While the press has made it sound as if letting the name of Senator Clinton be put up for nomination at the Democratic National Convention and letting the Senator speak are unprecedented events which bespeak of her evil motives to create pandemonium and walk over Obama, Boehlert points out that the only thing unprecedented is Clinton's almost immediate endorsement of Obama.
From Gary Hart to Jesse Jackson to Jerry Brown, runner up candidates have put their name up for nomination at the convention, and also been given speaking time. Neither Jackson nor Brown actually supported the nominee (Dukakis and Bill Clinton).
From Boehlert's report:
Fact: Many in the press have portrayed Clinton's planned convention address, as well as the fact that her name is being placed into nomination, as an unprecedented, heavy-handed power grab.
Fact: It's not. In years past, Democratic candidates who won lots of primaries and accumulated hundreds of delegates (sorry, Howard Dean and Bill Bradley) have always been allowed to address the convention and very often place their name into nomination. It's the norm. It's expected. It's a formality.
This newly manufactured media attack on Clinton is just the latest in a long line of press grenades thrown her way this year. But this time, she's not the only victim, because the media's concocted story line is being used to unfairly skewer Barack Obama, too.
Consider New York magazine: "Obama Agrees to Roll-Call Vote for Clinton. Does That Make Him a Sissy?"
What's so startling in watching the coverage of the Clinton convention-speech story has been the complete ignorance displayed about how previous Democratic conventions have dealt with runners-up like Clinton. It's either complete ignorance or the media's strong desire to painstakingly avoid any historical context, which, in turn, allows the press to mislead news consumers into thinking Clinton's appearance (as well as the gracious invitation extended by Obama) represents something unique and unusual.
...
Even after all these months, I still don't completely understand why Clinton's essentially centrist campaign for the White House ginned up so much open contempt from the press corps, which has felt completely comfortable addressing her in an openly derogatory and condescending manner. The issue of her convention involvement simply allowed the press to whack her around like a piñata one more time, regardless of the facts.
So many in the mainstream media have literally hated the Clintons for so long, and that hatred was so manifest that all things Clinton, including Al Gore had to be slimed, to be lied about.
And history was made as one manifestly unfit for the office of President has led this nation breaking its laws, leaving its citizens to fend for themselves, sanctioned torture, shredded the constitution, and on and on.
And this is what journalism has become. Like unto a perpetual fraternity hazing exercise.
