Former Clinton Followers for McCain MiniMovement Shows Further Irrationality on FISA
The more that the movement of former Clinton followers calling itself Women for Fair Politics speaks, the less convinced I am of the movement’s intellectual coherence. The movement of dubious size is no longer focused on following Hillary Clinton, considering that today Hillary Clinton appeared in full-fledged rally mode for Barack Obama. If not a movement for Clinton, then for what? A movement against Barack Obama, and a movement for John McCain. Yes, for John McCain. The movement and its leaders have specifically committed to voting for John McCain
But why not vote for Barack Obama? What made Hillary Clinton so much a better candidate that her rejection by a majority of voters and delegates would be so upsetting? And why vote for John McCain instead? What is this organization’s reasoning? Here’s one recent piece of it:
Obama angers the left wing netroots and the majority of Democrats with his announcement that he will vote for the FISA bill. Obama claims to be a “constitutional law expert” but apparently fails to interepret the Fourth Amendment correctly. Unity? No. Not this year.
It is wholly legitimate to criticize Barack Obama for supporting the authoritarian, anti-constitutional H.R. 6304. Heck, we’re doing it loudly right here, to the consternation of prissy partisan kossacks. But to compare Hillary Clinton favorably to Barack Obama on that point makes no sense. Like Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton declared she would filibuster the FISA Amendments Act, and Senator Clinton failed to do so last week. Senator Hillary Clinton is just as much AWOL on the issue of the Fourth Amendment as Barack Obama. And what about John McCain, who these people say they are going to vote for? John McCain is whole-hog in favor of H.R. 6304. So deciding to switch a vote from Hillary Clinton to John McCain rather than to Barack Obama because Barack Obama is supporting a bill just like John McCain and Hillary Clinton makes no sense whatsoever. You can’t explain a variable with a constant, and in this case we’ve got a constant.
It’s becoming clear to me that what the Clinton-to-Obama movement people are doing isn’t actually explaining. They aren’t articulating reasons with passages like the one I quoted to you. Instead, they’ve decided on a position first — to vote for McCain and not Obama — and then after they’ve come to that position they’ve looked around for reasons to pin to themselves. It doesn’t make logical sense, so I don’t think they’re going to attract the support of people who pay attention. The question is whether they’re going to attract the support of people who don’t pay attention.