You read it everyday on Democratic Underground, DailyKos, and other “progressive” spots in some manner or form: Because Hillary Clinton leads the Democratic nomination race, and the media is reporting it, the media is “picking” the candidate. Perhaps the media has contributed to the “inevitable” feeling of the Clinton campaign by reporting trends in the election, but one thing is for certain – It goes beyond logic to even suggest reps from the major TV networks, 24 hour news channels, and newspapers are holding secret meetings to plot the election of Sen. Clinton. Yet by claiming the media is picking our candidate, that is pretty much what they’re expecting us to believe is happening – some sort of “corporate media” collusion.

The question that begs to be answered then is what “progressives” propose to do about it? Do they want an information black out on the campaign? Do they advocate some sort of forced or self-censoring of the media? If so, would that not contradict the very liberal doctrine of freedom of the press?

Do “progressives” want equal time for other candidates? Well, there’s hardly an article or news broadcast on Hillary Clinton that doesn’t contain references and comparisons to the other leading candidates. And to be quite honest, the other candidates do get plenty of coverage. But the front runner always gets more. It’s the very definition of “newsworthy” that drives the media.

All in all, though, the meme that “the media is picking our candidate” simply doesn’t hold unless “progressives” believe the electorate is too dumb to think for themselves. On second thought, they probably do think that.

But there is something a touch more serious, I believe, and that is the impression I’m getting from netroots types that they’re letting the GOP pick our candidate. You can sense it buried in the text of their other meme: “We must not nominate Hillary Clinton because the GOP will be relentless in their hate for her.” Isn’t that the epitome of allowing an outside entity to make this decision for us? In a time when the GOP is severely weakened by sex scandals and corporate scandals, their fundraising is stagnant, and brand “Republican” is at a 20 year low in public approval, why should Democrats be afraid to nominate our strongest candidate based on what the REPUBLICANS think of her?

In the coming months, you’re going to see a lot of netroots hysteria over Sen. Clinton. In all seriousness they’re going to use the same “fears, smears, and queers” tactics the right wing uses. They’ll ask “what if Bill has another affair?” They’ll imply Hillary is a lesbian. They’ll claim “insider information” that the Republicans are saving something special for Clinton. Don’t fall for it. Because one thing we know about the GOP is they have a thirst for power that is more powerful than anything else. If they have something special saved for Clinton, they have it saved for any Democrat running.

We saw how the GOP machine at it’s height went after Senators John Kerry and Max Cleland. Now, severely weakened, the GOP simply cannot fund that same machine – especially against a candidate with the funds and the willingness to not only fight back, but to hit first.

(For Centrist Democratic News and Opinion, Visit DonkeyDigest. For The Latest News On The Clinton Campaign, Visit Hillaryweb.)

Be Sociable, Share!