« Just testing | Mark Lazen's Blog | When Cavemen Vote »

Hillary, the Wedding is Off


Has an American national political contest ever been so utterly transfigured in so short a time as the race between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama?

Just a few short weeks ago, we were falling inexorably, willingly into the waiting arms of the woman we knew would protect and provide for us. Sure, we flirted a little bit with the boys at the bar. We felt a thrill when our hand "accidentally" brushed John Edwards' knee under the table. We admired Bill Richardson's Latino éclat. But we were just having a little fun before settling down to eight years of blessed sanity and nutritious policy.


The prospect wasn't exciting, but we'd had enough excitement to last our lives. Our previous relationship left us broke, disillusioned, and inclined to flinch in response to any sudden movement. We had learned our lesson, and we were determined to exercise better judgment this time. Hillary cared for us, we knew. Might not respect and admiration blossom into a warmer devotion in the fullness of time?


And then... There he was.


He had been there all along of course. Why didn't we notice? Was he wearing a new tie? Had he shaved off his goatee?


Or was it the incandescent bolt of heaven's white light that set his chiseled profile aflame?


Our heart raced. Our blood rushed. Our minds went all higgledy piggledy. And we think we might throw up.


Oh my God, we're in love.


Political campaigns pass from phase to phase in ways that often seem predictable in hindsight, and this latest turn of events is no exception. We watched Barack and Hillary debate prior to Super Tuesday and vainly endeavored to detect meaningful policy distinctions. We were like a child trying to choose between two cupcakes in a bakery display. Does one have a more icing than the other? We closed one eye and bent over to get a fresh sight line.


Then there was a flash. And when our vision cleared, it was a new world. And we discovered that our two cupcakes could not be more different.


Obama's astounding Super Tuesday comeback, in which he erased a double-digit deficit to achieve near-parity in a mere two weeks, attests to the sea change that occurred. Much of the credit for the turnaround is due to the man himself and his magnetic appeal. But there was calculation as well. He and his staff envisioned this transmogrification and consciously positioned themselves to reap the windfall of the moment, lighting match after match under the Democratic electorate and praying feverishly that the flame would catch before it was too late.


But if the punditocracy was caught off guard, it was because they were so busy watching the spark that they ignored the tinder. In short, they underestimated the magnitude and intensity of latent emotion in American voters. It seemed that the race would be about a return to competence and stability, that political cynicism was so deeply ingrained in the American psyche that it could only be courted, not confronted.


But now it is clear that we were primed for an emotional outpouring. We were a super-saturated solution just waiting for the faintest touch of the catalyst that instantaneously alters everything. Obama is that catalyst, and what is precipitating now is a genuine political fervor.

This was supposed to be Hillary's moment. Didn't she check all the right boxes? She's smart, hardworking, right-thinking, and intimately associated with a past that most regard--with their usual selective and myopic recall--as days of wine and roses.

But in the context of this new narrative, the promise of competence and safety is underwhelming, and to wish for a return to the familiar ways and faces of the Clinton years seems an act of cowardice.


Yes, we enjoyed Bill's homespun wit, his studied good-old-boy affectation, and his bedroom eyes. He charmed and soothed us, and he was a perfect match for his time. Oil was at $10 a barrel and the stock market was juiced. Who wanted to make waves?


And he left us with fond memories. That's why when Hillary asked if it would be alright if he lived in our basement for a while after the wedding, we agreed.


But no cabinet post. And he buys his own groceries. And as soon as he gets a job, he has to find his own apartment.


We concede Hillary's impressive resume and talent. But let's not pretend the choice before us is purely one of head versus heart. Obama is not some smooth-talking Lothario looking to seduce an America on the rebound. There's a reason that the most educated segment of voters trend strongly his way, and it's more than his dreamy eyes. But at the same time, it's undeniable that the Obama juggernaut is driven by emotion.

Does that mean we are setting ourselves up for disappointment? Is the excitement imbuing us with a fleeting and fickle courage doomed to evaporate in the face of adversity?

No.


This outpouring of faith and feeling does not displace our hopes for administrative success, for legislative progress, for remade international relationships and a thriving economy. Rather it is an indispensable vessel to carry those hopes to fruition. Those who think this enthusiasm speeds us on a fool's errand, consider: For many decades we have repressed all traces of political idealism within ourselves, always seeking safety, predictability and stasis. Doing so has served, at best, only to ensure that as we marched drearily into poverty and disrepute, we did so to a steady beat.


Now, the problems we confront are more daunting than any in our history. Global warming requires an internationally coordinated response for which no prior model exists. Our economic woes are the product of suffocating debt and permanent resource scarcity; if there is a cure, it will not be pleasant. Our relationship with the international community is going through a change more profound than any since the end of the second World War. Policy alone, no matter how brilliant, simply will not bring us intact through the challenges to come. We'll need a leader who knows how to cultivate the qualities of optimism, restraint, and selflessness within us, and how to wring out every ounce when the going gets rough.


That is why this tide of emotion is more than relevant. It is the crucial prerequisite of whatever success can follow.


But the biggest change we will make is the one we've already begun.


You see, Obama doesn't talk about what he is going to do. He talks about what we are going to do. And in that phrasing, he expresses the most frightening truth that any politician can utter. A truth so terrifying that no President has whispered it in almost 50 years. He is telling us that the problem has never been our leaders.


The problem is us.


It's a mortifying realization. But if we broke it, doesn't that mean we can fix it too? So we're going to solve our problem, and we're going to start by saying "yes" to the notion that government can be better than it is. Whatever comes after, we will never regret it. Because saying "yes" isn't the precursor to a triumph. It is the triumph.


So that's it, baby. It's not you. It's us. We're sorry it had to end this way. We never meant to hurt you.

You can keep our CDs. But we want our superdelegates back.


44 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

Sexist, stupid shit.

user-pic

Oh Bev,

Come on, it is humor by analogy. If you did not know the author was male, it would not have struck you as sexist. What if the author's name was mary? It could have eaisly been for instance:

"Sure, we flirted a little bit with the boys at the bar. We felt a thrill when our hand "accidentally" brushed John Edwards' knee under the table. We admired Bill Richardson's Latino éclat. But we were just having a little fun before settling down to eight years of blessed sanity and nutritious policy."

I as a lady could have written this piece. So are you saying it is sexist because a man wrote it?

Geeze, pretty touchy BevD.

Great read, Mark. I hope we can still be friends with her after this.

user-pic

Me too, Niko. I have enormous respect for Clinton. There are reasons my money's on Obama, but none of them has to do with Hillary's gender.

user-pic

"Bill's homespun wit,his good ole boy affectation, his bedroom eyes" - welcome to the real world, where Bill Clinton isn't running for president, Hillary Clinton is. Some "enormous respect" - the writer just can't grasp the fact that the Senator is campaigning for the job, not her husband. But of course, I'm sure in the writer's world, wives have to do what their husbands tell them to do, and they simply cannot make informed judgements without the hubby directing the action. And poor Edwards - the blogger feels him up at the bar, but just doesn't want to bring him home to Mother...not that kind of candidate, I suppose.

So here we have a blogger who is voting for best prom date and husband material, the candidate he can swoon over, who makes his heart go pittypat, and that's the basis upon which he chooses a candidate. You better believe I'm touchy - I'm touchy as hell about the shallow, superficialness of choosing a candidate based on oratorical skills, the swoon factor, barroom buddy abilities and whether he'd make a good husband.

user-pic

Jeez, Bev, lighten up.

user-pic

Why Tom? Aren't you sick of this? Do you wonder why the press is so shallow? This is the same kind of reasoning we got from them in 2000 and 2004 - the best bar buddy, the fun candidate, the best marriage partner - Christ, you'd think we were electing a prom king.

I think it's shallow to assume that a candidate who is a great speaker can not have substance. It seems so clumsy, so black and white, so simple to make this leap. Take the time to learn more about Obama before you label him.

user-pic

Only idiots bought the bar buddy crap. Bush had no chops, no achievement record (except failures). Texas governor is a fluff job. Struggled to get "C" on courses in college.

Tell me how that has the slightest resemblance to Obama. Barack has all the academic credentials Hillary has, and more legislative experience, if not that of living in the White House.

You're being too emotional, yourself, if you can't acknowledge that both our candidates are qualified and talented.

I happen to feel Obama has better prospects in the general election and in bringing in a cooperative Congress. That's a feeling, of course, but no one has knowledge of the future.

Come on over to Eric Stepp's forum so we can argue this without threads evaporating.

http://projectlucidity.com/forum/index.php#4

user-pic

I don't care who you're voting for, I've said over and over that they would both be good presidents - I'm sick of the fluff and superficial crap that passes for political discourse on this site. The only possible response now is, "this is shit or this is not shit."

I am fed up with the shallowness of it all. We used to have some serious discussions with serious people and now we're discussing the best bar buddy or the best marriage partner or nasty letters published on wackjob sites. No discussion, no political discourse, just cute shit all the time.

user-pic

Totally agree on content here. I'm finding it hard to think of things to write about. I also note thinner soup on the Cafe main page. We're trying to make do with stone soup at Eric's.

user-pic

Tom, I have been one of the very few persons who posted here that has consistently argued that they would both be good presidents and that our focus should be on getting a democrat elected.

user-pic

Bravo! Tour de force! Beautiful post! ♪♪♪

And he left us with fond memories. That's why when Hillary asked if it would be alright if he lived in our basement for a while after the wedding, we agreed.  But no cabinet post. And he buys his own groceries. And as soon as he gets a job, he has to find his own apartment.


That's exactly what Bill feels like! I hadn't thought of it that way before. Thanks for the laugh...

user-pic

Nice metaphor. Great, clever post.

Bev, I understand why you are upset, but I think allot of people blur the line between Hillary and Bill because she lets them.

She says she has more experience, but that includes Bill's time in office (I am not saying she didn't do anything important during that time, but why not release the papers that let us all know what those things are?)

Like I said, I have no doubt that her claim of experience is valid, but if it were a man making that claim he would be asked to back it up, just like how most people who haven't researched Obama are asking him to back up his rhetoric.

Also I have looked into both candidates and there are only subtle differences in there plans (besides health care which I know someone will bring up, but I agree with him on that one, I think her plan puts too much trust in a corrupt insurance system to actually lower cost, and frankly without lowered cost I would be out of home if it was forced upon me.)

And before you call me a sexist I will tell you right now you are wrong. I have never discriminated against a woman, I have never believed that a womans role was anything but equal. I do not feel that my preference for a candidate that I have researched heavily and found to be my preference to be a sexist position.

Nice.

user-pic

Quote: "Me too, Niko. I have enormous respect for Clinton. There are reasons my money's on Obama, but none of them has to do with Hillary's gender."

What Mark, Niko and Marky said. I agree completely.

Mark,

This is an incredible piece. I loved it! This is better than pretty much anything I've read in mainstream print magazine or newspaper columns.

You must be a professional writer. Do you write for magazines? Which ones? I want more!

user-pic

Thank you so much for the kind words, Laura. It means a lot to me.

I hope it won't be long before some magazine and newspaper editors will show that they agree with you.

In the meantime--and after the meantime--I expect to drop quite a few pieces here at TPM. Thanks for making me feel so good about it.

Folks, if BevD can't see the difference between Bush and Obama, then there's absolutely nothing you can do to set her straight. Desperation is a stinky cologne, but willful ignorance is worse. I'd hold my nose and vote for Hillary if she's the nominee, but I'm not going to go around (as some have, admittedly) accusing her of being Bush-lite. That's asinine when lobbed at either Democrat. And this is coming from an active 2000 Naderite. I learned that lesson, I hope you do too, Bev. Eventually.

Mark you are an idiot - are you sure that you aren't really a 'NON DE PLUME " for that bigger idiot Chris Matthews-
that being said , please don't tell my Clintonista wife - but I'm voting early next week for Obama-
bUT Mark really you are still an idiot - maybe you can go and be on "hARDBALL " ...

I'm not so sure about the original post.... because you need to take it to it's logical conclusion:

HRC as the pretty gold-digger who will say anything, do anything to get us to sign the marriage license. She will promise us yummy sex, sweet devotion, taking care of our needs, and happily ever after.

And just as soon as we marry her, she will lose interest in satisfying us, say things have changed and eventually divorce us. Only she will have the levers of government to force us to pay alimony, making us all feel poorer.

And all this while she continues to live a lifestyle that she had grown accustomed to. On the basis of our hard work. In a house that used to be ours.

Are we all still sure we like the original metaphor?

Nice post, Mark. I think the image of Bill in the basement is perfect. Bill has done more to lose the nomination for Hillary than anyone outside of B. Obama.

Its another sad year for America. Again we get to choose one of two establishment candidates.

Both have gotten sleazy gifts from rich backers. Not quid quo pro, nothing illegal, but clearly I'll scratch your back you scratch mine.

Both have been paid and delivered for their corporate masters.

Both have pandered in the most distasteful way to worse biases of the electorate for votes on the campaign trail.

Both reauthorized the Patriot Act. Both have done nothing to halt the war, except for one speech by Obama that's he's gotten an incredible amount of mileage out of.

Both have promised much more than America can afford to deliver. Neither are talking about the deep holes we're in, the wars, the collossal debt, the trade inbalance, the loss of jobs over seas, global warming, in a way that acknowledges the sacrifices we must make to deal with them. Nothing but feel good lies and empty promises.

And the winner is, the one who reads a telepromter best. Reads it even better than Reagan and the message is similar. Its morning in America.

You have a great way with words, Mark, and if you were writing fiction I might buy a book. But as political analysis its drivel.

Oceankat,

Wow, you are one cynical puppy! You sound worse than my husband, and I call him Eeyore.

I won't disagree that it's been disappointing to see Democrats cave to Republicans over and over, lo these many years.

But I take issue with your comments:

First, I think this piece is BOTH entertaining AND substantive. I don't understand the ire of some posters, like the extremely bitter and angry BEV, who laments that she's "sick of the fluff and superficial crap that passes for political discourse on this site," and that this piece is akin to "nasty letters published on wackjob sites." The premise that an analysis can be either "serious" or "superficial crap" is obviously flawed.

Even so, if BEV is looking for strictly "serious discussions," why on earth would she click on a link entitled "Hillary, the Wedding is Off"? She couldn't have been misled--surely it was obvious there would be an UNserious sttempt at humor therein, right?

Second, of the candidates, you say, "Neither are talking about the deep holes we're in, the wars, the collossal debt, the trade inbalance, the loss of jobs over seas, global warming, in a way that acknowledges the sacrifices we must make to deal with them. Nothing but feel good lies and empty promises." This simply is not true. Both candidates have substantive plans available for review if you are inclined to seek them out. I think what you are expressing (if you'll forgive my presumption!) is disappointment from previous promises unfulfilled, and anxiety of the risks we face in this election: do we trust the rhetoric or the plans? So many roadblocks are out there to prevent real progress...why should we believe this time will be different?

If my bold presumption about your feeling is correct...well, you're right. We can't be certain, and experience has given us repeated disappointment. So your anxiety and pessimism is understandable.

But there's something you can do about that uncertainty. If you're looking for solid analysis on the real (versus the "mythical") Obama, you might like to check out some the posts made by "Hilzoy" at Obsidian Wings. This person is extremely intelligent and well-informed; moreover, she does exactly the dreary, boring, detailed research needed to be able to determine what's real and what's "fluff". I ask you to take a look.

And for a review of the actual SUBSTANCE of both Democratic candidates:
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2008/02/solutions-adden.html

Also noteworthy is this blast from the past (way back in 2006, before the campaigning started):
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2006/10/barack_obama.html

This is one of the most coherent blogs I've read that explains exactly what I've felt (but couldn't express so well.) I may not have liked HC as much in the beginning and have learned to like her less, but your explanation of Obama's strengths is right on the money. God Bless America! It sure took us long enough.

user-pic

I agree Mark. A great well thought out post. I always believed analogy can cut to the heart of the matter much more than "giving it to us straight" and much more humorous to boot.

Loved it. Keep typing :)

user-pic

Mark,

You really are a writer! I will now look for your other posts.

PS: I find nothing sexist in your post. This is a rather creative and witty piece.

I really think you should send this...somewhere. Slate? Salon? It does sum things up so very well.

Great Post!

The perfect rebuttal to all those pundits who use the reverse idea that Barack Obama is the one who gets left at the altar...

The good looking, charismatic, charming man shows up and sweeps us all off our feet. He promises us the world. We will travel with him to places we have never been before and do things we've never done before. All we have to do is trust him, and don't worry about anything and give him everything he asks for. It sounds all so wonderful, and we are in love with him. So it's easy. We know he can save us because he said so.......I think we need to wake up from this dream before it turns into a nightmare.

user-pic

Thanks for all the nice comments. And to those with not-so-nice comments, thanks for caring enough to shout.

I'm just trying to say something different, a little provocative, and have fun doing it. It's my first time posting here, and I really appreciate the warm welcomes. And the hot ones.

I'll be back soon to amuse those I've offended, and offend those I've amused.

m.

There goes MoDo's job security.

Mark,
Nice to meet you. Fantastic piece. Satire and Metaphorically impressive for those who didn't have a clue at first. Great post!

I thought your writing was provocative and right on target. Obama's accomplishments, actually, are humbling--the first black president of the Harvard Law Review. Too bad that accomplishment hadn't occurred decades ago....Obama is a brillant man, a literate man and a man with a heart and soul. Two things Hillary lacks. Hillary's 35-year theme: "There's only ME in team."

Awesome post Mark! I've been studying blogs & posts waaaaay too much lately, obsessed w/ the campaign & trying to gauge how others are feeling. Yours has definitely made my search worthwhile :)

The analogy was so apt, especially the hope that "respect and admiration blossom into a warmer devotion in the fullness of time?" That totally reminds me of trying to date someone I WISH I could dig but know that the spark isn't there. I wanted to like Hill (or at least not be repulsed/annoyed/disgusted by her) but I just can't pretend and I shouldn't have to. And thanks to Barack, I don't! None of us do!!

And I agree, the recall is TOTALLY "selective and myopic", and I often wonder how Hillary has come this far when so many people clearly harbor resentments from the 90's? It truly is nostalgia for a better era, when we weren't "flinching in response" so to speak (another brilliant analogy). How odd that scandals, lying, and impeachment are seen as preferable and happy days? Wow...

I can't wait for President Obama to take oath next January!!

((& keep writing, Mark :))

user-pic

"I'll be back soon to amuse those I've offended, and offend those I've amused."

Did you ever write a post about marrying a guy who was running for president?

Nevermind. There once was a cafe community in which BevD was a respected mother of a son serving in Iraq, and who sometimes disagreed with the majority of posters. But, indeed, she was respected by just about all regular posters. And she was not chided by newbie posters with fancy pens, writing about marrying a female candidate for the presidency.

Now few of us remain, and now you promise to come back to offend and amuse, kind of like a shock jock. And so this is what we have now. And like a shock jock, your post is offensive and amusing. Terrific.

Do come back again; I can hardly wait to see who you offend next. Indeed, it looks from the comments that your brand of prose is appreciated by many (just a snarky jokester, c'mon, right?). I have been around long enough to understand that that is ultimately what matters most.


user-pic

Some style there, admittedly. But I'm finding myself agreeing with you.

Invitation to the rump Cafe at Eric Stepp's blog, Lucidity-----
http://projectlucidity.com/forum/index.php

user-pic

Thanks Tom.

Bev,

In order to contribute to a dignified level of discussion, I try to avoid making personal comments to a fellow posters. But because of your repeated angry comments here, I feel the need to address you and your comments.

It seems that you resent the "newbies" here at TPM, and you feel that you no longer have the respectable status you had before. I'm sorry you feel you are no longer adequately respected, though I have to say, in turn, that your lumping me into the category of "newbie" and the contempt you express leaves ME feeling undeservedly (IMO) insulted. For the record, if you were to address me with respect, I am sure I would respond in kind.

I sincerely do not feel the intent of this writer's post was meant to be personally insulting to you or any other woman. Nonetheless, your profane and hostile posts indicate that you are offended. I am sorry you feel that way.

I have to ask at this point, why you continue to freely CHOOSE to come to this post? You have indicated that it is beneath your intellectual dignity, and that you feel the posters on this thread are comtemptible.

If this poster so offends you, you are free to avoid his posts; yet you continue to return and engage with resentful comments. Why???

As a Democrat I will support whoever the nominee is. But this Maureen Dowdism does not appeal to me.

I am not looking for an imagined relationship with a president. I am looking for competence and specific policy goals. First and foremost universal healthcare.

As a Wisconsin voter, I had the opportunity to hear Obama speak at the local university last Friday evening. While his speech contained snippets I'd heard before on news clips, his last ten minutes, speaking of hope and optimism, were clearly from the heart and won my vote this coming Tuesday. His America is my America: bold, courageous, not fear-mongering and militaristic. I believe that Obama is the only candidate left who has the slightest chance to change the dysfunctional mess the congress has become since Bill Clinton's days.

Does anyone really believe that Hillary will put an end to the cross-aisle shrieking, stagnation and stalemate that cripples our federal government? If she's elected president, the right will simply dig their trenches deeper and nothing will change. While that may be unfortunate for Hillary, and unfair as well, I'm tired of the status quo and can't see a Hillary presidency improving the current situation. My vote goes to Obama. For any pollsters, I am a 48-year-old white male. By the way, last Friday Huckabee drew 200 people to his event; McCain drew 800; Obama drew 5000, limited to that by the local university arena's seating capacity.

The fact that some people are so stressed about this election that they start sniping at satirists as though they somehow represent or are responsible for the generally poor quality of reporting in the MSM just proves that we need somebody to help us lighten up. Keep up the great work Mark. I look forward to your future posts with an anticipatory chuckle. Maybe that makes me a shallow or duped. And maybe it will render me unfit for the oh so serious and consequential discussions that ought to take up every waking moment (for the blogosphere never sleeps!) but honestly, i don't think it's likely.

Leave a comment

Mark Lazen

user-pic

Following: 12
Followers: 13

Posts
Comments & Recommends


Favorites

All Reader Posts
How to use myTPM

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address