BEATING HILLARY CLINTON. One of the interesting things about the Republican Party is the principled viciousness of right-wing activists and a lot of conservative voters. One such South Carolina conservative got down to the brass tacks about Hillary Clinton when she asked John McCain "how do we beat the bitch?" Talking Points Memo focuses on McCain's response to the name-calling as "an excellent question." But I think it's better to focus on the statement itself. What's striking about the statement is the powerfully off-hand quality of the woman's contempt for Hillary Clinton. In the video, "bitch" is not a stereotype of an unpleasant or overly aggressive woman or a term of opposition. Rather, the pejorative thrust of the conservative woman's use of the term in relation to Hillary Clinton was to treat Clinton as sub-human, as somebody who could not be imagined as equal in dignity to anybody in the room. What's "principled" about this kind of viciousness is the refusal to recognize Hillary Clinton as a worthwhile being. It was much like the principled refusal of slave owners and segregationists to recognize the humanity of black people. For this Republican woman, "bitch" was the female version of a racial epithet like the n-word.

In this context, the use of the term "beat the bitch" has an ambivalent meaning in the sentence as a whole. The primary connotation is to defeat Hillary but there's a strong secondary connotation of "beating" as in physically beating Hillary or in visiting upon her a humiliation and degradation that Hillary would deserve as a sub-human "bitch." The implied violence is captured by another person in the room who jokes that "she's talking about my ex-wife" and the idea of "beating my ex-wife." The implied violence deepens the racial analogy. Asking "how do we beat the bitch" is the functional equivalent of asking "how do we keep blacks in their place." Except that conservatives are not so nice as to use the term "black." And the implied answer to that question is "with all the violence we need."

GIULIANI'S APPEAL. As I've already mention, Talking Points Memo emphasized McCain's agreement with the questioner in calling the question an "excellent question." Actually, that's not the case. True, McCain did break up in laughter over the question. But he also made important gestures to reincorporate Hillary Clinton into symbolic humanity. Most significantly, he referred to Hillary by a name as "Sen. Clinton." By referring to her name, McCain brought the discussion out of the stock symbolism of bigotry and into a world where people can compete and disagree without dehumanizing to the nth degree. In that context, he could then talk about his respect for her and his respect for the Democratic Party despite his many disagreements.

But that probably wasn't the answer that McCain's questioner was looking for. To find the "right" right-wing answer, she's going to have to look at Rudy Giuliani. According to the Wall Street Journal, Rudy Giuliani appeals to Republicans primarily because of his carefully calculated image of "confidence" and strength."

"It's all about leadership," says Scott Reed, a Republican strategist who ran Bob Dole's 1996 campaign but is unaffiliated this time around. "It's all about him being a tough guy who won't take c--- from anyone. Social conservatives have embraced this and have overlooked the traditional issues of life, marriage and the Second Amendment for the guy," Mr. Reed adds.

To be more precise, not taking "crap" means "dishing out a lot of crap" without "apologizing" for it. It means that Rudy is going to engage in a lot of insults and put-downs as ways to display his aggression. As Giuliani has shown with his fibs about health policy, he's not going to care much about the accuracy of his claims and that he's especially not going to back down on any of his inaccurate claims. Like Bush, Giuliani will also refuse to disown the inevitable smear campaigns against Hillary and view them as "just politics."

And that's what Republican voters want to see. They want to see Republican candidates "beat" and humiliate Hillary Clinton as well as defeat her in the election. They want to "beat the bitch" with insults, innuendo, and smears and they want to feel good about the beatings they dish out to her.

And Giuliani is doing his best to project himself as the guy who's going to make Republicans feel good.

THE PROSPECT. To the extent that Giuliani or another Republican nominee refers his insults and innuendo to real missteps on the part of Hillary Clinton, they have a chance to succeed. But I don't think they're going to have that much self-discipline. Following the example of McCain's questioner, the Republicans will attempt to give Hillary Clinton a "beating." And I think that's going to backfire with a lot of women and moderate voters who are much more suspicious of the right than they are of Hillary.

Vote Republican.

Vote Republican. And it would work well were there one qualified candidate worth his/her moral (Christian) fiber. The "Right" has become a pseudo-Christian movement with all the commitment of a once a week confessional; the 6 days left in the week are spent debasing Clinton, shrilling on talk radio, rubbing elbows with oversized man in custom tailored expensive suits, exchanging pleasantries, tea and crumpets and $2000 appetizer plates, and lets not forget the obligatory, gratuitous oval office debacle circle jerk. There is a word we used to call these people who sit atop fences - Luke warm* - and they being conservative Christian folk, should bend down before their maker and ask: So, which man or woman is going to uphold the values we once stood for and lived by? is there even one running who has the spiritual depth to profess the relationship with God that conservatives all esteem so highly? Giuliani should be a no brainier. A man whose personal life tends to go in and out desert sand storms; his greatest hope is that the American Right doesn't recognize the mirage way up ahead.

It's time to wake up. Conservatives need to shed the morality weight; it wasn't adding up well with the outcome; hand it over to the man or woman who will make it a 7 day a week priority. Giuliani, down on his knees seeking counsel from a higher power several times a week? I don't see it happening and I think we've already seen what Rudy can do on two feet and a mop (I think that was a mop...if not, I don't need to know - accept my apology in advance)

The trouble with conservatives today is that they have become stupid and easily led, falling all over themselves for whomever espouses moral values regardless the deep moral debt building up in those they place their trust.

There may be a few more conservatives on this board who feel like I do. So come on over to my voting booth and bring a cup of snickerdoodle coffee. I take half and half. Love to meet the other conservatives who just voted democrat; because by God, we're looking for a something that behaves like a moral compass and it doesn't matter which party raised him up.

My post may seem like a late night acid trip. It's really more a late night Ambien trip. Ambien, if not taken precisely as prescribed, will actually trip one out if they're not about to sleep.

You touched on some stuff that I can't address. I recall it involved beating women and slaves. Guess I'll have to re-read it all over again. Way too late for that

*Revelation 3:16 'So because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of My mouth'.

ric:

In dog world, it pretty much means; "which stud will breed the bitch?" You Senator McCain? You Rudy Guiliani? Which one of you studs will breed the female in heat and quiet her.

Euphemism at best amd said in a manner as I described. If she is satisfied, she will not be a bother is the intent.