Yes, I am voting for Obama - but I’m holding my nose. And this is the LAST TIME I’m going to vote holding my nose. If the country wasn’t in such a freakin’ meltdown right now, I’d be voting for Cynthia McKinney.
At my son’s wedding, one of the guests (a college professor) came up to me and said, “I guess you’re working on the campaign, right?” I smiled back and said, “No.” He looked baffled and said, “Oh.”
His wife, a leading consultant on geriatric policy and a former Hill staffer, came over to me later and confided her husband was one of Obama’s senior advisors on Social Security. “Are you working for him?” she said.
“No,” I told her. “After what happened in the primary to Hillary Clinton, there’s no way. I’m not working against Obama, or for McCain, but I’m not helping them, either.”
She nodded vehemently. “Exactly! I feel the same way.”
There’s a lot of us out there. We won’t forget.
actually, i think anglachel’s post is based on some pretty sloppy reasoning. sure, there were people who said they were “on the left” who said some nasty stuff during the primary relating to the clintons. but that doesn’t mean that every liberal is responsible for what happened, or that no liberal may ever mention the fact that the mccain-palin crowd is calling for obama’s death.
it’s one thing to call out olbermann if he decries the threats against obama by pointing out that he once called for hillary clinton to be beaten. that’s actual hypocrisy. but to extend that hypocrisy charge to any liberal, no matter what he or she actually said or did during the primary, even to krugman who was himself a clinton supporter, makes no sense at all.
Cynthia McKinney? Isn’t that the crazy woman who assaulted a capitol police officer but thought she had some special rights because of her position? Good heavens, I would hope someone wouldn’t just vote for her because she’s female.
And I’m going through the “can I write in Ron Paul?” stage.
Susie,
whether you vote for him enthusiastically or holding your nose makes absolutely ZERO difference.
If you vote for him, you’re implicitly condoning everything he’s done.
but that doesn’t mean that every liberal is responsible for what happened, or that no liberal may ever mention the fact that the mccain-palin crowd is calling for obama’s death.
Beg to differ. First off, Anglachel quite specifically says that it’s “A GOOD THING” that Liberals are raising a ruckus about the McCain-Palin crowd.
Secondly, every liberal is responsible for what happened, because (with notable few exceptions, mostly Melissa McEwan and her Hillary Sexism Watch), no one spoke up. To paraphrase, All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men (and women) to do nothing.
because (with notable few exceptions, mostly Melissa McEwan and her Hillary Sexism Watch), no one spoke up
on the contrary, quite a lot of people spoke up. at least it seemed to be the major point of every political discussion i had from around february to may. i had a long discussion about sexism in the race during an obama campaign party last spring. the weird thing is that there were a lot of obama supporters who didn’t like the sexism in the race and yet this was completely ignored by the clinton people, even when i tried to point it out here and in other blogs.
“whether you vote for him [Obama] enthusiastically or holding your nose makes absolutely ZERO difference.
If you vote for him, you’re implicitly condoning everything he’s done.”
Yep. You’re condoning the unethical and undemocratic actions of Dem party leaders as well as the Obama campaign. In addition to the misogyny directed toward Hillary Clinton and her supporters, there was also caucus shenanigans in the form of fraud and voter suppression/disenfranchisement.
snuzy mandrake, beg you to actually read anglachel’s post. and follow the link to Cannonfire, who has some examples of the stomach-churning stuff that was actualy said and typed about Hillary Clinton. That it was never made a big deal of is definitely is an indictment of EVERYONE who identifies themselves as being liberal. And yes, of Barack-The Proud Sexist-Obama, who, yesterday again, merely grinned in a national debate about the T-shirts in his campaign proclaiming ‘Sarah Palin is a CUNT’.
i did read the post. and i acknowledge that there was a ton of awful sexist stuff during the primary. the problem is that this is a society with a lot a sexism and racism. this election, because it features both black and female candidates has kicked up quite a lot of disgraceful stuff from people on all sides of the political spectrum. it’s a symptom of our sick society. i’ve never said otherwise, and indeed, i probably had that particular conversation more times in the first six months of this year than i ever have in my life. which is why it strikes me as wrong to say that no one spoke out about it or no one made a big deal of it. quite a few people did.
Nice try on the “pox on both their houses”, Snuzy Mandrake. Diluting the issue is a nice diversion tactic.
How about providing links, oh say, from Daily Kos or DU showing us the brave souls who stood up against the sexism and misogyny and race-baiting unleashed by the Obama campaign and his supporters.
The thing is, we always expected racism and sexism from the right. That’s their stock in trade. (What used to be) Our side was supposed to be the one that knew better. Well, obviously not. That’s what the problem is.
the weird thing is that there were a lot of obama supporters who didn’t like the sexism in the race and yet this was completely ignored by the clinton people, even when i tried to point it out here and in other blogs.
Maybe because you were bringing that up secondhand? And couldn’t point out any concrete examples of Obama supporters deriding misogyny besides “Oh, I TOTALLY heard someone talking about sexism at an Obama rally, srsly!”
I had my eyes peeled. If you want to post an anti-misogyny post at, say, dailyKos dated anywhere between Feb-June, I’ll welcome it.
I have to admit, this is a new tactic. I’ve seen denialists (”there was no sexism!”) to revisionists (”ok there was, but it wasn’t that bad”) but this new version (”OK, there was sexism, but Obama’s supporters TOTALLY were FIGHTING that shit, man! They weren’t the worst perpetrators of it themselves! Nuh uh! Clinton supporters just totally ignored it when Obama’s supporters were championing women’s rights, for serious!”) is a totally absurd revisionist mutation that I never saw coming. But probably should have.
You vote for him because we’re in a crisis. Hmmm . . . make sure there’s a crisis next time, too.
Re the “all liberals” straw man.
Did the Obama campaign leverage CDS, sexism, and misogyny in the primaries? No question. Some liberals called bullsh*t. Were they very much in the minority? No question. Were they very much in the minority in the “progressive” blogosphere? No question. And no, many will not forget. What to do with the not forgetting is another question entirely. Incidentally, the denialism and revisionism is already starting, at least on my blog. Since the “hurt feelings” and “get over it” talking points didn’t take.
P.S. gmnadit writes:
“You vote for him because we’re in a crisis. Hmmm . . . make sure there’s a crisis next time, too.”
Shock doctrine, anyone?
Oh, and I forgot to say, Susie, thanks for standing up in those conversations, because you were standing up for all of us.
let’s just stop the bullshit about the cunt shirts right now.
those shirts were made by a group of bike messengers/artists –http://crucialbrutal.com/–in Philly that have absolutely nothing to do with Barack Obama.
They make all sorts of t-shirts, typically profane.
Their latest big seller is one that has the LA dodgers logo with a “Phuk” written over it in Phillies script.
I suspect their next one will feature a Devil Rays logo with “Phuk” written over it in Phillies script as well.
Your entire argument is built on a large amount of hyperbole and bullshit, quit lying about shit and you might get a better reception moving forward.
obama has nothing to do with the “sarah palin is a cunt” shirts, asking questions about illegal immigrant drivers licenses in a debate is NOT the same thing as being beaten and gang-raped by a group of black teens in Central Park, and there are plenty of reasons other than some fantasy land accusations of “violent misogyny” for the defeat of Hillary Clinton.
I am sure HRC will be quite fine as she continues to serve as the Senator from New York with her home in chataqua, with her fortune of 80 million dollars, the Big Dawg, and Chelsea.
I am sure Sarah Palin will similarly survive the “violence” of a few bike messengers, assorted hipsters, and others wearing shirts proclaiming the wearer’s beliefs vis-a-vis her cuntiness as she rakes in her $50k appearance fees and shoots animals from her helicopter.
This is what ties William Ayers to Timothy McVeigh, and why ethical people shun Ayers to this day. He ordered the murder of people for ideological reasons and has never repented of his acts.
This is ignorance or an outright LIE.
In fact they made sure no one was harmed. The only ones who died from a Weatherman bomb was some Weathermen who blew themselves up.
Get a grip people!
Whatever bad blood remains from the primary should be put behind us now. The last three debates have given us a look at what a President McCain would be like, and as for the possibility of a Vice President Palin, see “The Handmaid’s Tale” for a preview.
Thanks for posting that.
Raven writes:
Whatever bad blood remains from the primary should be put behind us now.
What “bad blood”? We’re just talking about campaign tactics — and successful ones. So, surely we can expect what “worked” for the Obama campaign in the primary to be continued, and even to intensify, after he wins the general, as I fully expect him to do?
Steveeboy;
“I am sure Sarah Palin will similarly survive the “violence” of a few bike messengers, assorted hipsters, and others wearing shirts proclaiming the wearer’s beliefs vis-a-vis her cuntiness as she rakes in her $50k appearance fees and shoots animals from her helicopter.”
Are you fucking sure she’ll survive? See, that’s the question that women talk about every fucking day of their lives. Is this woman hater the one who will beat the fuck out of me? Is this the woman hater who will rape me? Is this the woman hater that will kill me?
AND THAT IS THE PROBLEM THAT UNDERLIES ALL THIS TALK. GET IT?
And I’d like to say to any one who may be feeling coerced into voting a certain way: in the privacy of the voting booth you have the right to vote for any one you want. It’s your vote, your voice. Yours.
k, he doesn’t get it. It’s never occurred to him that women live under the threat of physical violence, let alone the casual verbal abuse that goes on every day of our lives. It’s all a game to him.
Still; sometimes you have to tell somebody he’s a fucking idiot. He’s just lucky that way.
And yeah, I put up with more than my share of crap today.
right,
tell it to the women wearing shirts that say sarah palin is a cunt.
you are the ones with no fucking clue.
And the sooner you quit trying to claim that words on a shirt, debate questions, face scratches, and the babblings of pundits are akin to real violence or gang rape, the better.
Sarah Palin is no feminist, she’s a barbie-fascist like Coulter, Ingraham, and the rest of the right wing nutjobs.
You want to see a woman hater, you open your fucking eyes and watch John McCain say “health of the mother” with that sneer in the debate last night–the same John McCain you sore losers have been helping ever since you got your feelings hurt cuz your candidate lost the primary.
Go ahead, strike a blow for feminism by voting for that asshole and his clueless sidekick because somebody with no connection to Barack Obama printed a t-shirt with a word you don’t like.
That’ll show ‘em!
You keep setting up this straw man. I’m not saying I’ll vote for John McCain - in fact, I’ve said the opposite. Liberals should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time: Opposing misogyny does not equate to supporting Republicans.
I’m saying that LIBERALS WHO KEPT THEIR MOUTHS SHUT ABOUT THE SEXISM IN THE PRIMARY DISGUST ME. They enabled the behavior and they made it that much more likely that this will now become STANDARD behavior in Democratic primaries.
And how can that be good news for women, who make up the backbone of the Democratic party?
The question I keep asking, Susie — How can you build a progressive movement on the basis of misgogny and false charges of racism? And the only answer I’ve been able to come up with is that you can’t.
sorry susie, none of that stuff was directed at you.
My only thought for you is that unless we implement a parliamentary system here ASAP, you–and me– will be holding our noses many more times in the future (but in this election I won’t be holding my nose at all).
And I don’t believe–as some argue–that the entire primary “was based on violent misogyny” so I don’t think it’s going to be a main feature of future races nor do I think that women have been set back because the candidate that happened to be a woman did not win in this case–just as I do not think that mexican-americans have been set back because my favorite, Bill Richardson, got his ass handed to him
it’s a fact of life in our party that everyone has their own issues and privileges them over others. some do race, some do class, some do gender. That “holy trinity” is a tough nut to crack. you can find just as much perceived– and real –racist garbage over at the confluence and other puma sites as you can perceived –and real– sexist crap at other places.
but that doesn’t mean that barack obama is a “violent misogynist,” and that doesn’t mean that Duncan, Marty, or Josh Marshall are now members of the patriarchal oppressor class as so many of the disgruntled HRC people like to claim these days.
–but that is not to say that there aren’t some libs that have issues with women or minorities.
we’ve got three weeks, and it has long been time to focus on annihilating the assholes that have done their best to ruin our once great country.
everything else is just white noise at this point, and I still have a hard time not thinking that a certain portion of this mess is not the fault of highly skilled rat fuckers from the GOP.
It doesn’t matter if you didn’t direct it at Susie. The problem is that you are not hearing what she says, or what I say, for that matter.
You can’t even see your own anger. How could you recognize anyone else’s?
i got a call from obama’s campaign tonight asking me to volunteer..i declined. i told her he was getting my vote…by default. i told her that i couldn’t get enthusiastic about a black man who thinks that ’separate but equal’ is a good thing for gays. Gavin Newsom for President!
“k,”
my “anger,” such as it exists in this case, has nothing to do with gender, race, or class.
I have little need to listen to people–like you, who equate words on t-shirts–or song lyrics, or any other form of artistic expression–with actual violence and by doing so trivialize the actual violence.
People that claim debate questions are akin to “wilding,” or that Barack Obama is a “violent misogynist,” don’t deserve to be taken seriously because they are not making a serious argument, they are spewing bullshit.
–Nor do people that claim the hipsters making t-shirts in South Philly that say “sarah palin is a cunt” are actually working for the Obama campaign.
So, you get sarcasm and disdain because it is pretty unbelievable at this late date, with all that is blowing up around us, that disgruntled HRC supporters cannot do what HRC HERSELF is doing and has asked her supporters to do–help elect our democratic nominee.
You want to see anger and hatred of women, I suggest again you watch that debate last night when McCain puts his air quotes around the word “health” and sneers about what a joke it is to allow a woman to make her own choice on that basis.
My anger remains directed at the right-wing lunatics that have ruined the country and those ostensible “liberals” that are STILL whining about the primary and trying to aid the McPalin ticket.
Oh, bull shit. Exactly WHAT was done to Hillary. She played with the same rules that Obama played with. He played better. She lost. He didnt’ induldge in push polls to beat her. He didn’t go dirty. In fact, it was she who toyed with the concept of going dirty. To her credit, she didn’t have in in her heart to really do him in a Rovian way.
Obama won. His policies are as good or better than hers. We have a great candidate. It is illogical to take this kind of position….I’m sure I’ll be heard. God, what does he have to do to win you over?
Gug
Just vote, for God’s sake, and stop DREAMING.
It has come down to McCain vs. Obama, and if I weren’t so tired …
I could explain it all to you children.
Just from my own personal perspective: I supported Hillary Clinton, despite her being essentially a NAFTA New Democrat, for the self-serving reason that I thought she had the better chance to win in November. Obama struck me then as rather naive and Hillary came “pre-slimed” by the Right Wing Howler Monkey Media Chorus. She had already taken every poisonous thing they could throw at her and emerged victorious. I was a Hillary delegate to the Texas Democratic Convention, and while I thought the Obama campaign was a little tin-eared (she conceded during the convention and the Obama delegates should’ve been prepared with some kind of peace-making gesture, even just cheering her name) I did not see any “violent mysogyny” by anybody associated with Obama’s campaign or any of his delegates (as opposed to random anonymous assholes on the internet) and for all the reports of caucus shenanigans in Texas, the issue was never raised in committee or on the floor, and believe me, Texas delegates will get into a bench-clearing brawl at the drop of a hat.
Susie, I appreciate your post on this issue, but after months and months and FUCKING MONTHS of listening to this, wobbly up there finally did it for me.
They don’t hear us, don’t listen, and don’t care.
I’ll vote downticket.
Hear that, ladies? All those references to Hillary being “taken behind the barn” or “into a back room” to be “taken care of”? Comparing her to a “monster” that needs to be “slain”? Figments of your imagination! Totally! (These would be the “denialist” breed of Obama’s supporters, doing everything they can to make this election a squeaker.
Hint, dudez: Go here. Read every single entry that’s linked at the bottom of the page. (All of them. Otherwise, you are guilty of being willfully blind.) Then come back and talk to us about how easy Hillary’s had it.
Please. I dare you.
I disagree with almost all of Anglachel’s post, especially the tortured bit of logic about Hillary really comparing HERSELF to RFK; I think that her accusation of Obama supporters using RW talking points is also a little rich given that she tsk-tsks about Ayers in the same breath.
People in the blogosphere love to complain about the MSM, and they’re right up to a point - the media has botched this whole thing - this potentially fascinating, meaty, historic election. They’ve assumed the role of that kid on the playground who doesn’t even have the gumption to be a bully and instead just yells “Fight! Fight! Fight!” I can’t believe the amount of time we collectively wasted asking “well, do you find THIS thing X candidate said to be offensive?”
The problem is that the blogosphere has no right to complain in this instance, because it’s been considerably worse over here. Did Obama secretly flip Hillary the bird? Is Hillary secretly hoping Obama’s going to get assassinated? What’s up with these awful Palin t-shirts? Why won’t McCain do a major policy speech denouncing some random idiot at his rallies?
The beautiful thing is that no one in their right mind cares about any of this.
People who care about materially improving women’s lives are going to vote for the candidate who will do that. People scared of losing jobs and savings will vote for the candidate who’s best able to convince them that he or she’ll be able to shore up the economy. People who want us out of Iraq will vote for the candidate who’s upfront about giving a timetable for our withdrawal. By these, and by a number of other measures, Obama seems to be coming out on top.
Despite all of the media din and the blog bullshit, people are figuring it out for themselves. 70,000,000 people watched the Palin/Biden debate, 69,500,000 of which (at least!) have never heard of Josh Marshall. I dunno, getting this infuriated about fairly marginal (in the grand scheme of things) talking heads and websites seems a little beside the point.
rkmk,
a collection of random posts from random media pundits and assorted idiots saying stupid things on fox news do nothing to support the claim that obama’s campaign was based on violent misogyny or that the shit hillary took from such idiots is somehow more offensive than the same sort of racist crap obama had to take from similar sources.
again, I am quite sure that HRC will be fine in her position as a Senator, with her fortune in excess of 80 million dollars, her nice home in Chataqua, her husband the big dawg, and her fine daughter Chelsea.
you vote for who you want, but when you do I suggest you keep this in mind–from the same source you link to above:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v642/shakespeares_sister/mccain/McCain_Health_large.jpg
a collection of random posts from random media pundits and assorted idiots saying stupid things on fox news do nothing to support the claim that obama’s campaign was based on violent misogyny or that the shit hillary took from such idiots is somehow more offensive than the same sort of racist crap obama had to take from similar sources.
1. They’re not “random”, they quite clearly express a pattern.
2. Obama and his campaign benefitted from the violent misogyny, and they refused to call it out and say that it wasn’t acceptable. He engaged in it mildly himself: “Likeable enough.” “Tea parties.” “Claws.” “Sweetie.” Same with the DNC - they wanted the Clintons purged from the party so badly, for their own personal gain, they let it slide. The thing is, it’s not about Hillary. Attacks on her rooted in the ‘problem’ of her gender are attacks on every. single. woman. Every one of us. And since the boys seem to be so bad at math, that’s something like, what, 53% of the electorate?
3. The shit that went down wasn’t more offensive, it was equally offensive and wrong. What was more offensive was the Left’s flat refusal to recognize, call out, or address it. To even acknowledge - publically - that it was happening.
And YOU’RE STILL DOING IT.
In short: Way to prove the point of Anglachel’s post, you dismissive douche.
So, are the people trying to excuse the misogyny in the campaign because it didn’t come directly from Obama perfectly sanguine with the fact that there are a lot of angry white people shouting racist and violent stuff at McCain-Palin rallies because, well, it’s not coming directly from McCain or Palin?
Didn’t think so.
on the contrary, quite a lot of people spoke up. at least it seemed to be the major point of every political discussion i had from around february to may.
I seem to remember that you dismissed a lot of it when it did come up. Just as it’s being dismissed now, though not by you (you’ve changed your tune).
You needn’t hold your nose and vote for Obama. He has it wrapped up. You are free to vote for McKinney. I’m in a deep blue state so I was always going to do that. Someone in a deep red state could vote 3rd party as well, without feeling like they voted against the country getting back on track (like either McCain or Obama would make that happen). And now, there are enough swing states wrapped up that Obama can’t lose. So go ahead, vote for McKinney!
Anglachel is exactly right. Liberal women only from now on.
“Obama and his campaign benefitted from the violent misogyny, and they refused to call it out and say that it wasn’t acceptable.”
Okay, I just have to respond to this — I would have been perfectly happy with either Obama or Hillary until fairly late in the campaign, but what finally moved me irrevocably into the Obama camp was teh manner in which Hillary and her campaign benefited from extremely overt racism and then refused to call it out and say it wasn’t acceptable. If you’ll recall, a lot of her late-primary wins were big victories in Appalachian states where 1 in 5 voters were proud to declare that they simply would not vote for a black man. I, personally, would have been appalled to have won a victory tainted by such attitudes were I in Hillary’s place, and her unwillingness to come out and make any sort of comment in opposition to the widespread racist attitudes among Appalachian voters was very off-putting to me.
Alan: Once again, missing the point.
What drives racism? Ignorance, mostly. Lack of education and opportunity, for a lot of people. Drawing those people into the Democratic party with the promise of a better life wasn’t exactly a dumb move on Clinton’s part - it certainly worked for her husband, and it’s a smart way to widen the base back to pre-1972 levels.
But see, I can excuse racism and bigotry in uneducated poor people. Given financial security and a better life, their prejudices tend to lighten up.
I can’t - and won’t - excuse misogyny among the privileged white elites who should know better.
Furthermore, when I was watching, for example the Kentucky results on CNN, Anderson Cooper read the question as “Is race a consideration in your vote tonight?” and 1/5 said “Yes”, and then the commentators started tsking about how upsetting that was - assuming that all the respondents were white, for one thing, and assuming further that all the white people were voting for Clinton. Neither of those assumptions are part of the question. Some of those they could very well have been AA voters (or other minorities) who want to see a minority in office to best represent their interests (which is a totally valid motivation, in my opinion), or white voters who are sympathetic and voted with a similar motivations - that minorities should be represented in major office. While I have no doubt that a percentage of those voters were white folk voting for Clinton for nasty reasons, I have yet to see hard numbers from pollsters on those who were white (or other minorities) who specifically said they were voting for Clinton due to race.
But aside from all that, while Anderson Cooper read those numbers out (regardless of the fuzzy reasoning they were using to evaluate that poll) they all expressed concern that racism is bad and the results troubling. Meanwhile, to this date the very existence of sexism poisoning the discourse is dismissed or ignored, let alone the Left condemning it.
Hey RKMK, just because your question deserved to be answered:
I think I can call out sexism and still (7+ / 0-)
support Edwards, (and Obama as my second choice) without throwing the election to Hillary. I believe that the Republicans want to run against her. That doesn’t stop me from respecting her, and criticizing sexist attacks on her.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/9/15149/90400/455/433806#c80
…took me five minutes. In fact, this thread is full of the kind of thing you said didn’t exist. I have PLENTY more.
That thread is from early January. Clinton-friendly bloggers got ran out of Kos circa late-January to mid-February, and lost their damn minds for the next 4, 5 months (if they ever got them back.)
That is Kossacks lost their damn minds.
I don’t think it’s fair to blame Obama because he supposedly benefitted in the primaries from the sexist attitudes of some voters without noting that there’s at least as much evidence that Hillary benefitted from the racist attitudes of other voters. While I agree that Obama should have denounced sexist attacks on Hillary, she should’ve given the same speech against racist attacks on him.
Sigh…
How ’bout you just refrain from using it (9+ / 0-)
I’m a man, and an enthusiastic Obama supporter, and find her tactics reprehensible, but no there’s no reason to use such sexist language. It lacks class.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3/22/161812/428/776/482309#c632
March 22, 2008
Again, took me 2 minutes and there are many, many other anti-misogynistic comments on the post.
Susie, thanks so much for writing this. I’m going to do the same because I’m in a swing state, but it’s a hard decision.
Please do not vote for him!
How is it different? if you support him then you are helping democrats to think that it was ok to push women out of election!
Think about it!
McCain 2008.
Hillary 2012!!!!!!
“if you support him then you are helping democrats to think that it was ok to push women out of election!
Think about it!”
Okay, I did and it’s giving me a cerebral hemorrhage. Are you seriously suggesting it’s sexist to win an election against a female candidate? And are you really suggesting striking a blow for feminism by supporting a candidate (McCain) who is anti-feminist in pretty much every respect? Whose running mate opposes abortion even for rape victims? Who charged rape victims for their own rape kits? Yeesh!
Right, Lucy: You show ‘em!
Vote McCain and punish those Obama supporters! You can contribute to making abortion is illegal — as it is in El Salvador, where women are sentenced to years in prison. And forget about birth control — it’s just a form of abortion anyway, right? And only wussy liberals screech about equal pay for equal work!
End of sarcasm. You need to consider WHO your candidate will name to the Supreme Court: Will it be a Scalia/Roberts/Alito/Thomas clone who wants to return women to the status of chattel property? Or someone as open-minded and progressive as a Ruth Bader Ginsburg? Your Presidential vote has CONSEQUENCES.
The idea that Obama was so horribly sexist in the primaries that this is even an issue is ridiculous.
There is no perspective whatsoever.
Did some sexist stuff happen? Yes.
Was Hillary racist in some of her tactics? Uhh, hell yes.
If Hillary had won and blacks were saying “Well I’ll hold my nose and vote for Hillary” you’d be shocked.
I dare say that you would call it sexist.
How on earth do you think this sort of thing looks to black people who believe that Hillary was the one using the underhanded tactics in the primaries and that Obama has taken the highroad with both Clinton and McCain?
All I am saying is that if you want to look at real sexism, look at the candidate who chose an unqualified woman because he thought democratic women were too stupid to look beyohnd gender to policies.
Without reading every comment that went before this one, for myself personally, a lot of what I ignored was because the complaints against it weren’t accurate. When it was said that the male candidate’s appearance wouldn’t have been made an issue, I thought back to John Edwards’ $400 haircuts or comments that Sen. Kerry looked like Lurch or the tree throwing the apples in “The Wizard of Oz.”
Sometimes it’s hot in the kitchen. Get used to it (while still decrying actual sexism, as opposed to generic ad hominem attacks).
Secondly, if guilt by association is valid to this degree, then absolutely everybody is complicit for the patriarchy we operate under. If you’re not part of a work stoppage, then you’re part of the problem.
I used to be a liberal until the Democrats took a big step to the left and I became a - what? Moderate? Centrist? Who can tell in these crazy times. I have all kinds of good reasons for not supporting Obama but add to them that he has not adapted his economic policies to reflect the current situation and as such, they stink. As a deeply offended and outraged Hillary supporter, I was never going to vote for him, but at least before the economy started careening down the path to total destruction I thought maybe he couldn’t do too much more damage (beyond setting back race relations a few decades and legitimizing misogyny in the name of Democratic politics). Now it seems pretty clear he will be an unmitigated disaster if he tries to follow through on the policies he has outlined.
It seems the pendelum has swung back too far and the damage to the country caused by the extremes on the left will be just as great as that done by those on the right. One of the problems with screwing the rich instead of the poor is that the rich don’t have to lie down and take it. They are free to pack up and head to more welcoming climes. Plus the very rich are very good at hiding their money from the taxman. Ditto corporations. Obama himself has millions invested in a money market fund that yields tax free income. I think Joe Biden is probably the only Senator who really believes paying taxes is patriotic.
Obama’s plans to institute policies that pay homage to those of the social democracies of Western Europe and Canada, and his recent allusions to FDR and new deal type programs may seem comforting at first glance, but perhaps he has misjudged the actual succes of those programs. The New Deal failed to rescue the American economy, instead it remained more or less stalled until WWII restarted the engine. Government tinkering with the economy, high taxation, and bloated entitlement programs led to economic malaise in Europe and Canada that has proven very persistent.
Obama’s new politics has been shown to be in actuality the worst kind of old politics. I am afraid his change we need will in fact turn out to be simply trotting out the same tired old ideas that have been tried before and failed. Even if they could potentially be tweaked to the point they might work here, now, when we face a deep recession, is not the time to implement them. We don’t need a grand social experiment foisted upon us, rather we need someone wise and reasonable at the helm. Someone sensible and able to compromise. We deserved much better; too bad we didn’t get it.
We don’t need a grand social experiment foisted upon us, rather we need someone wise and reasonable at the helm.
For me, the phrase “grand social experiment” makes me think of Sen. Clinton rather than Sen. Obama. I don’t see Obama’s tax policies as a shakedown of the rich but rather a sensible adjustment to the progressive income tax rate. If those claiming to ‘love America’ while they continue to plunder it, or hide their wealth offshore want to leave then good riddance.
Don’t forget that many of the Wall Street executive incentives were themselves tax dodges and that as far as corporate taxes go, Enron paid nothing for 4 of the 5 years before they went belly up.
No amount of nitpicking about Sen. Obama or how we missed getting a ‘good’ nominee when Sen. Clinton’s team mounted an incompetent campaign (to blaim it all on misogyny is a convenient dodge) will negate the fact that Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin will be a continuation of the worst of the Bush years.
Really? The last time you’re holding your nose. Well, that’ll show ‘em if you vote for Obama. Yep, that’ll hit the corrupt DNC and RBC and
that demagogue Obama. Boy, holding your nose? Man, you’re gonna hurt their feelings if you hold your nose—BUT still vote for them.
Well, I’m not holding my nose any longer. I’m gonna breathe the sweet clean air of voting against the nastiest piece of garbage to come down the political pipeline in my lifetime… I’m voting McCain and so will my fellow dems and ex-dems who really want to stop Obama and the New Corrupt DNC.
Palin + Mccain = PAIN
I don’t think Obama gives a damn if you remember or forget. He’s contemptuous of you, and still he’s got your vote. Why would anything change?
Susie, it feels like years since I’ve been to your blog, so in internet time that probably means it’s been a few months.
I’ve hopped in to say how sad I am to hear you say this. Obama has stood by or even abetted some of the most hideous bigotry I’ve seen, all while talking a good line. That actually makes it worse, as far as I’m concerned. Sexism, ageism, racism, homophobia, he’s used them all. The Democratic leadership has also stood by.
Why would anyone hold their nose and reward that behavior? Doesn’t that make you complicit?
And remember, as a practical matter, if McCain gets in, he’ll have a Democratic Congress to contend with. Not a whole lot he can do. And all the Republican shit is really going to hit the fan over the next four years. If the Democrats control Congress and the White House, it’ll probably be the last Democratic Administration for decades.
There are worse things than a McCain presidency. Rewarding bigotry is one. And decades of Rethugs is another.
Nope, can’t agree with you. I have NO CONFIDENCE that the Dems have the backbone to stand up to a Republican president. Where on earth would you get that idea?
contemptuous of women ….. check
Bigotry, homophobia …. check
ageism, misogyny…..check
racism, sexism …. check
no backbone …. check
Wow. Damn right. You vote for this guy.
Shorter Susie: He beat me up again, but this is the last time I’m taking him in, cooking him a nice hot dinner, rubbing his feet, and ironing his shirt! I swear! And anyway I won’t smile while I’m doing it so that will show him
Susie, thank you for what you wrote in the post. Then I got to the comments.
Thanks to all the trash in the comments including the c-word spelled out by “Stevieboy,” I will be voting for Cynthia. I was thinking, “Well it was so offensive but . . .” Like Susie. And I appreciate why you (Suzie) feel that way but the mean like Stevie and “The Angry Black GuY” have made it really clear to me that I will not be voting for Barack. Those two indicate just how much hatred and denial are still there.
I would thank you (Susie) for covering the sexism, I would thank Lambert (Corrente) and Paul at Corrente, and Ava and C.I. at The Third Estate Sunday Review. The five of you were the real leaders for me in calling out the sexism.