Letters to the Editor
debaser
Published Letters: 656 Editor's Choice: 11
-
with all due respect ljwalker
[Read the article: My last word (for now) on sexism]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]In addition -- and this is what progressives do to her -- they bash her because she isn't enough of a feminist according to "their" definition (using as an example her use of military authorization vote).
I think this is a bit of conflation between "progressives" and the rest of the spectrum. I suspect that the kind of people that populate this message board (trolls excepted of course) really do hold Clinton to a more strict feminism than say...my mom for example ;) This isn't necessarily a bad thing, or even a strictly Clinton issue. To a large percentage of "progressives" Obama's healthcare plan is woefully inadequate, but I suspect that for others, it's rampaging socialism at its finest.
Actually, this conflation (for lack of a better word) is a large part of what's been niggling me about this thread and the video that generated it (remember alice? this is a song about alice - sorry, I just HAD to get an Arlo reference in here somewhere ;) The video showed right wing blowhards (and Matthews - same diff) being, well blowhards. Remember these are the types of people that call John Edwards a "faggot". But from this we extrapolate that those who are voting in the Democratic Primary (the great majority of whom are, you know, Democrats) are holding the same kinds of odious opinions (again, trolls on this site excepted - they prolly do hold those opinions). Perhaps this helps to explain why this debate has rankled many male posters here...it paints us with the same brush as the people we hate the most (the Glenn fucking Becks of the world)
cheers
-
@AKA smith
[Read the article: My last word (for now) on sexism]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]See? I knew we could find some common ground! Poverty actually IS the central issue (although the pinko commie in me would say the real issue is unfettered capitalim ;)
"When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a Communist." - Helder Camara
(qouted for no real reason other than the fact that I like it :)
-
@Geoff Randall
[Read the article: No, Hillary Clinton shouldn't be winning]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Thanks for bringing up McLuhan. I've been thinking about this election and McLuhan (and Northrop Frye) for a little while now. I think he really wouldn't be all that surprised at how things have shaken down. He thought that people are far more receptive to "cool" (not in the finger-snapping jazz way ;) politicians rather than "hot" ones. I think that a large part of the unspoken, or subconscious (i'm not sure i like that word, but it'll do) appeal of Obama is that he's the ultimate "cool" candidate, whereas Clinton is decidedly "hot". I think alot of the complaints about her being "shrill" boil down to an unease with hot politicians...i think that no matter how much we like firebrands in the abstract, they turn us off when confronted with them. As I've noted elsewhere, Obama just oozes "cool", it's not a coincidence that he looks so comfortable in a suit, he looks genuinely comfortable with who he is (whether this is a campaign tactic or not is up for debate, but the fact that it resonates is, I think, not)
This is also the tightrope that McCain must walk...he tries his best to be cool (witness his quiet "my friends" trope) but the anger is always bubbling under the surface. I think this is in part why he looks so ill at ease of late - he's really trying to contain an essential part of his personality.
Back to Clinton though, I think one of the major flaws in her campaign is that she didn't channel the inner female "cool"...but instead tried to highlight herself as a firebrand "fighter". It doesn't look genuine to see her having rousing rallies (part of that is unfortunately due to her natural voice - it just doesn't carry as well)...the thing about her New Hampshire moment was that she looked, well, comfortable in that round table setting. I realize that saying this is pretty close to sexist - but I also think that you should play to your strengths...and that it is possible to use preconceived gender notions to your advantage. I'd wager that a part of lack of success is because she didn't do this but rather went the "fighter" route.
whoa...i just went on one helluva weird tangent there...i think i'll stop now :)
cheers!
-
@dataguyx
[Read the article: No, Hillary Clinton shouldn't be winning]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Cheers: To liking my last post, I wasn't sure if I made any sense, guess I did :)
Jeers: To your last "AD" insult, that one cuts pretty close to home dude, not cool, and inaccurate.
as ever,
-
nice work King
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I liked this piece...nice to see you getting into the down and dirty world of, you know, reporting. Your writing chops often surprises me (as your analysis is usually so spot on that I expect a drop off in the style column)...so...uhh...good work :)
although I must admit I was hoping for something a little more exciting to happen yesterday. God help me, I laughed myself silly watching the Paris brou-ha-ha...I have a soft spot for the French and their willingness to riot at the drop of a hat :)
oh and p.s GO HABS!!!!
-
@unschooler
[Read the article: My last word (for now) on sexism]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]thanks for giving me something to ponder...I hadn't really thought about the whole "woman vs black man" thing that Clinton says. I suspect that you're right, and it should provide me with at least a couple more hours of mulling.
cheers