Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who's the most dirty and negative of them all?

Big Tent Democrat, a longtime supporter of Barack Obama who isn't afraid to also criticize his candidate of choice, has an excellent assessment of the negative politics in this election season over at Talk Left, titled "Why The Obama/Clinton Rules Led Us To This Rough Campaign":

When the Media and the Left blogs deplore the negativity of the Democratic presidential campaign, especially from the Clinton campaign, they ignore that they are a major reason why it has happened. Why? Because they attack the Clinton campaign no matter what it does while ignoring or defending every negative attack and questionable tactic of the Obama campaign.

The examples are legion. There is not an ounce of doubt that it was the campaigns challenging Hillary Clinton last fall that first engaged in negative attacks. The Media and some of the Left blogs were imploring the Barack Obama campaign to do that and certainly not a single word of reproach was written about it.

Led by Tim Russert and Brian Williams in the October 2007 debate, and followed eagerly by the entire NBC network and many Left blogs, the attacks on Hillary Clinton, especially on her character, were applauded on a daily basis. More.

I criticized the character attacks and dirty politics. I was quite alone in this at the time. (I dropped my endorsement of Chris Dodd as a result.) And Clinton suffered because of these personal attacks against her. To wit, Barack Obama was rewarded for his dirty politics last Fall.

The Obama/Clinton rules were in full flower in the run up to New Hampshire. The Media and some Left blogs led the charge - cheering negative attacks on Clinton, attacking and distorting the Clinton campaign's responses and attacking her for trumped charges of negative campaigning. They were ready to dance on Hillary Clinton's political grave.

Since then the rules have been locked in. No matter what happens or is said - to NBC and to some Left blogs, Hillary is evil and Obama is without sin. The coverage of the Nevada at large district issue led to the most ludicrous charges of "disenfranchisement" from the Media and some Left bloggers.

Then, expecting Clinton to be knocked out in Texas, NBC and some Left blogs were bitterly disappointed and argued Clinton should drop out even though she won both Ohio and Texas (some even float the idea that the Texas caucus results were the true contest in Texas, rather than what they were - proof positive that caucuses disenfranchise voters.)

Indeed, disenfranchisement now becomes the key guiding principle of some Obama supporters - they support it at every turn. My own personal anger is tied up in the attitudes about the Michigan and Florida revotes. Everyone knows that Barack Obama blocked revotes in Florida and Michigan. No one outside of Michigan and Florida seems to care.

Let me put it bluntly, the dirtiest politics practiced in this campaign was Barack Obama's blocking of the Michigan and Florida revotes. There is nothing uglier in politics, nothing dirtier, than blocking voters' chances to vote. The stain on Barack Obama for this will not wash away with me. (BTW, I am not saying Clinton would not have done the same thing, I THINK she would have. But she did not.) Especially since I believe it would have helped Obama in the general election.

The Clinton campaign realizes that no matter what they do, they will be declared evil. They realize that no matter what Obama does, he will be declared a saint. In such an environment, both the Clinton campaign and the Obama campaign will feel no restraint to their behavior.

The Media and some of the Left blogs have created this climate. Pols are pols and do what they do. I expect nothing else from them. I once expected honest assessments from some in the Media and from most in the Left blogs. I no longer do. Clearly neither do the campaigns.

If the headlines and coverage do not change no matter what is done by the campaigns, then you can not expect the headlines and coverage to matter to the campaigns in terms of tactics. For all those in the Media and in the Left blogs deploring the negativity of the campaign, I suggest they look in the mirror for the main culprits.

Personally, I think he's spot on concerning two of the main points: (1) the major role of the media and many Left bloggers in tolerating and even encouraging and helping in the negative politics from other candidates long before Hillary started using her own so-called "kitchen sink" tactics, and (2) how "the dirtiest politics practiced in this campaign was Barack Obama's blocking of the Michigan and Florida revotes".

And I should note that in saying this, by no means do I mean to suggest that I approve of Clinton's negative attacks.

Agree? Disagree?