Letters to the Editor
-
Probably sexist but not the most important bad thing about the remark.
He is deliberately being condescending and spiteful, whether sexist or not. He does seem to be treating her like the Queen of Hearts in Alice in Wonderland: Off with his head! Off with his head! Wicked Witch of the West! Vicious butch-woman!
But I don't think his main goal is sexist - it's an underhanded, manipulative, highly personal, down in the gutter attack. He means to undermine her (like a real politician). And no one calls him on this and his many other attacks. , as they would in an ordinary, honest campaign. It's the media's obligation to do so, but they are so drunk on him they can't even see the reality here.
-
Clinton has won the states that count
Obama will certainly lose the general election if nominated. He has won in red states only. This means that in the general election, the electoral votes will go the the Republican candidate. Even if Obama would the popular vote in the general election, the electoral votes will decide who gets the presidency. This is why Gore lost the presidency even though he won the popular vote in 2000. Only HRC has proven she can win the big blue states and thier electoral votes. Obama should quit wining and try to prove he can win even one big blue state, otherwise, he is just not electable.
-
Madame Defarge, your concern for Paula Jones is really touching.
Nevertheless, being a woman, I believe that it is feigned. True concern would allow these women to live in peace. When Hillary Clinton announced that she was seeking the Democratic nomination, Monica Lewinsky spoke to an English journalist about her fears. Ten years on, she felt she could never get away from the scandal and the carrion-crows who are still feeding off it. Not that such a description would ever apply to you, of course.
Your chosen pseudonym does strike me as odd, however. Wasn't Madame Defarge that bloodthirsty woman in "A Tale of Two Cities" who sat beneath the guillotine in Paris, watching the heads roll while she continued with her knitting? You too are a very judgmental person who feels free to comment on the marriage of another couple as if you were their private confessor. Each person is unique so your tale of woe has no bearing on the Clintons' marriage.
-
Hillary's "periodic" and "desperate" negative ads
Hillary's ad-attacks on Barack are unconscionable and desperate (hint, hint, this is an antifeminist subliminal reference to that patriarchal drivel "Housewives" on TV, right?), and the ones defending her share the same culpability. Barack said what has clearly emerged as a pattern in Hillary's "periodic" attacks when she starts to lose political grounds to him; and whether his words have an antifeminist or sexist subtexts depend on the judgement made by those whose interest in the matter is clearly govererned by their ulterior motives. So don't pretend to be outraged by this particular sexist remark which it is not, when you are already outraged, because you have already lost the discourse. It is not what Barack said about Hillary; instead what Hillary has been saying about Barack that should be questioned on ethical terms.
-
Madame Defarge
The lies and peccadilloes of Bill Clinton and the "downfalls" of his administration are nothing compared with the outright blatant lies and corruption of Bush & CO. I doubt seriously anyone can compare the two, least of all the Republicans come November.
I think you also forget that Kennedy and MLK were both major philanderers, just as much of even more (in Kennedy's case) than even Bill actually. But no one speaks about THAT, do they? Nobody decries them or calls them sexist or misogynist, do they?
And I think you also forget the sheer number of people who remember both of them fondly and think that Bill's administration was one of the best this country has ever had. Many people would very much like that so-called "sordid mess" administration back, any day. If people thought it was so bad, Hillary Clinton would not still be a contender.
-
Stop Hillary supporters from feigned outrage!
Why this desperation to turn him into a sexist? Isn't it the same label that is foisted upon all and sundry indiscriminately who ever dare to question the motives of these so-called "feminists," whose rage is so clearly orchestrated by some nefarious political exigencies rather than a true slight?
-
Obama is a copycat
I just saw a news post online about Obama's plan to create jobs by investing in the energy economy. Can you say copycat? HRC announced this plan last year in the Spring and her plan is more detailed and paid for. Obama's hubris is unbelievable. I'd rather have a work horse than a show horse in the president's chair. Obama has no substance at all. All he has is a big message and no real ideas about the nuts and bolts of bringing change to Washington. Obama should really move to Hollywood and make a movie about being President rather than try to take on the Republicans in November. He is so flashy and glamorous. Too bad we can't nominate him right now for an Oscar for his performance during this campaign.
-
Factcheck, you're wrong...or lying.
I refer you to a *real* factcheck regarding Barack Obama and energy jobs.
http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck/2008/02/14/response_to_clintons_random_ti.php
REALITY: Obama Advocated for Green Collar Jobs for Years--And Unveiled His Plan a Month Before Clinton Unveiled Hers
OCT 2007, MONTH BEFORE HILLARY'S PLAN: Obama's Said In His Energy Plan That Investing In Energy Would Create Millions Of New Jobs In The US.
Apollo Alliance Co-Founder Bracken Hendricks Praised Obama's Energy Plan For Funding Programs To Train "Our Youth In The 'Green Collar Jobs' Of The Future.
SEP 2006: Obama Addressed Creating Green Collar Jobs In A Speech On Energy Independence.
APR 2006: Obama Addressed Green Collar Jobs In A Speech On Fuel Efficiency Standards.
Obama Called for Green Jobs in Audacity of Hope...Published in 2006.
Details on all headers above available at the website.
-
@ @ Madame Defarge
We know a lot more about human behavior than we did then, and women are less fatalistic about their husband's philandering, or should be. Plus JFK and MLK aren't running for First Laddie.
Perhaps the word "sexist" is too loaded to be used effectively, in this situation. Terms like dysfunctional, unhealthy, co-dependent and narcissistic may be more appropriate and easier to handle. They are clinical terms, not meant to be judgemental, but factual.
Bill suffers from something. Anyone who has affairs with subordinates on a regular basis, has issues. We can feel for him, but it's risky, to assume that some sort of "uh-oh" behavior isn't going to pop out. It may not be a sexual affair, but he is, as we've seen during the campaign prone to self-destructive stuff.
Again, no one is perfect, but a lot of people want to turn the page. It makes sense, especially when you factor in the effect that the 527 groups could have in the fall.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/527_group