And it is the civic responsibility of every well-meaning American to ensure that she does NOT become the President of a dis-United States of America either.

If you think that the above is a strong statement to make about a Democratic Party's candidate on a blog site dedicated to electing Democrats, I agree. But, before you jump to conclusions, I ask you to stay with me while I make the case that it is incumbent upon every Progressive to assiduously work towards ensuring that Hillary Rodham Clinton does not succeed in sowing the seeds of racial disharmony among us and tearing us apart.

THIS IS WORTH REPEATING: I am NOT representative of the fabled "Typical Obama Supporter". I do NOT speak for Obama, nor for the Obama Campaign. No, volunteering for his campaign is not tantamount to speaking for him. Whatever you think of my abilities, they do NOT include to the feat of channeling Obama's thoughts. I am just an American, a proud Democrat, with access to a keyboard and umetered internet.

Over the weekend, the Democratic Party held several Caucuses as part of the ongoing Primaries for the election of the Democratic Party's flag-bearer in November. Four States and a Territory held their caucuses and Barack Obama won EVERY ONE of the contests. Let's take a quick look at the outcome of these contests from the 4 States (Virgin Islands' results is so lopsided in favor of Obama that I believe that including it here will be prejudicial):

  Nebraska   Washington  Louisiana  Maine 
Obama   68%   68% 57%  59%
 Clinton  32%  31%  36%  40%


Yesterday, Hillary stepped onto the national stage and, in front of the national media cameras, had the following to say in response to her weekend defeat:

These are caucus states by and large, or in the case of Louisiana, you know, a very strong and very proud African-American electorate, which I totally respect and understand.

Please indulge me and go back to the table presented above. Look critically at the HUGE disparity in the result. Please take note of how badly Hillary LOST, not only in not-so-black Washington, or in somewhat-white Nebraska, but ALSO in white-as-they-come Maine. Maine - a state Hillary was supposed to not only win, but win BIG. OK, now that you've taken stock of the lopsided result, could any right-thinking Progressive, nay any well-meaning American who is interested in not getting mired in the sordid racial profiling prevalent in the politics of the past, PLEASE TELL ME THE SIGNIFICANCE OF Hillary's allusion to the blackness of Louisiana??? What EXACTLY does Hillary mean to say by pointing out that Louisiana is FULL of Blacks who voted in droves for Obama? OK, sure, she said she respects them. Does that mean that she does not respect the other voters in the other states and the territory in which she was beaten?

Clinton has publicly dismissed the caucus voting system since before Super Tuesday, seeking to lower expectations heading into a series of contests that played to Obama's advantage.

"my husband never did well in caucus states either," Clinton argued that caucuses are "primarily dominated by activists" and that "they don't represent the electorate, we know that."

Ouch! I am a proud Democratic ACTIVIST, and although we do not have caucuses in California, I was proud to drive the hundred or so miles to support my NV brethren and I appeciated their dedication and selflessness for waiting in line to actually participate in this most precious of all democratic processes. When they mattered, Hillary and her campaign courted them aggressively. A majority of these people voted for Hillary. Now that she doesn't NEED them anymore, THEY ARE UNIMPORTANT TO THE ELECTORAL PROCESS, according to Hillary. And she wants to be the President of every American.

The New York senator went out of her way to say she was "absolutely" looking forward to the Ohio and Texas primaries in March, where she believes voters are more receptive to her bread-and-butter message.

Take that, the rest of y'all tone-deaf-non-Hispanic-non-White-Male-Latte-sipping-pompous-and-elitist-dwellers-of-some-god-forsaken-States Americans. Hillary does NOT heart you, nor does she think you matter. She doesn't want to be YOUR President. She prefers Texas, or Ohio, or some other state that is yet to hold a primary. You would think that, having been so dismissive of Iowa after she lost, Hillary's handlers would have encouraged her to not be so dismissive of any part of the country she seeks to govern. Obviously not. Apparently, the 50+1 calculation reigns supreme within her circle. Adding salt to injury, Hillary went on to say:

It is highly unlikely we will win Alaska or North Dakota or Idaho or Nebraska," she said, naming several of Obama's red state wins. "But we have to win Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, California, Arizona, New Mexico, Florida, Michigan ... And we've got to be competitive in places like Texas, Missouri and Oklahoma.

Ladies and gentlemen, your "Agent of Change", unfiltered and undilluted. This is the candidate who wants to represent the Democratic Party in November of 2008. Still holding tight onto the archaic political playbook of Clinton v1.0, triangulation and all. Using and discarding people and constituents with regularity without batting an eyelid. Pitting minorities against each other, commissioning polls that amplify racial dissimilarities, conveniently ignoring the fact that, in so many constituencies in this country of ours, minorities do coexist and collaborate on a daily basis.

Hillary continues to seek to fan the embers of racial disharmony by trying to projecting her percieved racial polarity between Blacks and Hispanics onto the national stage. This is NOT the hallmark of a great leader.

Hillary's sense of entitlement is preventing her from understanding the basic fact that, if you continue to disparage and bellitle and annoy various segments of your base, you will hardly have any base left to bank on. Hillary started of by not only refusing to apologize for her pro-war (despite multiple opportunities presented to her on a platter of gold) vote, she actually GAVE ALL ANTI-WAR ACTIVISTS THE MIDDLE FINGER.

How many more reliable Democratic constituents will Hillary spit on BEFORE all well-meaning Democrats begin to realize the perils of a Democratic ticket that includes Hillary anywhere on it? Students can't vote in Iowa because they are too facebook-ish and won't vote for her. Blacks are sheep and vote for people who look like them, even though they were the most reliable constituent her husband had before and throughout his presidency. The Hispanics hate them anyway, so who needs them? Activists are pernicious because, well they are too loyal. Caucus-goers can all go to hell, unless they live in NV. Red States don't count - they are NOT really Americans.

Hillary Clinton is afflicted with a malignant and incurable hubris that inhibits her ability to objectively comprehend the obvious truth of her losses. Hillary is not able to accept the fact that people are voting FOR Barack not because he looks like them but because, once they have had a chance to critically compared him to Hillary on a levelled field, Barack dwarfs her in a very significant way.

Hillary claims to be "ready from day one". Perhaps this is why it is difficult for her to accept the reality that, in spite of having the immense financial support and infrastructure of a well-funded party apparatus behind her from "Day Zero", she has been beaten badly by a scrapping campaign put together on shoestring budget by a nobody.

We already have a "Uniter" in the White House and his brand of unity does not appear to differ much from what Hillary is spouting right now. For the sake of the country, and in the interest of the Democratic Party, all well-meaning Progressive owe it a duty to themselves to continue to tirelessly work to ensure that Hillary's brand of intolerant and divisive politics is soundly defeated. We need to not only beat this odious machination, we need to beat it to pulp, ensuring that no other Democratic Party cadidate can ever rescuscitate it again.

Let it be known that, while Hillary continues to pit one segment of the country against the other and one Democratic Party's constituent again the other, her opponent continues to build a formidable list of enthusiastic supporters and impressive coalition, bringing more people into the political process than ever before, beating the other party in every turnout, energizing a usually-depressed base and giving the Democratic Party a more-than-stellar chance of taking the White House and helping the down ticket in November.

Will Hillary ever acknowledge this qualitative superiority? Will Hillary acknowledge that, once people get to know Obama, she doesn't compare? Will she recognize the fact that when it comes to the nitty-gritty, detailed- and orgnizational-oriented brand of one-on-one politicking, a vast majority of Americans just prefer Obama? Will she acknowledge that Obama has a vastly superior appeal, authenticity and organizational ability? And that he, not Hillary, is the better candidate, not just for the Democratic Party's prospects in November, but for the country for the next several years?

You may also like

Read Next

Trending Now