If you're looking for new and exciting reasons to "get over it," Michael Kinsley’s recent piece in TIME is not to be missed.
Aside from the standard arguments and moans --and he deploys plenty-- Kinsley offers up a few "gems" that are worthy of both excerpt and comment. In the midst of a muddled plea that defies my best attempts at summarization, he informs democrats, particularly Hillary Democrats, of the steps that must be taken in order to guarantee a better America:
But true, professional unscrupulousness--the kind of do-anything-to-win pragmatism that Democrats envy in Republicans--requires more than just working yourself up into a lather of dislike. Sometimes, in fact, it requires the opposite: putting aside your dislike, your disappointments, your anger, your feelings of betrayal. In the case of Hillary Clinton's erstwhile supporters, all of these feelings seem overwrought to me. But there is no point in arguing about this, or at least not now. Now is the time to just get over it.
But wait, there's more.
It seems Mr. Kinsley holds a rather simplistic view of democratic policies and the benefits they provide regardless of class.
Barack Obama has refused $84 million of government money for the fall campaign because he believes he can raise more privately. For the Democrats to find it easier than the Republicans to raise money is a recent development, and a somewhat inspiring one. Affluent people who give to the Republican Party are advancing their own class interests, whereas those who give to the Democrats generally aren't. This suggests an admirable seriousness about their giving. On the other hand, if they go off in a snit when their candidate loses the nomination, that will suggest that they aren't really in this out of progressive passion--they just find politics an amusing hobby, like racehorses or yachts.
Got that?! Affluent Democrats are but noble philanthropists voting and giving against their own self-interests in order to rescue the underclasses. Further, those Clinton supporters who may have doubts about Obama are just elitist snobs throwing a hissy fit. If they don't write a check to Obama regardless of any doubts then they just aren't taking their holy obligation to the downtrodden seriously.
So children, especially all you snobby rich children, don't forget to just Shut the fuck up and send Obama more money!
- tnjen's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Front page
Comments
Riding the (Cotton) Unity Pony
You so right, Michael K. dude. It's just same old same old. All those hysterical overwrought snitty Hillaryists are just -- on the rag! Periodically attacking!
When will they grow the f*ck up? When will they shut up?
Most importantly -- When will the stupid bitchez QUIT?
Excellent points
about the piece.
Thanks.
What is even the point here? I guess to air deep suspicions? Or to further keep the "it's all Hillary and her supporters' fault" meme going?
Where's Michael's linky goodness?--it's all "that will suggest..." Well at least he's not an elitist himself. Heh.
"Affluent people who give to the Republican Party are advancing their own class interests, whereas those who give to the Democrats generally aren’t. This suggests an admirable seriousness about their giving."
I like the reasoning that only donating against your class interests is admirably serious--well aren't we all then, seeing as how we're supporting the CEO's with the oil and gas and McDonald's companies with government, tax dollar subsidies? But of course, if we were to help the poorer or those with problems, that wouldn't count as serious then?
And Mike's got the common touch DOWN:
"On the other hand, if they go off in a snit when their candidate loses the nomination, that will suggest that they aren’t really in this out of progressive passion—they just find politics an amusing hobby, like racehorses or yachts."
I love it! It's the ultimate elitist put-down of the non-elitists: you may not have money but I am going to accuse you of acting like the worst empty-headed pleasure-seeking rich people because you are now paying attention to your own economic interests. The BGTRLI voters are treating politics like an "amusing hobby, like racehorses or yachts" when they demand that the Democratic nominee actually BE progressive?!
thanks truth partisan
I have no idea what Kinsley's piece is actually about other than maybe just a broad cry for help/unity. The contradictions and wrongheaded statements (IMO) were so many that it made my brain hurt (I wanted to go through them one by one but the piece is such a mess that I didn't know where to begin). That said, the thing that probably bothered me the most is that he seems to accept the republican idea that democratic/progressive values serve only to improve the lives of the poor and even there he implies that those improvements aren't actual economic or socio-political gains felt broadly within society and achieved via progressive policies and programs that tackle real problems but rather through simple government giveaways of wealthy folks' money. It bothers me a great deal that he posits voting democratic as a means of altruism. Certainly, we should aim for altruism within society but progressive policies are designed to work for and benefit all people regardless of class.
This is classic
Kinsley, WITHIN HIS OWN PIECE, posits the logic for why Clinton supporters may be having trouble supporting Obama.
"Barack Obama has refused $84 million of government money for the fall campaign because he believes he can raise more privately. For the Democrats to find it easier than the Republicans to raise money is a recent development, and a somewhat inspiring one. Affluent people who give to the Republican Party are advancing their own class interests, whereas those who give to the Democrats generally aren't."
Maybe, just fucking maybe, Barack Obama is raising all that money because those givers all view him as more malleable to their interests than McCain. And maybe, just maybe, that fact gets reflected in how WORKING CLASS PEOPLE perceive Obama vs. McCain.
It's not rocket science, unless you're a sheltered elitist incapable of positing alternative worldviews other than those of rich Dems and rich Republicans.
Jeez
" ... if they go off in a snit when their candidate loses the nomination, that will suggest that they aren’t really in this out of progressive passion—they just find politics an amusing hobby, like racehorses or yachts."
Michael Kinsley, you insufferable twit, GO FUCK YOURSELF.
Best rebuttal evar!
Seriously, that probably is the best retort to Kinsley's erm "treatise."