If Hillary is such a "corporate shill" then why does the RW hate her so?

[SujiwanKenobee]

If being pro-business is considered to be a Republican meme, I fail to understand why exactly there are so many of them who have made Hillary hating their prime occupation in life. If so many DU ers are accusing her of being such a corporate whore, then why wouldn't she be acceptable in the eyes of moderate Republicans? I honestly don't comprehend the source of the vitriol.

[Kittycat]

1. Because of her Social Programs, and Bill.

Her social programs will undoubtedly benefit business, but the burden falls on the families & tax payers.

[billyoc]

2. Same reason the Yankees hate the Red Sox.

They want to be on top, not the other team. Right wing republicans don't want right wing democrats to be in charge, they want to be in charge themselves.

[zonmoy]

3. what part of the of the right wing hate her the most.

the corpofascist, the christofascist, other fascist elements. they hate her because people actually liked her and her husband and because they were much lighter on their fascist agenda.

[shraby]

4. They dislike her because of Bill,

as well as the garbage the rw shoveled at her when she was working on a health care package and the Vince Foster thing, they have a lot of made up shit to throw at her if she gets the nomination. You see, Bill became president and he wasn't supposed to...it was supposed to be Republican presidents forever. He threw a monkey wrench in their plans, so they villified both him and Hillary from day one and continued until * got in office. That formed the republican voters' perception of Hillary and after 8 years of propaganda, that perception is pretty well ingrained into their thinking.

[SheilaT]

5. When the RW looks at her,

all they see is her husband and everything they hate about him. They are incensed that she stayed with him when his infidelities were exposed, which says a lot about their "family values". They also cannot abide the very idea of a woman who is independent, has her own career, doesn't stay home and bake cookies while raising children.

In short, they do not hate her because of a careful consideration of her policies or connection to the corporate mainstream or anything that might make them like her.

[Changenow]

6. Huh.

Bush 'Ranger' Supports Clinton
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/07/bush-ranger-sup.html



Rupert Murdoch Loves Hillary Clinton
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/05/09/politics/main1600694.shtml


And the vast right wing conspiracy has had a change of heart where the Clinton's are concerned:

Bill Clinton turns enemy into a friend
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article3123946.ece

[Captain Hilts]

7. GOOD point. nt

[BlueManDude]

8. Your mistake is believing that irrational people have rational motivations.

[rurallib]

10. True that - they have contradictory positions on many things

yet it bothers them not one whit.

[pat_k]

15. "Belief people" v. "knowledge people"

They don't care one wit because they are "belief people" (a label I coined in something I posted http://january6th.org/post_of_the_week.html#pmk">on Salon a couple years ago).

Belief people come to their beliefs by looking to others. They adopt conclusions and don't need to know the basis. Beliefs are beliefs, not theories. Listen to Rush for 10 minutes (if you can stand it), he just spouts a series of "conclusions." There are no "cases." (He also says "We know" alot, so of course listeners can take what he says as given.)

For knowledge people, things need to add up. Their beliefs (conclusions) are theories that are constantly being tested against the facts at hand and logic. They figure out how things fit together and fill in gaps as they seek to understand their world.

A belief person has no problem holding contradictory beliefs because the beliefs have been adopted in isolation. They believe it because they've been told it is so. They don't need co-existing beliefs to be consistent because there is no "theory" to test them against. They know what they know.

And, if they come to believe that "everybody knows" something then they believe it too, even if they believed the opposite yesterday.

Ever wondered why polls sometimes turn on a dime? I think those giant swings are belief people flipping. There is no need to spend time reconstructing the basis to reach a new conclusion. When some critical mass is reached and enough people have adopted a belief, that belief spreads like wildfire.

My description of "belief people v. knowledge people" is nothing more than a "working hypothesis." What goes on in people's heads is a "black box." But the hypothesis does seem to explain and predict what I've observed. I don't think anybody is 100% belief person or 100% knowledge person is all aspects of their lives. but it does seem that in the political realm there really is a dichotomy.

Whether or not the "belief person/knowledge person" hypothesis is true, it saves me a lot of frustration and grief. It also gives me hope. We don't need to inform or educate "everybody" -- we shouldn't even try. They'll believe what they believe. We need to stop validating them by engaging with them. If they notice that "everybody knows" something is crap, they'll "know it" too.

Posted some additional thoughts on the related "authoritarian personality" in http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=108&topic_id=125546&mesg_id=125794">Post 14.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

9. Maybe it's like the old RW line about certain foreign leaders that wouldn't pass >>>

>>> the democracy sniff test.
"He may be a sonuvabitch but he's OUR sonuvabitch."

[LiberalEsto]

11. Just because

Because she's there, I imagine

[classykaren]

12. fox news always said they wanted her to get the nomination n/t

Which really made me wonder what the RNC has ups its shirt?

[NastyRiffraff]

13. Clinton hatred is nothing new.

And it has nothing to do with her politics.

It started with Bill's run for the presidency, and it's never let up. It was began by the RW nuts, but continued by the so-called liberal media.

The Republicans have never forgiven Bill for winning in 1992, and especially again in 1996. Neither was supposed to happen, but they thought they finally had him when they managed to impeach him over a stupid intern.

As for Hillary, it was enough that she was not only married to Bill, but she was also very involved in the administration. (You never see a good REPUBLICAN First Lady involved in actual policy!). So there came the vile Vince Foster accusations, the unrelenting hits on her health care proposal...etc. The media just played along, and I'm not talking about Faux News, Rush, or Hannity. Try the NY Times and the WaPo, who pushed the bogus Whitewater story hard, even after it was discredited.

And of course, the constant attacks and propaganda worked, even with some liberals. (There are Democrats who still think there was something "fishy" about Foster's death.)

[Andreshunter77]

16. The hatred is not rational, either

Her detractors don't care if accusations are backed by evidence or not.

[pat_k]

14. There is no reason. They just "know" that she's evil incarnate.

"Reasoning" simply isn't an attribute of the authoritarian personality.¹ Right-wing reactionaries don't reason; they believe (which is why it is pointless to argue facts or logic with them²).

The authoritarian personality appears to be a basic type. "Non-authoritarians" who grow up in an isolated, homogenous world will tend to "get out" or "get along to go along," only questioning the haters when confronted with particularly egregious examples. Authoritarians who grow up in a multicultural world seek out and find safety in fundamentalist/fascist communities (e.g., a community of "ditto heads"; a fundamentalist religion; or a "conservative" town).

When someone in an authoritarian/fascist/fundamentalist community doesn't conform to their assigned role, hatred and repulsion are the means by which they are forced to conform (or at least shut up) or are driven out. As for the various ethnic groups "out there," who knows what they might be up to? What frightening "foreign" ideas they might bring? Hatred is the means by which they are "kept out."

There are so many threats to the security of their safe little world. They are hateful because there are so many things and people to hate (be frighted of). They don't need reasons. They just need something to say. And they are fed those "somethings" by their peers and "leaders."

Hillary haters hate Hillary for the same reason they hate black and brown people, people of different religions, homosexuals, feminists, or anyone who subscribes to a belief system that threatens their world view. But unlike the threats that are close to home -- threats they can usually drive out with "run of the mill" hatred -- Hillary was a heretical "first lady." She's trying to "take over." Despite the intensity of their hatred and efforts to demonize her she refuses to "go away."

What we need to "get" is that authoritarians are only about 20-25% of the population. It doesn't matter if they hate Hillary. There is no rational reason to take issue with. Stop worrying out them. Ignore them. Dismiss them. Their fantasies don't belong in the "marketplace of ideas." Reject their assertions out of hand. If we engage/argue/defend we validate them. They are followers. When "everybody knows that's crap" then they'll "know it" too, even if they "knew" the opposite yesterday.

_____________________________________________

1. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2681291&mesg_id=2681323">belief people v. knowledge people and http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2681291&mesg_id=2682633">how to deal with them more effectively.


2. Countdown, July 10, 2006
   http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13816491
   
   DEAN: I ran into a massive study that had really been going on for 50 years now, by academics. They‘ve never really shared this with the general public. It‘s a remarkable analysis of the authoritarian personality, both those who are inclined to follow leaders, and those who jump in front and want to be the leaders. . .
   
   OLBERMANN: Does it really—do the studies indicate that it really has anything to do with the political point of view? Is it—would it be easier to essentially superimpose authoritarianism over the right than it would the left? Or is it theoretically possible that they could they have gone in either direction, and it‘s just a question of people who like to follow other people?
   
   DEAN: They found—they have found really—maybe a small, 1 percent of the left, who follow authoritarianism, probably the far left. But as far as widespread testing, it is just overwhelmingly our conservative orientation.
   
   OLBERMANN: There is an extraordinary amount of academic work that you quote in the book. A lot of it is very unsettling. It deals with psychological principles that are frightening and that may have faced other nations at other times, in Germany and Italy in the ‘30s coming to mind in particular. . .
   
   DEAN: The lead researcher in this field told me, he said, I look at the numbers in the United States, and I see about 23 percent of the population who are pure right-wing authoritarian followers. They‘re not going to change. They‘re going to march over the cliff. The best thing to deal with them—and they‘re growing. And they have tremendous influence on Republican politics. The best thing, the best defense is understanding them, to realize what they‘re doing, how they‘re doing it, and how they operate. Then it can be kept in perspective, then they can be seen for what they are. . .

[MojoMojoMojo]

17. If Hillary is such a "corporate shill" then why does the RW hate her so?

Because her single payer heathcare reform in the 90s, was the the most progressive ever considered.
Only Kucinich offered single payer in this present campaign.
That we could have healthcare like the rest of the civilized free world is very intimidating to the powers that be.