Letters to the Editor
-
"PRO-CLINTON FEMINIST WHINE"
This pretty much describes it.
Poor, poor, set upon unfairly by those "boys", nice white lady, day thirty something......*sniff*....***
***Any mention of her lying, false indignations, racial attacks, or any of a number of legitimate reasons for not supporting her, are not to be mentioned. The fact that she's a SHE, gives her complete immunity from ANY honest criticisms.
Got it, "boys"???
-
I am so tired of the sexism card
"I just know it's really sexism, even though everyone has good reasons for their positions." That spoon there? Gag me with it.
There's a hell of a lot of irrational hatred of Hillary out there. I've seen it myself. But she's been smeared for almost two decades now, and the sad truth about the Big Lie is that it works.
On the other hand, I was a Hillary defender up until her remote feed appearance on The Daily Show. She lost me that night with her intensely fake chipperness, and she's lost me more every day with her desperation to win. I don't see the moral restraint in her actions that I believe is necessary in a leader. She wants what she wants, and she will do whatever it takes to get it, no matter who gets hurt in the process.
In contrast, Obama has shown a lot of moral restraint. He's avoided getting down in the mud with her, despite the accusations from the other side that he's using substitutes to do his dirty work.
I see both rational and irrational reasons for people to be against Hillary. But I think they are against Hillary herself, for the content of her character, and that's why it isn't sexism.
-
@ Greeneyedkzin
You wrote: "I wonder if we can't differentiate between the Senator and his supporters. He's shown himself capable of feeling and principles.-- Greeneyedkzin"
Thanks for a thoughtful response; your other points (edited out here) are likewise well-said. Good to read your entire post.
I must disagree, however, with your idea that he is "capable of feeling and principles"; I find him to be aloof, a bit arrogant, humorless and somewhat elitist. As for his "principles", the Rezko affair has still not completely come to the surface, so, that is still a question in my mind.
If I just felt more comfortable with Senator Obama, I might be an enthusiastic supporter; I am, however, one who questions nearly everything I see and hear. Having been lied to by many/most politicians, I will be the final arbiter and judge of what is "truth, justice and the American way." I will do that beFORE I vote for a candidate.
Bottom line: if Senator Obama wants my vote, he hasn't earned it yet. I'll have to be more confident that he has a rock-solid plan for the Iraq imbroglio, the housing abortion, the economy overall and our relationship with the civilized world that Dubya so thoroughly screwed.
Tag, Senator Obama...you're it.
-
It's not just men
And yet, as Lossia wrote in a recent e-mail, "I've been really bothered by what I perceive as sexism [among some male Obama supporters] and have spent hours defending [Clinton] ... A lot of guys just can't stand Hillary, and it's the intensity of their irritation with her that disturbs me more than their devotion to Obama."
I've seen plenty of the same animosity and distaste for Hillary Clinton in Democratic women, as well. It's not a man/woman thing.
-
Young Americans
I know this is buried in a pile of letters, so not sure who will ever read it. Not to worry, it's the participating in society that counts.
I rather think that the kind of letters written above validate the claims of those of us who believe that Obama is not really an actual person but a construct or, to paraphrase one quote in the article, a projection of the political fantasy of well-educated but politically unrealistic white people. For Blacks, he is the construct of their hopes and dreams for social legitimacy. That's far more understandable and reasonable.
Young, white, "well-educated" American voters are really, still, young white "well-educated" Americans. And honestly, not being a young American, but having lived as here 20yrs, I believe that there are probably no people groups in the world who are more wide-eyed, self-involved and loathsomely unaware of those facts due to a faux-critical approach to life. They pass off the enjoyment of low-level irony (only if it's funny), self-deprecating kookiness, public discussion of private happenings and being passionate about something they "think" is liberal as a genuinely critical view of the world and thus sort of assume that their perspective is somehow impervious to evaluation. They treat all alternative thoughts at claims with contempt (as witnessed by the horribly narrow-minded conservatism produced by Salon . . . and yes it is "conservative" because it's not open to change). They assume that their ideas are so lofty, so ideal that to doubt them must mean you're some kind of gutter creeping right wing nut job who can't see the depth of the "real" world they so clearly see.
Frankly, young Americans, it makes me want to hurl my lunch to think that you, of all people on the planet, should determine who the next president will be. You with your unbelievable self-centeredness and endless blathering on about yourselves and what you’re feeling. The social issues you discuss drive you to "discuss" them with passion because of how they make "you" feel. What makes me laugh, is your earnestness; you really think that you think. You mistake ceaseless writing and speaking for critical thought. But you're no different from the Reagan youth who only wanted things their way and look where that got us.
If you could drag your eyes from your own navels and look around, you'd see that you're just being ridiculous. Just silly. The only reason I have a problem with that is that you might elect a president with all of your blundering about the political landscape (as if you know where you're going and what you're doing . . . clowns). The whole world will be stuck with your sickening self-involvement trying to tell the rest of is how it needs to be and you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.