By Greg Sargeant
Nov. 16/2007
NY Times' Kit Seelye: McCain "Bitch" Episode Is Bad For Hillary
The piece, by "Kit" Seelye, contains this startling bit of analysis:
Clinton allies have suggested in the past that sexism-based attacks can actually help Mrs. Clinton by inspiring sympathy among women. They may even win over some voters who understand that campaigns are brutal but who appreciate a candidate who can “handle it,” as former President Bill Clinton recently said of his wife.
At the same time, the episode may remind voters that many people have strong feelings about Mrs. Clinton and make them question whether they want to live with animosity and polarization.
The piece adds that this episode may serve as "a reminder that many voters view Mrs. Clinton as divisive."
The "bitch" episode is bad for Hillary? Hmmm -- that's a pretty silly conclusion. First off, there's far less analysis in this piece on the question of whether this is good or bad politically for John McCain, even though he's the person who stood by while his supporter uttered the slur and proceeded to raise money off of it. We only hear Seelye's views on whether this is good or bad for Hillary, even though her only involvement in this was that a McCain supporter somewhere thinks she's a "bitch" and gave voice to that sentiment.
...
If voters are reminded of this it will be because they're being reminded of it by ... people like Seelye, who says it here twice. As always, your political media figures will just never acknowledge their own role in shaping our political narratives and our perceptions of public figures.
This piece spends far more time telling us that this "bitch" episode is bad for Hillary than it does in telling us whether McCain's fundraising appeal was, you know, true or not. Bizarre journalistic priorities indeed.