No, not the HRC. The other one.

It came to my attention, talking with a fellow politico the other day, that I probably am in possession of a rather irrational dislike of one Hillary R. Clinton. I bickered for a good while with my friend as to whether or not the Hill was deserving of funds from her organization.

Right wing turns on immigration.

Suggestions of the abolition of abortion.*

Poisoned “support” of queer communities that panders to the sellouts.

A history of support of unchecked free-capitol trade.**

Then again, as I have repeated many a time in the last months: There is not a single acceptable candidate for the Democratic nomination in the race.

Not a single one.

Every contender is to my eyes, fatally flawed with compromised positions, status quo preserving double talk, and sheer un-electability. I do question my particular vehimence against Shillary, and I tend to think that it may be rooted in my growing feeling of betrayal by the Clintonian politics of my youth. For some time, I had seen Bill as heroically liberal, only to grow in understanding that he’d been anything but. The suggestion that he’d told Kerry to support the FMAs came as a final straw, obliterating any residual good will.

The problem, I have come to understand, is that most of my fellow Americans are damned idiots, and get precisely the government that they deserve. Sadly, we have yet to find a way to contain the misery produced by such poor judgment onto those most responsible.


*This is why “safe, legal, rare” is not an acceptable tagline for a progressive. You start talking like this, and you reinforce the perception that those who engage their choice to terminate a pregnancy are either victims or moral weaklings. Holistic family planning is a good. Surrendering to the moral outlook of the forced natalist crowd is not.

** As distinguished from a system in which labor is equally liquid.