On Race, Betrayal, and My Growing Appreciation of Hillary Clinton (UPDATED SLIGHTLY with a PPS)

Lately there has been some rather over-heated discussion in the papers and on the airwaves about the notion of betrayal.

The unsubtle agitprop "Betray-us or Petraeus" ad (yes, literally untrue, but a useful provocation), became a short-term totem which might re-emerge during the desperate and venal months ahead as an "election issue" to bore the pants off us all. Bush and the remainder of his team, who seem like mid-level Staples floor staffers, must be the actual target for such consideration, not one of his lesser uniformed functionaries.

So the Move-On ad whipped up various bores of the right into a frenzy of priggish obfuscation which in turn fueled a news-cycle or two worth of bush-league outrage in the US Congress and on Fox. The dew-laps on the representatives shook, the speeches were made, scorecards adjusted, Rome continues to burn. Elected Democratic representatives of both genders, in their ever-ugly ill-tailored suits ran for cover, like maladroit and husky kids at a grim game of musical chairs. People turned away from Move-On (and on and on), to watch Kid Nation, Perez Hilton, or Top Chef.

But today, this particular Thursday of 2007, I'll tell you who the real betrayers are, and let's see where the chips fall: The betrayers are every one of those GOP candidates for President who have declined to show up at the African-American voter forum tonight. The betrayers are Romney, Rudy, McCain and the irrelevant and entertaining Thompson.

Race is everything in America today. As much as mismanaged war. As much as fiscal malfeasance. Race is everything. It is at the core of justice and poverty and opportunity and education. Race is everything.

The no-shows, off to their fund-raisers, etc, are betraying a spiritual compact which democracy relies on. Because every white politician in this country running for national office has a huge and terrible compact inherent in the job, an awesome and final responsibility to insist that minority children be thrust into a safe and shining future, an equal one -- a more than equal one.

Because not to attend is a symptom of deep cultural amnesia. Not to attend is to give short-shrift to the civil rights movement itself. It is owed to the memory of Dr. King. Not to answer that call at that forum is to reveal oneself as out of step, out of tune, and out of time. To not go, is to fly over New Orleans and turn around towards Washington, in the manner of the impeachable President we now enjoy. To decline this forum is to reveal a thoughtless pragmatism of the sort that should make one ineligible to even vote let alone run for office.

It is not an act of racism by these men; merely one of shallowness so short-sighted as to be worthy of ideological LASIK surgery.

Whither the romance of a white politico who can excite an unmoved, unimpressed, disenfranchised black electorate? (Oh yeah, they tried to impeach him for lying about his libido.)

And to those who wish to write letters about the stupidity of black Republicans -- don't bother. I don't see why African-Americans shouldn't expect the GOP to offer them an alternative to the anemic soup of the Dems. Every time I write a post, there is a slew of feverish letter writers who reduce the subject at hand to a dullards' game of isolationist and partisan tag.

As I have said before, the mystical and romantic power of this nation is on the wane. The invisible beauty that sometimes runs below the surface of American life is fading away. For years, as a kid, I watched the whites of South Africa become sallow and gummy with indifference and hardness. White politicians in America owe the black electorate their full attention and nothing less. Or else you can hardly blame African Americans for turning to sharpies like Sharpton for leadership and a boost of serotonin, can you?

PS Some months ago I wrote of a run-in I had with Hillary Clinton at an L.A. fundraiser. I watched her on the compulsively entertaining and strangely marvelous Joe Scarborough show last week and found her to be stirring. And then she laughed on FOX like Redford in The Candidate and I liked her even more. The real person was showing up, and she's been running circles around the other would-be nominees. What the hell is happening? Is it that I turned the TV back on, and my brain is no longer whirring away like the dreidel it is?

PPS : Sat, Sept 29. Regarding my after-thought of an observation on Hillary Clinton, which seems to have provoked a number of responses: A slightly closer-reader would note that I did not endorse her in my little PS. That was about mood, tide, an internal, and emotional polling. She was suprising, and it signaled a kind of relaxation in her which was attractive. It could even be construed as an ironic and very back-handed compliment to note that a politician seems more flesh and blood and less mechanical this week than she has in the past. The PS is a minor footnote to my assertion that in order for this country to even approach a condition in which the American dream come near to realizing the mystical glory it craves - as a notion - all of us white people might want to start understanding that we are ALL African-Americans today, or else, we are not Americans at all. Romney, Rudy, the hapless Thomson, and (sadly)
McCain, are, in this bloggers opinion, lesser Americans, and unstatesman-like, because of the choice they made not to bother going to the debate in question.

Comments

[SvS]

Whichever Dem gets in, doesn't matter in the LARGE categories like The War. That is going to happen regardless; the machine is in motion. The smaller categories (like equality for gays, equal pay for women, re-building a middle class, environmental issues) can change and that is all we can hope for. I like the idea of a woman president (finally). And I like Hillary in spite of her many flaws. She seems to have a heart.

[SensibleAmerican]

SvS! We need to hear more reasonable, sensible and well informed people like you instead of the usual socialist cacophony!

[ConcernedAboutRFuture]

Women generally tend to have more "heart." I believe this is an evolutionary character of being a mother... and she being a mother, probably has more compassion than most males.

No offense meant guys... you're the hunters; we're the nurturers.

[peaceandfreedom]

Hello concerned.

Not actually completely accurate. Perhaps in our Western Society, due largely to acculturation, and in great part to the dominance of male oriented religions we do see a lack of nurturing in men.

This is definitely not the case worldwide as many cultures esteem that ability in both sexes, even in your socalled primitive hunter-gatherer groups.

Historically, predating the rise of religions like the Catholic Church, Islam or any ultra orthodox christian offshoots, there were many societies where people worshipped a variety of dieties, natural and often times female, and where the male's role in the rearing of children was expected and accepted.

So it doesn't mean that we don't have those instincts and abilities; it only means that between the guilt of the god-mongers and the war makers, there is not much room left for our best qualities to grow.

[situationcritical]

ConcernedA­boutRFutur­e (See profile | I'm a fan of ConcernedA­boutRFutur­e)
Women generally tend to have more "heart."

Tell that to the Amazons.

[EvereaderinSC]

Maybe Hillary does need to be the nominee in 08. When that happens and the Democrats lose yet one more election, theirs to lose, the whole party as we know it now will go away as the Whigs did back in the 1850s & what rises from the ashes will be better.

I really don't think we can go much lower than what we have now. I agree with Elizabeth Edwards. No matter what the MSM says or acts like or what the "polls" say, Ms. Clinton is unelectable. The handful of books that came out a few years ago about her being a lesbian & all the Whitewater stuff, ad nauseum will rise to the surface like pond scum, but it will be MUCH worse during a presidential campaign, ugly and gross & we'll be back to the future once again.

I agree with the majority of folks speaking so far. Enough is enough. 2008 is NOT 1992. Times have changed we need TRUE change, not Romney or any other pseudo-Republican change...we need a breath of fresh air & Hillary is air - if you want to call it that - from an aerosol can. How's that for a rant & a major metaphor mixing?!

[CosaBella]

You just took a page from Rovian speak. "Vote for a Democrat and another 9-11 will occur."

"Vote for Hillary and the Democrats will lose another election."

It is always amusing to me how people become what they despise. If I didn't know any better, I'd say Rove taught you very well.

[SensibleAmerican]

Do you work for the Fixed News Channel?! Only they can come up with so many disparate dots and connect them somehow! Whigs? Elizabeth Edwards? 1992? Profound!

Oh and incidentally, 2008 is also not 2000! No more non-entities to ruin Hillary's chances a la Al Gore! While on comparisons, 2008 will also not be 2004! Hillary will pulverize the right wing slime machine!

[Countess]

Hillary is part of the right wing war machine.

[BlueBoomer]

EvereaderinSC: You've hit it on the head.

And here's another consideration:

Unfair and unfortunate as it is, the reality is that the Muslim Middle East does not hold women in high regard...AND WE ARE NOT GOING TO CHANGE THAT...EVEN IF SOMEHOW HILLARY MANAGES TO GET ELECTED...

At best, she will likely be ineffective in that arena, and would probably have to rely on Bill, altho' that may not be enough...

WE NEED A LEADER THAT CAN STAND TOE TO TOE WITH THE MUSLIM WORLD...SOMEONE THAT CULTURALLY THEY CAN RESPECT WITHOUT RISKING MORE INTERNAL STRIFE...At this point in history, that leader must be a man.

And that leader SHOULD be JOE BIDEN...HE IS THE MOST ELECTABLE AND THE MOST QUALIFIED...PERIOD.

[situationcritical]

And 2000 is not 1950 as the repubicons would have it.

[kelfeind]

Reasons to support Hillary

Hillary will have no trouble figuring out the difference between intelligent design and intellectual fraud. I think she will have no trouble understanding the scientific arguments about global warming, the depletion of our fisharies, the pitfalls of nuclear power, and the promise of renewable energy. I support Hillary because America needs a dose of mothering right now. For the past 6 years the boys have had their little fun and run up a trillion dollar charge. While they have been playing army in their sand-box (Iraq), the house hasn't been cleaned, the kitchen is bare, and the medicine chest is empty. About 3,500 people were killed on September 11, 2001 because the Bushies were more interested in tax cuts and strategic missle shields than in taking President Clinton's warning about Bin Laden seriously. Now, about 3,500 other Americans (+ many thousands more) have been killed in Iraq. By what cruel and peverse accounting does this bring the balance sheet back to even? Only in the minds of the Texan Men. Hillary, will bring our involvement in Iraq to some sort of conclusion. I think it will return to somethig like the "No Fly Zone" of the 1990s; no wider regional war, no attacks on the Kurds, and no hardened Al Qieda training camps. I think she will again turn her focus to healthcare, this time as a national priority to save economy from the competitive threats comming from countries that have national health care. I liked Paul Krugman's analogy with public school. Our government doesn't prevent parents from sending their children to private schools but it does require everyone to support, through taxes, public schools. American healthcare should be reformed along the same model. Let people freely choose where to get their healthcare but require all to support a system that provides necessary services to everyone. Finally, I think Hillary knows Washington as well as anyone and better than most. If anyone can navigate those trecherous waters for 8 years, It's this girl. We don't need another screw-up, too much is at stake.

[SensibleAmerican]

Amen!

[UNCLEJOE]

obviously a blogger paid by the Hillary camp.

[Noelle]

Could be, but I would guess not quite as much as UnSensibleAmerican.

[andyboy]

I agree. It becomes painfully obvious. She knows Washington­?......Huh­?

There is no indication we willever go back to a simple "No Fly Zone". Pure conjecture and fantasy.

The way these bloggers are idealizing and morphing Hillary into something she never was is such blatantly partisan horn blowing it makes one sick.

I feel sorry for those Americans (and they seem to be the only kind we have anymore) who remain steadfastly intent on TRYING to portray one side of our sick, dacadent, immoral society as somehow superior to the other.

We as a country ALL OF US are laboring under the false impression that government is looking out for our best interests because in our sweet idyllic vision it is so.

But it isn't actually happening. Not with any Democrats nor with any Republicans.

Here in America we serve one master and one master only. Money. Your vote determines who gets the most lobby money and the most "donations". Period. Thus handing the majority of the Power which equals Money to the victor.

The gaggle of expensively dressed sales and marketing people who inhabit the Hill have the job of listening to you and acting as if their interested and most importantly to convey the feeling that they really "care".

The other part of their job consists of what I call wrangling with each other while nothing actually happens.

Or if they think that you might have caught on to the college education scam they were runnning they will add some money for a few more Pell Grants, pat each other on the back and go straight to a $100 lunch. Then it's off to Fiji to study their economy and buy cheap but mildly impressive souvenirs for the folks back home.

[situationcritical]

He's good huh?

[Larry of Corrales]

Is this the same Hillary Clinton who voted today to give the President power to go to war against Iran? The same Hillary Clinton who voted to give the President power to go to war against Iraq! What do we think of people who make the same mistake over and over. Not much!!

[NoContest]

Yes, she needs to get her shiite together...

UP with John Edwards. He is the only ligitimate candidate. The Hilldabeast is dangerous just like here perverted husband.

~
`~
~~~~~

[CosaBella]

To say this vote will "give the President power to go to war against Iran" is inaccurate and hyperbolic. Until the day comes when Hillary votes to allow Bush to attack Iran, then your fears are justified. But she has not.

I'm concerned about the Democratic Party base. As a result of the bungled Iraq War and our distrust/dislike of Bush, we are becoming too cynical, too isolationist. We need to break free from this.

We need to acknowledge that there are threats to us. We can not allow our cynism to dictate and blind us from potential threats. I don't know if Iran is a threat, but this non-binding legislation is not calling Iran a threat. It is just placing the RG on a "watch list." It is not an authorization of war.

Unlike John Edwards who will revert everything back to "don't trust Bush," Hillary is juggling that fear with a genuine concern for Iran.

What is that old saying? "Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not after you."

[scooperss]

Have you been here the last 8 years? Precise wording is the key to everything the bush administration does. If you haven't seen the twist and spin that can be put on something as simple as what *torture* is, you better take another look.
Didn't congress give bush the authority to "attack terrorism"?

[andyboy]

So just because Hillary votes just like Leiberman doesn't mean she's a Republican?

We are to fear Iran? I don't. Never have. Never will. Iran is not a threat.

Let's suppose they aquire nuclear weapons. Worst case scenario. What then?

Within minutes of their first shot (which they would never take anyway) they would be obliterated in a nuclear firestorm.

The reason we fear Iran is because we have always treated them like shit. Talked about them like dogs. So we fear reprisal from a country we know in our hearts we have had nothing but disrespect for. If you beat a guy up one day from then on you have to sort of look over your shoulder to make sure he or some of his friends isn't about to give it back to you.

The muslim world is afraid of America. Like a dog that you beat. Or a wife. When you deal with others through intimidation and threat and sanction and attack and killing and occupation you turn yourself into a monster.

No different than a Hitler or Mussolini.

They shout death to America. We wear t-shirts with their leaders faces emblazoned over a bullseye.

Please stop acting as if your better or more civil. You aren't. The only time peace comes is when one hand reaches out to another. When someone wants it. We don't.

[SensibleAmerican]

"Is this the same Hillary Clinton who voted today to give the President power to go to war against Iran"???!!!

Yikes! When and where did this happen?! Please elaborate ... and if you cannot, no worries! We often see these ramblings and rants on here ...

[brutus948]

when you vote to designate the army of a sovereign government as terrorists you are essentially declaring war on them. That's why the Hillaries YES vote to kyle-lieberman matters. She is a NEOCON warmonger just like Bush.

[Bobzmcishl]

Hillary and Bill helped push through NAFTA and let health care reform go down the tubes. She has now sided with the neocons twice and she can't commit to getting our troops out by 2013. She appears Republican-lite to me.

[CosaBella]

It is inaccurate to say that Hillary and Bill "let HCR go down the tubes." Hillary fought for it as hard as she could. There was fierce opposition from Democrats and Republicans. Hillary did not compromise and that, she admits, was what contributed to its failure. You can not deny she fought for it.

As for the 2013, may I also remind you that Obama and Edwards both can't commit.

Are Obama and Edwards "Republican-lite," too?

[Mojane]

She's relaxed and cackling. Feeling heady. Exhillaryation at having nice comfy lead in the press and polls and press and polls. She still scares me. Iran? She does it again? She scares me terribly.

[peaceandfreedom]

"Exhillaryation..." Priceless. With a wit like that perhaps you could smack down SensibleAmerican and her herd mentality?

[SensibleAmerican]

Fristly it is EXHILARATION! Secondly, I am flattered that you are mentioning a word I have often used for your likes: "herd"! :-))

[Nezua]

Hillary? Nope. No way. I don't care how much she laughs off questions. I admire anyone laughing at ludicrous questions. That is the right response. However, it's really irrelevant. It's only packaging.

Elect yet one more Clinton? Nah. This is not a dynasty position. We've had enough Bush/Clinton. And more important, elect another hawk? No sir. The time is past for all that glorified and useless and ultimately self-destructive and unwarranted violence. We need someone who dreams bigger.

[ElkoJohn]

the Hillary cackle is her passive-aggressive technique, btw why did she vote for the Liebermann Amendment to allow the Bush War Machine to go after Iran?? Did the Bush fool her again??

[Lisette]

ElkoJohn Right! See how she really is

[Lisette]

**
Nezua,

Very well thought out and well written post! I totally agree with you.

[SensibleAmerican]

You go Lisette! I am happy that people like you are speaking up! Comment more often so that some of the inane and insane babbling is diluted!

[situationcritical]

Good and bad, good and bad - I have had enough good and bad. Out with both. I want something different.

Life and death, life and death. I have had enough life and death. Time for something new.

Dem and Repub, out with both. What else ya got?

SENSELESS arguments.

Actually, Nezua, I haven't had enough of the Clintons.

[yaznaioutibia]

Jon:

I suspect that you are seeing a geat deal of dissatisfaction on HuffPost with HILARY and an anti Denocratic movement going on. So the quick post. It won't stop it. The condemnation of Move.On was an eye-opener and a major turning pint to many of our simple voting minds. We are not just going to vote against Bush. And do not threaten us that our non-vote makes no difference. We are excited about a third party . The food is coming. We are democrats, not idoits. Will this be posted, I think not, nothing I respond to is posted. Good

[SensibleAmerican]

Hillary voted against that resolution! She voted for the Barbara Boxer resolution which encompassed all services personnel like the swift boating of John Kerry and the humiliation of Max Cleland!

[Libsrule]

I'm sorry but dispite Hillary's ability to game the system by using her talents for electioneering, I simply am tired of Bush/Clint­on/Bush/Cl­intons in the White House.

This is not a dynasty for the two to split and plunder at will. Hillary for all her TV charm has still supported the war, refuses to make a single statement of what she is going to do no matter what.

Mostly she is a DLC democrat which means she's a moderat democrat pledged to protect the profits of corporations and war profiteers over the protection of the citizenry.

You know what a "Moderate" democrat is?

A republican.

[UpperWest]

Are you aware that Hillary voted for the Kyl/Lieberman resolution that declared the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist group -- thereby making it easier for Bush to go to war with Iran?

I don't care how stirring she was with Joe or how much she laughed on Fox. She has learned nothing from her Iraq vote, and has once again given the keys to the drunk teenager.

You might want to re-evaluate your re-evaluation of her.

[SensibleAmerican]

"thereby making it easier for Bush to go to war with Iran?" Ok ... so ... how?!

[brutus948]

because now the US army can attack iranian army because they are now terrorists. That's how. Its a subtle way of declaring war on another country.

[SensibleAmerican]

Touche'! WE need more people like you on this Board Jon! Very astute observations and especially the ones on Hillary! Finally some facts instead of the usual air head rantings!

[Lisette]

We rant because Hillary is wrong and all wrong for America.

[SensibleAmerican]

Oh! I thought you were one of the sensible ones?! I get it! You mentioned "Post". A Post is what Jon wrote. Remarks to it are called comments!

Please, don't stop ranting! It is a hallmark of the far-left-f­ringe-soci­alists!