Sunday, June 01, 2008

Raising Hill

Hopefully, you got the chance to see HBO's damn good movie Recount, about the underhanded machinations and near-psychotic fight for votes that ensued in Florida immediately following the 2000 presidential election. In addition to being a snapshot likely to trigger depressing alternate reality fantasies that wipe away the nightmare of the last several years, it paints a picture of the sickeningly Machiavellian lenghts that Republicans went to in an effort to stop the vote recount -- in particular, the staged protests (read: near-riots) designed to terrorize adversaries to the breaking point.

An exercise in irony that's beyond description, however, is to watch Recount, then pay close attention to the behavior of Hillary Clinton's supporters yesterday at the Democratic Rules and Bylaws Committee hearing. Clinton's frighteningly rabid apostles -- who've been conditioned by their leader not to take no for an answer, no matter what -- bear a resemblance to the bullying GOP warriors of 2000 in ways that would be hilarious if they weren't so damn sad. (Protests are one thing; shouting, booing, making pseudo-extremist threats and otherwise being disruptive inside the meeting room itself is something else entirely.)

Hillary's journey to the dark side has been complete for quite a while -- but there's no need for her zombies to rub it the hell in.

(CTV: Hillary Supporters Furious with Hearing Decision/6.1.08)


Alex said...

That's because the Hillary supporters _ARE_ GOP warriors. I don't think there are democrats alive that think Fox News is "fair and balanced."

Anonymous said...

You flail between outrage at James Baker's "underhanded machinations" in Florida in 2000 and Hillary Clinton's "rabid apostles" - because they used technicalities and process to try to get their backs out from against the wall and get a little wind in their sails.

It seems you abhor those who use process to defeat substance, yes?

Why then did you conveniently fail to mention the outrage you must surely feel at the fact that Barack Obama refused to agree to a substantive revote in Florida and Michigan - solely so that he could manipulate the delegate bans there to pummel Clinton with the momentum of a "winner" (without have won anything). Now those are some "underhanded machinations." And Obama wasn't even backed against the wall! Remember?? He was out in front - the winner - so much so that he was dismayed that Clinton would not quit.

I don't have a dog in the fight. In fact I never thought I'd live to see the day where the best this worthless two party system can give us is some hot air pontificators out of the U.S. Senate.

I'm just saying if you rage at those who are master manipulators; those who use procedure and the adjective law to avoid substance and understandable specifics; those who create mind-boggling technicalities in our laws and then skewer regular stiffs with that which they cannot understand - then your post makes a glaring omission is not giving Obama his due.

Chez said...

Wow, all that effort -- all that insightful rumination -- and you choose to remain anonymous.

I'm shocked.

A little political maneuvering, however questionable, is an unfortunate necessity in today's climate. I never assume -- nor have I ever insinuated -- that anyone is squeaky clean. What I'm drawing a parallel between is Clinton's tactics right now, yesterday, and the GOP's eight years ago. Nothing more.

Stephen said...

Imagine if Giuliani had never pulled out of that senate race against Clinton in her rookie year....recockulous.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous again:

I remember high school . . . bad things are o.k. if if the really cool people do them.

And yeah, didn't George W. Bush use variation 3.02 of "high school moral relativism" when he set up Guantanemo?

Mr. Controversy said...

Nice commentary. Oh, and just shooting my mouth off here, but if it hasn't already been used, why not use the headline "Come Hill or High Water" when she finally does drop out? Just a suggestion, it sounded funny at the time.

Michael J. West said...

I did see Recount, and I did notice the disturbing similarities between the Bush supporters in the movie and the Clinton supporters at the RBC hearing.

But there's a far, far more important lesson to be learned here, and it's another lesson that both Recount and the RBC hearing have in common:

The state of Florida can reliably fuck up every presidential election.

Vermillion said...

The state of Florida can reliably fuck up every presidential election.

Now just drop the "every presidential election" part, and you will have it right on the nose.

As far as Anon 4:26 and his eagerness to point out "omissions," I am sure he would like to point out that Obama's so-called manipulation wouldn't have been necessary if Hillary hadn't stayed on the ballot in those two states when all the other Democratic nominees withdrew. Of course, she won those states, but funnily enough, she was also the only choice on the ballot.

But I guess that can't be consider a machination, huh?