Legal Commentary

Double Standards Part A Jillion

By Big Tent Democrat

Clinton pollster Geoff Garin asks some fair questions:

So let me get this straight. On the one hand, it's perfectly decent for Obama to argue that only he has the virtue to bring change to Washington and that Clinton lacks the character and the commitment to do so. On the other hand, we are somehow hitting below the belt when we say that Clinton is the candidate best able to withstand the pressures of the presidency and do what's right for the American people, while leaving the decisions about Obama's preparedness to the voters.

Who made up those rules? And who would ever think they are fair?

Indeed. but double standards rule the day. Consider this inane post:

I am truly convinced that if the results were reversed and Obama was down and tried to loop in the popular vote from states where all candidates agreed not to campaign (especially any state where Clinton's name wasn't even on the ballot!), her camp would be crying foul so fast it would make your head spin.

OF COURSE they would. Who in their right mind would doubt it? It is only dolts who would doubt it. At it is only dolts who would doubt that Obama would be making the same arguments were the roles reversed. This is politics. These are politicians. This is what they do.

Did Jacki Schechner just fall of the political turnip truck? The issue is not whether politicians will make self serving arguments, of course they will. The issue is evaluating the merits of the arguments and the issues involved from the perspective of what is best for the Democratic Party. If you a part of a Cult of Personality, it is not easy to do this.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking only for me

Full post as published by TalkLeft on April 25, 2008 (boomark / email).