Hating Hillary: The One Thing Left and Right Men Can Agree On

[Buzz cook]

118. The hate for Clinton on the left goes way back.

At least as far as the 92 election. If you remember that's a time when the vast majority of people right or left still got the majority of their information from the main stream media and considered them a reliable source.

So for her first few years in the national spot light Hillary Clinton was described by David Brooks and his ilk. I'm of the opinion that many on the left internalized those memes.

Many on the left believed that Bill Clinton was a right wing, small time, corrupt, Southern crook, that cheated away the nomination from "real" liberals such as Paul Tsongas. This even though the policy positions on all the candidates were pretty much the same.

Oh and at that time Bob Kerry of Nebraska was considered a real heartland liberal, so you can see the difference between what we were told and what reality was like.

That what started the left disaffection with Hillary and it was based on inside to beltway snippery.

It then devolved into Clinton rules journalism. Something that has risen from the dead like a zombie lie.
The left at that time didn't have the infrastructure to push back. They might not have even if they could because along came 1994 and the right wing revolution.
Both Clinton's were the designated scape goats for a systtemic failure by the party and liberals.

I think of it as a dysfunctional family in which the abuser picks on only one child; eventually the other family members blame the victim. The family begins to think if only the victim wasn't there the abuse would stop. So if only the Clintons were out of the picture the media would return to being fair to both sides and the right would go back to being fuddy duddy fiscal conservatives and not ideological terrorists.

That exhibited itself in election 2000 where centrist Gore was pitted against centrist Bradley. The MSM let it be known that Bradley was the "real" liberal while Gore was a lying, somewhat crazed, self promoter, etc. and so on. Sadly many on the left bought that as well, even though by then we could prove that the media were whores in real time.

It happened again in 2008 when a little known dino was hailed as the "real" liberal by the media because of a centrist speech he had given at the 2004 convention. Once again if one were to explore the rhetoric and the records of the democratic candidates there wasn't much separating them.

Now contrast that to Warren who started as a little known functionary in an area that wasn't covered much by the media. She was able to garner nation wide support in a democratic/liberal system that didn't exist in the 90s, before she got because of that support she was able to get her seat in the senate. In short she is a winner and everyone lves a winner. But she is a winner in good part because of the reaction to the mal treatment of Hillary Clinton.

So people on the left like Warren because she didn't have to go through the meat grinder and hate Clinton because she did. And that hate often exhibits itself as sexism, because it's easy.

Sorry to tell you this, but to many people who call themselves leftist, if they dislike a person, they think it's OK to use any form of demeaning language they care to.

So read this fom the start. http://dailyhowler.com/archives_98.shtml
Read "Fools for Scandal" Lyons
http://www.amazon.com/Fools-Scandal-Media-Invented-Whitewater/dp/1879957523
And read "The Hunting of the President" Conason Lyons
http://www.amazon.com/Hunting-President-Ten-Year-Campaign-Destroy/dp/0312273193/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1448352132&sr=1-1&keywords=the+hunting+of+the+president