In which I display my ignorance, irrationality, and insolence

In the competition for the Democratic Party nomination, it pains me to say, one thing has become increasingly clear: Hillary Clinton has what my grandmother used to call a "complex relationship with the truth." Or, as my wife says with her characteristic directness: "how can anyone take what Hillary says seriously?"

Going into this, I really didn't have any problem with Hillary Clinton. I was no fan of Bill Clinton in the 1990s, mostly because of policy, but also because of his ease with bullshit like "I smoked but didn't inhale" (was he lying to his friends then, or to us now?). Hillary struck me as smarter, and I wrote off the criticisms of her as an "American Evita" as annoyingly offensive comments from people who obviously knew nothing about Eva Perón and had every reason to smear Hillary Clinton.

But then someone actually challenged the Democratic establishment and, far more importantly, her position in it. Suddenly, caucuses don't matter because they favor candidates who ask more of their supporters than simply pulling a lever. After South Carolina, the votes of the most loyal sector of the Democratic voting public didn't matter. Then, those of us in "red" states don't matter either, because Democrats won't ever win in our states anyway. In short, the actual voters in this internal election simply can't be trusted, because they have committed the ultimate political sin -- the one that reveals their irrationality -- by not giving their votes to the only candidate that truly counts: Hillary Clinton. The kind of insolence shown by the people who decided that perhaps another candidate was better (gasp!), her campaign insists, is just the kind of thing that the Superdelegates were created to stop.

She knows better than we do, and that we don't realize this is a sign of our ignorance, shows that we have been duped, we are irrational. We must be stopped.

Privilege trumps democracy.