Clinton, Obama and Our Narcissistic Press
We're at the mercy of a narcissistic and irresponsible press. Matt Bai's blog post in the New York Times being "Exhibit A":
No one expects Mrs. Clinton to stand down and let Mr. Obama make his case unchallenged. She could, however, send a clear message to the cogs in the machinery she's built that there is a line she will not cross. She could tell her Nevada allies that the job of the Democratic Party she grew up in is to make it easier for people to caucus, not harder. She could tell Robert Johnson that he needs to apologize, the same way she forced Bill Shaheen, her New Hampshire co-chairman, to resign last month. She can make it plain to all those people trying to get jobs in the next Clinton Administration that there is way to win--a rough and combative way, even--that nonetheless won't destroy all the good that the Clintons, at least for a lot of Democrats, have come to represent.
By loading all the responsibility onto one candidate, as if the other had no place in it, it just heightens the antagonistic environment and makes the problem worse. Did Bai call for Obama's national co-chair Jesse Jackson Jr. to be fired after he said Hillary Clinton cried over her appearance and didn't care about the victims of Hurricaine Katrina? Did he even mention that this isn't a one-way battle? No. He's smugly content to pour gasoline over an already volatile situation then stand back and watch it burn.
Myopic journalists like Bai inflame these things to the detriment of the political environment and the Democratic party without any consideration of the cost involved. I realize destroying any kind of coalition that could win against the Republicans next November is an acceptable price for some people, but some of us actually do care what happens to the country going forward.
Both Clinton and Obama have issued statements calling for an end to the pie fight, which is a good thing. The responsible thing to do is to refuse to let people like Bai egg them on. We'll see if it's all rhetoric or if their actions back it up. But barring an Edwards resurgence, I frankly don't see how we win the next election without both Clinton and Obama on the ticket in some order. If the antagonism we see online is any evidence, coming together again as a party without it is going to be awfully difficult.
If no decisive victor emerges before the convention, the superdelegates could force both Clinton and Obama onto a ticket. While I'm sure neither would be happy with that situation, it may be the best thing for the party as a whole. It certainly would be an unbeatable and historic combination, ushering in an era where we can hopefully begin to talk about these things. And after the damage that their mutual mud slinging contest has done to any kind of future coalition, the onus may be on them to suck it up for the good of the country.
Because it doesn't look like our high-minded press -- full of egomaniacs like Bai with no more imagination than to flog the horserace story for their own amusement -- will content itself with anything less than scorched earth.
Jane Hamsher blogs at firedoglake.com
Follow Jane Hamsher on Twitter: www.twitter.com/janehamsher
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
If you go by just reading the comments here on HuffPo, you will see that the Clinton supporters are more than willing to support whomever the democratic nominee turns out to be. The Obama supporters are running the spin republican-lite and have stated they would not support the democratic nominee should it be Clinton.
it's impossible to evaluate overall media treatment of this battle without including the right wing talk radio effect on this. in this case they may not have done much to get it started but limbaugh/hannity and crew gave it full attention today and will do the best their monopoly allows them to turn the molehills into mountains as long as possible. a comparable negative GOP story would be killed or minimized in the same way, with a plethora of excuses for the faithful and thousands of nasty calls for the media outlet who might not get the hint right away.
and if obama dems think the clintons got racist, just listen to limbaugh for a bit. he is full of it and just can't keep himself from showing off the "subtle and veiled" racism that naturally pops into his head. same with the sexism. and it's getting blasted all over the country 24/7 on public airwaves.
there is much the establishment media wouldn't do or continue if it weren't for the groundwork of uncontested talk radio repetition to give them cover.
Of course Hamsher is right about a few things. The media doesn't give a damn about issues or candidates. What they are about is selling their product and to do that they will do whatever it takes. If it takes egging on a cock fight between two candidates then that's what they will do. Since the public loves a horse race, they will ignore issues in lieu of the race itself. If Democrats had any sense at all they would disable the media. What MSNBC is doing to Kucinich is disgraceful and the rest of the Democratic field should withdraw from the debate. Clinton and Obama should end their tit for tat nonsensical name calling as it makes them both look mean spirited and small minded. Any media personality who attempts to raise non-issues and inflame a bloody political row should be called out for it. Media malfeasance continues to occur because candidates seek to gain from it. If each of the candidates did this, I suspect the media's counterproductive efforts--counterproductive vis a vis the national interest--would come to an end.
This problem would not exist if the two corporate-owned candidates would withdraw from the field.
THANK YOU FOR WRITING THIS POST.
HILLARY SHOULD have OBAMA AS VP as you say, or she will lose the general.........
The DNC should tell her to do so, because i think she has different plan. THE CLINTONS HAVE USED THE DNC TO CLIMB TO POWER , and IT IS THEIR TURN TO REALLY HELP THE PARTY.
BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT HILLARY WOULD NOT ACCEPT TO BE OBAMA' S VP...so he could choose RICHARDSON./EDWARDS
BUT let
Jane, your'e the best. We will know that the media is improving when you have your own broadcast forum. Until then it will be more of the same from our lame media.
Both Clintons are the narcissists here, and they shall destroy the ticket, if they do not realize they are killing democracy with their infant-like games! We see right through them, and are appalled at their transparency! After 8 years of a sociopathic DICTATOR, the last thing we need is another narcissist! Groups like Media Matters fan the flames in deference to Clinton, instead of allowing the real debate to continue! It is time for a "New Generation" to pick up the "torch," whether or not the old-timers want to pass it, or not!!!
You know who most fears a Clinton-Obama ticket - the right-wing media! So they are going to fuel this gender-race feud between Clinton and Obama until it reaches a breaking point. Once that tipping point has been reached and there is no way Clinton and Obama could ever agree to be on the same ticket, they will be satisfied. Because everyone knows that in 2008 with our nation fatigued by a never-ending war and wracked by economic woes, a woman and a man of color running on the Democratic ticket could win the presidential election by over 60% of the popular vote!
If Democrats don't like this "pie fight," one thing they can do is transfer their support to Edwards (or even Kucinich!).
You nailed it, Jane.
please, let progressives of all stripes come together as friends after the primary season is over. we need the democratic nominee to win it for all our sakes.
I read Bai's blog post, and you're right. The media, both the MSM and the blogosphere, are determined to stir up racial conflict to increase their web site traffic. It's irresponsible, dangerous, and unethical. If you doubt my word, take a close look at the headlines and photos on the HuffingtonPost the past week or two. I've fought for equal rights for all people throughout my adult life, and it sickens me to see this kind of thing happening in 2008.
Such canibalism, whether in the Times or on Huffpost, isn't narcissistic, it's Darwinian. Conflict is controversy, which sells. Show me a place where young celebrities melting down in real time don't dominate the airwaves, and I'll show you where candidates can respectfully debate their opponents without winking at surrogates out to destroy them.
Yes, yes, yes. As I've been saying in comments here on HuffPost, as have others, the Democratic Candidates should put aside their egos and their petty political squabbles and agree to run on a ticket composed of the top two contenders for the Democratic nomination. If Obama wins and Hillary is second, it should be a Obama/Clinton ticket. If Clinton wins and Obama comes in second, it should be a Clinton/Obama ticket. If Obama wins and Edwards is second, it should be an Obama/Edwards ticket, and so on.
It is IMPERATIVE that the Democratic Party ABSOLUTELY PREVENTS any repugnantkin from winning the White House in November 2008. If the Democratic candidates are serious about caring about this country and its future, they would agree to let the chips fall where they may, and run in accordance with the people's votes.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
