Hillary: The New Queen of Mean?

[DJ13]

By flouting the popular vote in favor of elitist superdelegates, candidate Clinton ignores the new realities of leadership in the 21st century

The original Queen of Mean, Leona Helmsley, met her downfall when she disdainfully observed that paying taxes was for "the little people." Make way for the new Queen of Mean, Senator Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.). This time it's not about taxes, but about the very essence of democracy: voting.

------

O.K., I get it. Despite all these heady months of spirited, hopeful, and, yes, joyful participation in caucuses and primaries, it's alright that our votes are ignored because we are simply not in the loop. If the superdelegates override the popular will, it means we were just playing "democracy"—like playing "dress-up" or "doctor." When it comes to the serious work of choosing the Democratic nominee, the little people must step aside and let the insiders do what we would have done if only we had known better. We told ourselves our voices mattered. What were we thinking?

------

Senator Clinton's endorsement of the elite's right to override the people's vote puts her smack in the middle of the 20th century and its dominant leadership model. That model was invented to concentrate and manage complexity at the top, when most of the rank and file was uneducated and considered ill-equipped for meaningful participation. Large centralized hierarchies, including political parties, unions, corporations, and government bureaucracies, were its hallmark. Information stayed at the top. Only commands flowed down.

This kind of leadership found support in the notion of "false consciousness" that originated in the philosophical writings of Marx and Engels. They thought the working class was incapable of perceiving the nature of its own oppression. Any contentment a worker felt was therefore an illusion brought on by an inability to grasp economic reality.


More here-
http://www.businessweek.com/managing/content/mar2008/ca20080318_659859.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index_best+of+bw

[BeatleBoot]

1. Demonize, demonize, demonize, demonize...

Sean Hannity would be so proud.

[FARAFIELD]

2. Hmmm

well you could ask Hillary supporters about Hannity they were quoting and linking him like crazy last week. That was WAYYYYY too easy.

[maddiejoan]

3. I would

but I'm still too busy asking Obama supporters why they believe Drudge.

[ThatBozGuy]

10. Funny Im asking why Ms Clinton supporters believe her

Even more so now that her campaign is on good terms with drudge and fox ( and no Im not talking about the Muslim picture BS)

[MH1]

7. Hillary handed the knife over on 10/31/06 when she stuck it in John Kerry's back.

[BeatleBoot]

11. John Kerry?

You mean this guy? The guy I went door-to-door for? The guy I phone banked for?


I worked my ass off for this guy and he shows up to a photo shoot looking like this?





"Sorry, Barack, I did my best by endorsing you....sorry you lost Massachusetts..."

[DearAbby]

4. Let's not go there....

Let's concentrate on how to beat McCain/Bush Redux.

Good place to start:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5220801

[mac2]

5. Stop it McCain

[KittyWampus]

6. Hillary & Bill never questioned the assumption that NeoCons & Elite Control Our Govt

[housewolf]

8. This article makes some good & important points... here's more

...
My teenage children watched Senator Clinton on the Today Show, mouths agape. They attended our local caucus with me and saw hundreds of our friends and neighbors gathered in the elementary school gym on that Sunday afternoon, despite an ugly Maine snowstorm. They listened to the thoughtful searching debates and saw us cast our votes. How could anyone suggest we didn't know exactly what we were doing? "What's the point of electing someone who doesn't believe in the American people?" they asked. "If she wants to ignore us now when she's only a candidate, what will she do as the President?"

Leap of Faith

Hillary Clinton has laid bare the urgency of Barack Obama's call for a new kind of politics more effectively than he could have done in a lifetime of speeches. We are already knee-deep in a new social paradigm based on inclusion, voice, and shared responsibility. If it still seems a little vague, that's as it should be. By definition, such a paradigm can't be imposed from the top. A new kind of politics, like a new approach to management, can only emerge by trial and error. It's a process of invention we must all share, just as no group of experts could have decreed Facebook, YouTube, Craigslist, or the blogosphere.

By planting her flag on the side of the elites, Clinton has crystallized what's at stake. The rules that give super-powers to superdelegates are anachronistic. The Democratic Party is on a collision course with history, racing to secure its place as the General Motors (GM) of U.S. political life — inwardly focused, out of touch, irrelevant. Senator Clinton should reject those rules and take her own leap of faith into a new century where most of us are already at work building a different community.

She should signal her trust in this community and insist the nomination be decided by popular vote and electoral delegates. Embracing the tactics of elitism might mean a nominating victory for Senator Clinton, but it would be a death knell for the Democratic Party. The biggest losers? That would be the American people. "

http://www.businessweek.com/print/managing/content/mar2008/ca20080318_659859.htm

[BeyondGeography]

9. Key "now you have done it" indicator: When they start comparing you with Leona