What is Michael Hirsh drinking?
Writes Michael Hirsh:
For the last few days, the blogosphere has been ablaze with speculation about the kind of damage Hillary Clinton could do to the Obama presidency if she becomes secretary of state.
Of course, for the last few days there's been comparatively little speculation within the blogosphere about what kind of "damage" Hillary Clinton could to the Obama presidency. It's been the mainstream media that's played up the "damage" angle and been childishly obsessed with pushing the "soap opera" angle of the story.
For the most part, lib bloggers have been treating the story seriously, like adults. We're still waiting for the Beltway pundits to catch up.
We've been writing much more about Lieberman if he actually bothered to read more than one blog. And if Hirsh wants to talk about damage being done, how about he take a good hard look at what the traditional media has done to our country?
As noted, we have no particular view on Hillary Clinton as Sec of State. But we do have a reaction to the pundit corps’ renewed Clinton/Gore-loathing: Things have reached the point where these sad life-forms are “objectively anti-American.” The nation is in a set of major messes; a new president is trying to pick the people he thinks will serve him best in a difficult time. But so what? Even in such a perilous time, the loonier members of the Dowd-Matthews axis can’t quit their Clinton-loathing. Nothing will keep them from this vast pleasure, the one pleasure of their sad lives.
It’s almost like they loathe the country itself. In the past, they’ve done astounding harm to that country through their aggressive Clinton/Gore-trashing -- especially when they worked so hard to put George Bush where he is. But even now, they refuse to abandon their childish games. Nothing will ever make them stop. They care about little else.
They did their very best to elect George Bush in 2000 and it took a stolen election to get it done. But then again, this is the traditional media we're talking about.
