Why I stay angry…

…from Avedon, who is neutral* and doesn’t usually say too much (emphasis mine):

Digby noted the other day: “I just heard Chris Cilizza suggest on MSNBC that this charge of sexism is impossible to quantify, but Obama is winning partially because he turned his historic candidacy into a movement, while Clinton failed to turn hers into one. That may be true. But I can’t see how she ever could have done it with coverage like this:” – such as the attack on her when she said at Wellesley, “In so many ways this all women’s college prepared me to compete in the all-boys club of presidential politics.” Of course, she was simply saying something good about what she learned at Wellesley, but the media excoriated her for “playing the victim”. The media worked very, very hard to make it impossible for Clinton to highlight the historic nature of her campaign. You’d have thought that after her win in New Hampshire, they’d at least allow a mention of the fact that it was completely unprecedented for a woman to have won a state primary, but no – it devolved into an entirely counterfactual exclamation of surprise that Hillary was not dead yet, and an “explanation” that all those Clinton voters were a bunch of racists who’d lied about how they were going to vote - although, in fact, they hadn’t lied at all, and she’d been leading in the polls all year.

Also, this:

I really look forward to the day when I don’t get up in the morning and find my formerly favorite blogs littered with so many stupid posts attempting to twist statements by Hillary Clinton into Proof of Evil. When the Republicans say stupid things about Obama, everyone is perfectly capable of seeing through it and tearing it apart – in fact, y’all do it so well that I have little to add. Why can’t we do that for Hillary? And why is it that when I try to do that, I get attacked as a “Hillary supporter”, even though I’ve made it clear that I can’t choose between her and Obama? What’s wrong with you people? Do the Republicans spend half their time trying to destroy the reputation of the Reagans, or Gingrich, or any of their standard-bearers? Do you think they would spend five seconds doing this kind of self-immolation? Pull yourselves together

_____________
*I believe Avedon is neutral but being neutral is all it takes in some quarters to be smeared as a rabid Clinton supporter. Because in some quarters, apparently, “Clinton supporter” is an accusation.

Possibly related posts:

Torture

Spicy mustard, how evil

An unreliable narrator

“A flawed man with a very big heart”

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.