On Hillary-bashing

At the last college dems meeting, despite my complete lack of technical skillz (sorry again everyone), we managed to discuss issues of media bias in this, as well as past, campaigns. The meeting ended on a discussion of Hillary Clinton's treatment by the news media. Some of us, myself included, argued that Clinton has faced a lot of challenges and discrimination, perhaps surprisingly to some, because she is a woman. Issues brought up were the whole 'cleavage' debacle, talk about her wrinkles, wardrobe, questions about if she's had plastic surgery, criticisms of her voice, demeanor, etc. that I believe frankly wouldn't be issues of discussion if she were a man. Some people at the meeting opposed these assertions.

However, it seems that two Hillary-supporting NYTimes columnists have raised the same concerns about the venom being directed at Hillary Clinton. Stanley Fish and Paul Krugman both wrote columns/blog posts decrying the treatment of their favored candidate. I agree wholeheartedly with both columnists that over-the-top Hillary-hating is ridiculous and absurd.

An important distinction must be made, however, that Fish and Krugman, for their devotion to Hillary, I suppose, fail to make. Both Fish and Krugman seem to imply that there can be no legitimate criticism of Senator Clinton and that supporters of Senator Obama are just suckers for fancy language, and ignorant of the 'dangers of inexperience.' Here I depart from their assessment and take offense.

While it may be easier for Krugman and Fish to paint all those that oppose Hillary with a broad brush, it is also intellectually dishonest and ethically questionable for columnists of their reach and power. It may astonish Krugman and Fish, but it is possible to hold legitimate reasons for disliking Hillary Clinton. Personally, her foreign policy plan and support of healthcare mandates does it for me (not to mention her comment that 'there are certain things presidential candidates cannot say when they are running for office'). See? I accomplished that without any hate or venom! Furthermore, there are many of us that don't just blindly support Senator Obama, but have chosen to support him because we believe his policies and qualifications will serve the country better. I join Krugman and Fish in asking Americans to join in this rational, hate-free discourse, but in making this call, the columnists would do better to avoid the blatant generalizations they so decry in their opposition.

Also, because this post was so serious, I feel the need to lighten it up. Enjoy these blasts from the past: