboards, fearing what people absent of unoriginal thought might think.

Too bad there are no "traditional Democratic Party" candidates on our ballots this year (Kucinich, where you at?). I cannot vote for war, therefore I cannot vote for Obama. Being outside of party unity or the two-party system is still considered heresy in 2008. Will it ever be "the right time" to remove their hands from our throats? Ralph Nader and his platform will prove ahead-of-the-curve again. The proof of his integrity, intellect, and commitment to the human race will be evidenced in next 20 years, and if not by then, posthumously.