Hillary Clinton gets booed during a speech at the Take Back America Conference in which she mentions the continued support of the American troops in Iraq, and all Hell breaks loose. By all objective accounts reported by actual attendees, it was Clinton’s statements regarding her belief that it was the responsibility of the Iraqi government, to in effect, dictate the conditions under which American troops will withdrawal from Iraq, as opposed to the actions of the American Democratic leadership elected to get that job done, that drew the negative outburst from the audience.
However, once again, mainstream media seizes on any opportunity, no matter how easily debunked, to paint liberal Democrats as not being supportive of the troops. It’s akin to the coverage of John Dean’s campaign ending scream, which was relentlessly played on all outlets until the American public thought, yes, that man is at least flighty, or at worst, just plain nuts, even though reporters who were there and without an agenda submitted that Dean’s rousing “buck up the crowd” speech was completely in keeping with the enthusiasm exhibited by those within the forum.
In general, the right-wing television coverage of Clinton is patently passive aggressive as she is at once openly reviled by the right, yet she is simultaneously defended for her hawkish stance reported to have riled the left. This, per many pundits within the mainstream media like Chris Matthews, seems to make Clinton appear “presidential” as she stoically slogs on unaffected by what is largely non-support of what is purported to be the hated “Michael Moore faction” of the far left.
The right-wing media loves to boost Clinton’s reputation as the Democratic candidate predestined to run against the chosen Republican anointed to assume the “New Reagan” mantle, as they are so itching to royally kick her ass. They are quite happy to amplify the disdain many Democrats have for Clinton’s veiled admittance of infallibility, which they reason makes her more palatable to the middle of the road, thereby increasing the chances that they can run their boy against her in the general election.
Democrats of all persuasions are overtly smeared by the right as being out-of touch with the heartland anytime the subject of the expedited withdrawal of troops from Iraq is the topic, and Clinton is in turn subliminally fortified as a populist, a centrist candidate responding not to party affiliation with her previous more hawkish stance, but rather to non-partisan American values per her refusal to flatly admit she made an error in judgment regarding the Iraq war ala John Edwards and the other Democratic presidential candidates who initially supported the war.
Although poll numbers like these are a bellwether much of the right just can’t completely grasp yet, it will be one that ultimately compels Clinton to either talk straight about the Iraq war to garner more support from the left, or the one that drives her even further to the center to attempt to blur the line between moderate Democrats, Independents, and disaffected Republicans who can’t yet bring themselves to accept the reality of not only the conditions on the ground in Iraq, but the domestic condition, the now common belief that America is in a kind of freefall; a fall from grace in the eyes of the world that only a president who desires to compel real social change on all fronts will be able to reverse, and the reversal of all mistakes is only possible with complete acceptance.