The ever-reliable Andrew Sulivan
links to a post from
The New Yorker's George Packer, who writes,
in part:
What we are witnessing is a controlled experiment in modern campaigning: eliminate policy differences between two candidates; space out the primary schedule so that it remains empty for seven weeks, thereby creating a political-news vacuum in which the candidates and their supporters continue to give speeches, hold press conferences, or blog nonstop; and subject every word to the scrutiny and amplification of the twenty-four-hour news machine. The predictable result is that two appealing politicians will quickly start to lose their lustre, until, by the time Pennsylvania gets to vote, on April 22nd, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton will seem like the smallest, meanest, dirtiest, lowest, most dishonest candidates ever to run for office in the United States. Q.E.D.
I don’t have an answer for this manufactured hysteria, which reminds me of nothing so much as two small children left unsupervised in a room.
Yeah, who would've guessed that a close Democratic Party presidential primary election pitting a Chicago Dem against one of the Clintons would get nasty? Shocking.
It can't be the candidates -- it must be 'circumstantial happenstance'!
Datz rite. Punch 10... ya know.