Ruben Navarette, Jr. had it right in his article over on CNN: that was cheap and divisive. And if you think that West Virginia and Kentucky aren't very working-class and white, and that Clinton's not doing all she can to use that, you're living in fantasyland. Her little WINK*WINK quip:
"Sen. Obama's support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again."
Talk about Reagan-era "code words" and veiled racial politicking. It isn't nearly Willie Horton, but Clinton indeed sounds more like some conservative, southern Republican stumping straight outta the 60's, rather than the dyed-in-the-wool "liberal" she's supposed to be, the wife of the "first black president."
Shit, if Obama wins, McCain is looking like a better choice than her. She also voted for the Iraq war, but at least he's not trying to get sneaky with old racial prejudices -- ahem, or actual fear and animosity towards black people.
Leave it to Hillary to look more "conservative" than the Republican guy. What wonders she is doing for the Democrats! I certainly am thinking about not voting for her if she wins the nomination -- I wonder how many others are starting to get a distinct distaste for her that will go beyond a realistic recognition of the things one has to do to best one's opponent in the nomination?
I mean, if I'm going to vote for a Republican, I'll at least vote for the one who at voted for the war resolution and has the courage to stand behind that choice even after the war has become unpopular -- instead of doing the "flip-flop" the Rovians successfully pinned on Kerry. And I'll also be wanting to vote for the candidate who DOESN'T look like a racist prick. On that score, Hillary stands alone right now.
