-
Website
http://www.jackandjillpolitics.com/ -
Original page
http://www.jackandjillpolitics.com/2008/06/this-primary-campaign-has-brought-out-the-best-and-worst-in-me/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
Understand what?
She had more advantages than any modern American Presidential Candidate, and when she was coronated, there wasn't any low she wouldn't go to? Any group she wouldn't pit against the other? Any rotten tactic she wouldn't pull?
Maybe I'll be there by the convention, but right now?
Nope. I'm not feeling reconciliation with folks who believe it's ok to diminish me because of my race, and can't give me a handful of incidents from the Obama campaign and surrogates in the other direction.
I'm not ready to turn any cheeks.
This sentence describes to the letter emotional places that instances in this campaign have taken me whether it was driven by the Clintons, the media or the Clinton surrogates, some of which I'm sure have felt the pain of being black in America.
I remember the hurts better than you Jack because you left out the statement that Hillary made that MLK needed a president to get civil rights legislation passed and the "assasination" reference.
Aside from a very recent personal experience that rocked my belief in human decency, I had always believed that most people would give another a hand and judge them based on the person they would come to know and treat them accordingly. I believed that because that had been my reality until recently.
This campaign has opened my eyes to a world that I for some reason didn't know was so ugly. Maybe it was my own naievity, but this campaign has made me more aware of the stock value of the African American citizen. I didn't realize it was so bad.
I am a woman and as a woman I can honestly say that the things said about Hillary Clinton being a woman amounted to little more than locker room teasing which she was willing to play along with when her on surrogates referred to her having cojones, testicular fortitude and so on so the idea that we should feel for her and her supporters because they have suffered sexism does not walk with me. Why in the world would someone who is offended by sexism let herself be referred to as tough as a man when other descriptions would have sufficed?
I cannot reconcile this because the assaults were not necessary.
As rikyrah has pointed out on many occassions, Hillary had the money, the machine the brand and a large majority of the black support starting out. I can't deduce the turning point, the point that Hillary needed to use the Southern Strategy to win a democratic primary where the base of the party is black. As if we weren't watching, as if there was nothing we could do. When did the moment click in her mind that she was coming after us? That we were disposable?
Jack, it could very well be that Hillary Clinton & Co. took us (at least me) to a place we cannot come back from.
I can't kiss and makeup.
As far as I am concerned Hillary and Bill Clinton are a relic of old similiar to a Strom Thurmond or a Bull Connor.
They weren't worth it anyway. They lack character and morals. We were forever supporting a flawed mentality in the both of them. We forgave them for things we not dare be associated for fear of not being seen as respectful, righteous people.
Jack. NO. Please.
I am a woman. These were not attacks on me.
I exist.
I know when I am and am not being attacked.
I am tired of having my existence, intelligence and ability to perceive erased by this lie.
This lie that attacks on Hillary Clinton were attacks on me -- because they were attacks on "women."
And the lie (that you are not saying but that is attached to this generalization you are making) that if I don't see it, if I don't feel it this way, I am somehow not aware of the sexism that exists in this society -- delusional if I don't accept this lie.
This erasure of my existence is ugly and it is violent.
Yes I said violent. Saying attacks on Hillary Clinton are attacks on me because they are attacks on "women" (and I am a woman) ... is on the side of violence. It says that attacks on a perpetrator are attacks on me because we share a gender. It is not true. It is on the side of violence to say that.
Please stop. Please qualify your statement. Please change what you wrote to say that's how the supporters of Senator Clinton felt it, or that SOME women felt it that way, or anything that allows for the existence and subjectivity of women who do not feel it this way.
I'm not saying erase the fact that some women did feel it this way. That is obviously true and should not be erased. But please allow for the reality of women who did not.
Here is some of what I wrote to someone I argued with about this, when she told me that "The real victims in the appalling coverage of Sen. Clinton's campaign, I believe, is all of us: that is, any woman with dreams and ambitions, be they in politics, business or the arts."
I feel media-push back against Senator Clinton as actually somewhat affirming to my experiences and perceptions (at least more so than her actions and approaches!). I do not feel the coverage as directed at me at all, don't feel it as a barrier or attack on me because I am a woman. Because my sense of her is so strong, because her actions frighten and horrify me so deeply and viscerally.
I feel that when people act in such a horrific manner, publicly, then they enter a landscape in which we (they and I) are on opposite sides of a struggle.
So I don't identify with Senator Clinton and don't see attacks on her as attacks on myself. I don't live a life where lies and distortions are the bedrock of my reality. My strength is not based there, my actions are not based there.
How she is treated is not about shared gender for me, it is about her being an actual three-dimensional person who has chosen a particular path and needs to be held responsible for it. The deathwatch stuff doesnot feel threatening to me, not at all. Instead, it resonates (metaphorically of course) with my visceral response to PLEASE make her stop causing harm if she won't stop it herself, because what she is doing hurts me. For me this is a deep visceral reaction to actual pain and wanting to make it stop. ......
I *do not* feel that those guys in the media are being abused by Senator Clinton. But I myself feel her as violent, as a perpetrator, and I identify with their push-back against her more than with her actions to start with.
So Jack, maybe you didn't mean to imply "all women" when you said women like you did. I don't have a need to erase the reality that SOME women felt attacks on Hillary as attacks on themselves. But not me. To suggest that is a lie. I will not collude with a lie.
The reason I didn't feel particular outrage was because all too often, Hillary and her most ardent supporters used their gender as a weapon, dishonestly and cattily. I can honestly say that I have suffered more at the hands of my so-called sisters than I ever have at the hands of men, so those responses, those attacks, the disgrace of hearing them cry out about sexism while completely overlooking the racism was to me, a disgrace.
I can honestly say that the deepest outrage I felt during these primaries centered around the racism I kept seeing. It was heartbreaking and infuriating all at once, and it was sometimes so subtle and self-righteous that it made me want to scream.
Because this man -- Barack Obama -- was the first person to seriously inspire me to give up money, time, and effort toward his success. Like you, my ownership goes so deep that it was personal.
My tolerance level for dishonesty is pretty low, as is my tolerance for outright meanness. I have seen far too much outright meanness, and this is coming from the same side. I think that hurts me more than just about anything.
With all of that, I want to be forgiving, and move past the hurts of this season into what I see as the possibility for the most electrifying national election of this century, or the last one.
Because you know what? Barack Obama's transformative politics won. He just proved to all of us that it IS possible to move past the politics of cynicism to the politics of hope. And he did it by bringing us all into the process, emotions and all. That means that we bear the burden of turning that transforming light on ourselves and now inviting Hillary supporters into the excitement, and that means forgiveness.
Someone once told me that forgiveness is acknowledging the right to be angry and surrendering it. I think that's where we need to go, because the ultimate goal is in sight -- it's just a matter of leaving the past behind and inviting a larger group into the politics of hope. Imagine the transformation in this nation and in ourselves if we can go there.
I am a woman and as a woman I can honestly say that the things said about Hillary Clinton being a woman amounted to little more than locker room teasing which she was willing to play along with when her on surrogates referred to her having cojones, testicular fortitude and so on so the idea that we should feel for her and her supporters because they have suffered sexism does not walk with me. Why in the world would someone who is offended by sexism let herself be referred to as tough as a man when other descriptions would have sufficed?
Say it again.
::
michelle, thank you. Thank you so much.
::
Hillary Rodham Nixon is a patriarch.
And if she can't stand the heat, she should get the fuck out the kitchen. That she attributed that Black Mother Wit to FDR shows just how deeply rooted is her patriarchy.
I see no reason to forgive her at this point.
She remains in the mire.
And she's got years and years of work to do to come up out of it.
I don't think she can. Not without a whole lot of psychotherapy.
She's a sociopath.
It's an illness with a cure, but only if diagnosed.
And quite frankly, I've lost a great deal of respect for her supporters.
I simply have little patience for denial.
The fact of her candidacy proved that gender wasn't the issue, as did the fact of her presumption that she was the appointed one.
Where you lose me is on the forgiveness factor. Truly, I believe there has to be a way through the collective anger to outstretched hands of forgiveness if we want to have a prayer of winning this thing in November.
And win we must. We didn't fight for Barack's candidacy to see him lose in November because we stand divided. Someone has to make the first move, and sooner rather than later, for our own sake, and the promise of electing an extraordinary and gifted man to the White House this year.
YOU ARE WRONG!!!
Yeah those white boy pundits made a few caustic statements about Clinton. But you're operating from a position that the corporate media was out to get her and therefore out to get ALL WOMEN. Well, they were NOT out to get Hillary. She said politics are ugly, they're a contact sport. That was par for the course. Do you think she cared or it bothered her when she actively cultivated relationships with the very same people she claimed harmed her in previous election cycles? I agree it was like a hazing before you join the group. They couldn't make it too easy for her.
Besides the 'women' in that equation were and still are white women. I repeat, Black women were never in that equation. If it was just about women being oppressed then all the white women who felt their privilege in jeopardy would not have come out and attacked Black women AND men so viciously. THAT was the violence.
Hillary has done NOTHING to make up for the damage she and her campaign have done. In fact she and her buddies in the corporate media are actively trying to foster a toxic environment where white people don't trust Obama and Black people feel ignored and disgruntled.
The proportion you've used would not balance the scale of justice in any shape or form.
i.e.
Clinton calling for Obama's assassination vs Chris Matthews saying she has thick ankles.
--- See it doesn't compare
The men that need to examine their gender bias...and racial bias are WHITE MEN. Not to say that Black people haven't engaged in any sexist behavior but I'd be more likely to say it was in response to the racial attacks vs. behavior INITIATED by us. Again the level of harm must be evaluated in proportion to its effect.
Clinton wins for every level of depravity HANDS DOWN!!
I will post only a fragment of it:
you wrote: We didn't fight for Barack's candidacy to see him lose in November because we stand divided
we who?
where is the dividing line? where does it come from?
I need to go to bed.
She doesn't deserve forgiveness by a long shot, and her supporters are now threatening to vote for John McCain, something that most Obama supporters would never do, even in light of how awful HRC has been (although, to be fair, there is some evidence that these have been McCain-supporting infiltrators).
Yes, we do need to try to be understanding of her supporters, because, like Jack said, most voters are not as stupid, partisan, or hateful as HRC's fringe. However, reconciliation will only occur with positive action and leadership from HRC. So far, I haven't seen any evidence that she's willing to unite the Democrats behind Obama, even though she has reportedly asked for his help to smooth over black sentiment against black elected officials who supported her. The latest reports say that she will not concede on Tuesday, hoping for a win in South Dakota, and waiting, I'm assuming, for Michelle's alleged "whitey" video to emerge. If the video exists and is as explosive as some seem to expect it to be, then HRC probably will pull off a win by August. How she can then get black people to support her in November is a mystery to me.
I always found it interesting when HRC and her supporters played the gender card. When I think about how most women in other parts of the world are abused and exposed to true SEXISM, I just don't see it. Her complaining just seems childish and not even something she could possibly truly believe.
Why aren't all minorites pissed off about the treatment Senator Obama has gotten from the media, DNC and others? Divide and conquer - it still works.
gotta go .. have a good day everyone. I'm so grateful to have found a community to share all that's gone on the past several months. There were times when I was truly depressed, but had a place to go....
I want to get one of those bracelets, like the WWJD ones, that say WWOD. LOL
The only way to see Hillary Clinton as representing feminism is to be totally guided by identity politics: she's female, therefore she's a feminist.
Obviously identity is important. It matters if a candidate is a woman, or African American, or whatever.
But identity doesn't go on forever. At some point (as other commenters have already pointed out above) we need to look at the individual human being. In the case of Hillary Clinton, take a look, and keep in mind the line from the Beatles Strawberry Fields: "what did you see when you were there? Nothing that doesn't show."
This is a privileged person who used private detectives to harrass women whom Bill harrassed. This is a feminist?
Hillary's supporters should look to the many truly admirable women who are breaking barriers, who are getting things done (which usually means working with other people... not Hillary's strong suit, as you may have noticed).
I could totally get into the feelings of her supporters, that it would be great to have a woman president, BUT I just can't do that with THIS PARTICULAR INDIVIDUAL woman.
Maybe it's all those dead Canadian hemophiliacs who went to hospital to get their transfusions and left with HIV. Who knew the Arkansas Governor had his hands in that tragedy.
Maybe it's all those dismembered babies in Rwanda that made Hillary vomit when she met them. Who knew she and her husband had a role to play in genocide.
Who knows how many black people have been boldly called "nigger" since Chairman Hillary began her unholy crusade.
I guess what I'm trying to say is I don't give a damn about Hillary or Bill or their insipid supporters.
i'll try to dip in and out throughout the day with some followups.
i definitely couldn't list ALL the offenses of the clinton camp, so don't take anything from me not listing MLK, assassination and other wrong statements and decisions.
I fully agree with Ms. Martin who wrote
Jack, it could very well be that Hillary Clinton & Co. took us (at least me) to a place we cannot come back from.
God I know that feeling, and many more of you have expressed something similar.
A lot of people never trusted, liked or respected The Clintons. I'm not one of those people. Watching them descend into ugliness has been painful and infuriating, especially as our own witness was called into question.
FOr Michelle, I really need to clarify.
I'm not trying to say I believe that all attacks on Hillary are sexist or attacks on you. I'm trying to see and express the frustration of a category of her own supporters.
I talked to a Hillary supporter who told me point blank that she only began to support Hillary as a defense mechanism against sexist media coverage. This person never bothered to understand our rage and sadness, and I never really bothered to understand hers.
I'll update the post to clarify that.
keep it coming fam!
Your honesty and integrity is admirable, and your perspective, along with the other posters and commenter is always passionate and interesting.
I keep coming black to this blog even though I am not black, not a Democrat or an Obama supporter.
I do have to say that I did note the tone and tenor of the posts and comments on this blog change as the primary progressed, but I just scrolled over the posts about the Clintons because I long ago realized what they were all about.
I have alway felt that in coming to this blog, that I was 'standing on your property' and that has guided me as I process what I read here, and how I comment.
I too care deeply about politics and our country and enjoy debating the issues and the best way to move the country into the future.
I am looking forward to discussing and debating the upcoming campaign with, to quote conservative radio talk show host, Bill Bennett, 'candor, intelligence and good will.'
Peace.
of course that was right before the whole rfk blowup, at which point i hardened a bit. toward her and her supporters, at least the ones getting all outraged that "obama pulled the race card on her and ruined her chances" and blaming her gross statement on him and us (Obama's supporters).
and there, i basically found a divide i often talk about, on that is at the core of my own blog's purpose...a divide in seeing the world and people. and seeing the dominant culture as setting values for all, and some people see it the way i do, and some seemingly never will. sometimes its race based, sometimes class. events will point out and highlight these divides. its not the events so much as the gap in our experience and way of seeing things. those people who dare accuse obama of using race in a negative way simply see the world in a very different light than i do. and we would undoubtedly disagree on many things, primary or no. and to those who want to hold on to those gross ideas or sulk on it, they can go take a flying leap. i have nothing to say to them until they open their minds.
but overall, it's a good point to be making.
I think the GOP wants to divide these two strong Democratic groups, Women and African Americans.
And if she can't stand the heat, she should get the fuck out the kitchen. That she attributed that Black Mother Wit to FDR shows just how deeply rooted is her patriarchy.
I see no reason to forgive her at this point.
She remains in the mire.
And she's got years and years of work to do to come up out of it.
I don't think she can. Not without a whole lot of psychotherapy.
She's a sociopath.
Craig,
THANK YOU.
For Hillary Rodham Nixon.
Never truer words were written.
I appreciate your post.
Whenever I think about her campaign, I think about Bush and his relationship with the Religious Right.
Simply put, he played them for votes.
His campaign played into their fears and promised that when he was president, America would be "pure" again.
Did it happen? Nope.
And slowly, the evangelicals began to realize they had been played and are now (some of them at least) considering supporting Obama.
Sen. Clinton did the same thing, playing off people's fears in a ridiculous quest to win an election she lost in March.
Once the smoke clears and her supporters realize they were played for fools, the real backlash against her will begin.
---------------------
I cannot put the blame on the Republicans for this one.
This one belongs to the Clintons and their crew.
I've often wondered why Bill Richardson ran over to the Obama side and why he looked like had just been freed from some shackles when he got there.
I've concluded that Bill Richardson looked at the Clintons with horror and thought to himself, "What if I was the front runner? What racial games would they play on me?"
If Bill Richardson was the front runner, would the Latino vote be dismissed? Would the Clintons have tried to link Richardson with illegal immigrants? Would Fox be running videos of illegals jumping over the border 24-7? Would Hannity be crying about La Raza and trying to link Richardson with Latino activists?
And then when Richardson did go over to the Obama side, the attacks on him were much more violent than when Robert Reich went over to the Obama side? I wonder if his suspicions about what the Clintons would have done to him if he were the front runner were confirmed.
Why am I talking about Bill Richardson? Because the same thing that happened to Barack Obama because he's black would have happened to Bill Richardson because he's Latino, the same racial attacks and suspicions.
Hillary Clinton and her Crew basically said "If you are not white, you need to fall back and wait your turn, and the length of your wait is to be determined by US. If you don't, we are going to make sure white people don't vote for you."
I wonder how many black politicians/candidates are wondering if somebody is snooping on their churches, trying to dig up dirt on them through their place of worship?
And if you are Muslim or not the right kind of Christian (i.e. Romney) you need not apply at all.
I don't think Hillary Clinton and her enablers need to be soothed and coddled. They need to be blasted and called out and the Democratic party needs to be called out for the spineless wimps they are. IMO they've fractured this country along racial, religious and class lines just for personal gain and I'm not sure that political damage is going to be repaired, at least not any time soon.
::
That's not rational support. It's reactionary support. Which is no support at all because it's a projection.
It's false.
I don't need to understand a person who would say that.
She doesn't understand herself.
Besides which, the "sexist media coverage" of Nixon's campaign is pure bull.
Thank you so much.
::
rikyrah, I just call it as I see it and I saw it from DAY ONE when they emerged on the national scene.
And I didn't need to do any research.
I think this speaks to adam's point. Those who were bamboozled by the madness of their royal couple will be the last soldiers to wage an offensive against them.
Sex and the Sissy
My favorite passage among MANY:
So, to address the charge that sexism did her in:
It is insulting, because it asserts that those who supported someone else this year were driven by low prejudice and mindless bias.
It is manipulative, because it asserts that if you want to be understood, both within the community and in the larger brotherhood of man, to be wholly without bias and prejudice, you must support Mrs. Clinton.
It is not true. Tough hill-country men voted for her, men so backward they'd give the lady a chair in the union hall. Tough Catholic men in the outer suburbs voted for her, men so backward they'd call a woman a lady. And all of them so naturally courteous that they'd realize, in offering the chair or addressing the lady, that they might have given offense, and awkwardly joke at themselves to take away the sting. These are great men. And Hillary got her share, more than her share, of their votes. She should be a guy and say thanks.
It is prissy. Mrs. Clinton's supporters are now complaining about the Hillary nutcrackers sold at every airport shop. Boo hoo. If Golda Meir, a woman of not only proclaimed but actual toughness, heard about Golda nutcrackers, she would have bought them by the case and given them away as party favors.
It is sissy. It is blame-gaming, whining, a way of not taking responsibility, of not seeing your flaws and addressing them. You want to say "Girl, butch up, you are playing in the leagues, they get bruised in the leagues, they break each other's bones, they like to hit you low and hear the crack, it's like that for the boys and for the girls."
And because the charge of sexism is all of the above, it is, ultimately, undermining of the position of women. Or rather it would be if its source were not someone broadly understood by friend and foe alike to be willing to say anything to gain advantage.
All of your frustrations with the Clintons is understandable and in the heat of the moment, it is hard to keep civility.
During the recent "FL/Mich voters are being suppressed, we are winning the popular vote," crapola, I find myself yelling at the TV while Obama surrogates kept calm and above the fray.
Of all the post HRC election obits I have read so far, the conclusion of her annoymous advisors is they messed up the Caucus systems and Super Tuesday strategy was a dud.
While I agree with those points, I think her pro war stances gave Obama an opening in a 2008 Democratic contest.
The most overlooked factor that I have not seen discussed in the MSM is Hillary's complete alienation of the African American Community.
People forget the media writing articles before Iowa pondering if Obama was "black enough," and then all of sudden he is pulling 90 percent of the AA vote in every contest.
I long ago thought the 2nd test of Obama's after Iowa would be convincing black women in South Carolina to vote for him. The Clinton's had mad respect and long ties in the AA community.
He not only had a strong showing but the Clitnons totally miscalculated and threw away the AA vote for no real good reason other than to convince white voters into thinking Obama was a scary black guy.
The AA community noticed these Southern Strategy like campaign tactics and took it out on the Clintons in the voting booth.
They were voting not only for Obama but also against the Clintons, who willingly and purposedly dissed them after overwhelmingly helping Bill/Hillary attain political power for years. It was painfully obvious by "MLK, Roll the Dice, Drug Dealer, Jessee Jackson."
I do not understand how any reasonable person can not see the truth of Clinton's racial divide tactics.
I changed my stance for a moment after she attempted to call for violence against Senator Obama in delivering the assassination code word to the lunatic fringe. A few days after I'd gotten over being absolutely appalled at her cruel, win-at-any-cost words and deeds, I went back to maintaining that she should remain in the race until the last primaries were over. Now that day is here and she's still unwilling to step aside, still trying to do whatever she can to discount his winning the nomination.
Being a black woman born and raised at the beginning and through the height of both the black and women's rights movements, I understand her perfectly, however; I do not agree nor can I countenance the language or the methods that she and some of her white feminist supporters have used to denigrate Senator Obama because she lost so much and so often when she thought she would win.
Now we've come to the end of the long, long primary season and it is clear that she cannot win, and I find that I still do not like her refusal to acknowledge that it is over for her campaign.
I do not like that she continues to challenge his right to be the nominee despite the olive branches he continues to graciously offer to her in the form of apologies for others' words of truth, among other instances of absolute grace. No matter how conciliatory and gracious he is to her, she tries to turn it against him, to make him the monster that she is.
At this time, I do not have the ability to 'understand' her extremely poor manners and obnoxious behavior.
And you know something else? As I type this, Senator Obama only needs 35 more delegates to clinch the nomination. Yet I am certain that she's lied to his campaign, maybe even to him, that she will concede tonight but has instructed her surrogates to refute this through corporate broadcast media.
I do not believe that the AP is getting this wrong; I'd stake my life on it that she agreed to concede with the Obama campaign. She's still lying, attempting in every way she can to destroy his credibility and his moment as the official presumptive nominee.
She is nothing nice and neither is her lying husband, Billy Jeff.
So no, I cannot attempt to understand her at this time.
As a mixed (black) woman, I agree with the other black women here that the attacks on Hillary were not attacks on women - they were attacks on well off, educated, ambitious white women. Black women are completely ignored and if we happen to inconvenience anyone by putting a toe in the spotlight and get attacked, we aren't treated like hysterical women that need to get back to caring for our husbands and children - no we get the "nappy-headed hos" treatment with ALL that implies.
So while the educated, ambitious wealthy white men in those clips were attacking other educated, ambitious, wealthy white women to cut down on the competition, I as a mixed woman felt nothing but some sympathy for the white women (because I am not cold-hearted) but I knew it had NOTHING to do with me as a mixed woman. Nothing.
So I think it is very positive that you have become more aware of the bs that gets thrown at successful white women. I would like more focus on the severe underrepresentation of women of color.
I agree with the other women of color her that it is violence to erase us. This campaign and the media's use of the word "woman" makes Sojourner Truth's speech "Ain't I am woman?" almost as relevant today as it was in 1851 and that is sad. Here's a link to it: http://www.feminist.com/resources/artspeech/gen...>
-------------------
It's just like at work, a "well meaning" white women will want to introduce the black part-time Pinkerton security guard with the gold tooth to her college educated professional track black female coworker. And the white woman will say, "he's tall, he's black, y'all will hit it off." And then she wonders why her black female coworker is not thrilled with this match. She figures, he black, you black, so you two should hit it off.
That's the same mentality that's going on with this campaign. None of these bobbleheads are bothering to ask black people WHY they are voting for Obama over Clinton, they are just assuming, "He black, you black, so that's why you're voting for him."
That's basically what Bill Clinton said back in South Carolina.
That's straight up what Geraldine Ferraro's been saying since February.
And if you as a black person spell out why, you're labeled a hater or a racist.
None of these people, the white female coworker, Clinton, Ferraro, the MSM etc. want to see or accept what they are doing, which is telling me what I'm thinking because I'm black.
And it's not just black people they are doing it to, they are telling "hard working white Americans" what they are thinking because they're "hard working white Americans," and they are telling Latinos what they are thinking because they are Latinos.
I'll gladly try and convince anyone I think can be convinced to support our nominee, but I don't see the point in wasting time and effort on those "Democrats" who would rather see a Republican president than a black one.
Maybe I am wrong, but I think the Clinton supporters who simply preferred Hillary for reasons other than racism and some weird anger displacement won't even need convincing or reaching out. They would rather see Obama win than McCain since Obama's policies are closer to Clinton's.
I think absense of Obama hate would be how you could spot a person who supported Clinton simply because they preferred her politics and personality. Supporting Clinton didn't require hating Obama because he didn't attack her in a dirty way. Yes, he twisted facts to his favor but unfortunately that's politics and it usually doesn't make you jump parties.
But maybe I am wrong. I'd love it if someone interviewed Clinton supporters so we'd understand how they saw it. I just don't buy the media sexism = Obama sucks, I am voting McCain
Here's a link to a video documenting sexism FROM the Obama campaign:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ke64670GkZ8
(Pretty sure it's made by a Clinton supporter)
My experience as a Clinton supporter is that I've lost all sense of perspective...I used to blog about racial/ethnic, economic and gender inequality; poverty; affordable housing; and Katrina recovery, until this election took over my life. And that's just one example of how captive to this whole thing I've become. I think that many of us on both sides are projecting all sorts of feelings and desires on to these 2 candidates - that they've become figureheads (and not very good ones, in their centrist, insider ways, IMO) for the cultural and political battles we personally fight day in and day out. I think I'm most disappointed in my own loss of cynical criticism of the overall political structure in this country in my zeal over a female contender.
And the timeline on the hardening of and b/w supporters is so short. I supported both candidates financially and vocally last fall, voted for Clinton on 2/5, but have only become convinced her righteousness in the last couple of months. Please. I have come to believe more strongly in the last couple of months that she's the stronger candidate, but I'm ashamed of myself for making her candidacy my particular fight du jour, when I'm so normally focused on policy battles, community organizing, local economic development, and attempts to hold our politicians' feet to the fire. It's been a fascinating but cognitively dissonant ride, that's for sure.
It's also like having your white coworkers be astounded to find out that you don't care much for Rice as a Secretary of State, even though they know where you are on the political spectrum.
Wow thanks for stopping by with that youtube link. I didn't see it so much before but I can now see why Clinton supporters closed ranks around her and got much more defensive. I don't agree with all of it (like the 99 problems song, "periodically", monster and the pictures of Obama looking down on Hillary and some other things seemed exaggerated to me) but I am sure Clinton supporters disagree with some things Obama supporters perceived as racist.
As a mixed (black/white) woman, I thought I was seeing both sides but the alienation I felt by the misuse of the word woman to mean middle class white women must have cut me off from seeing those tings. I also live overseas so don't have much access to American MSM. It does however look like there was much less attention in the MSM on the sexist attacks than the other way around. Can other people back this up? That's the way it's looking.
I must admit through most of it, I was wondering why Clinton wasn't speaking out against the racism (when it wasn't coming from her...) but yeah, where was Obama on speaking out against sexism?
I guess the lesson is divide and conquer works! This whole thing is just really, really sad.
And the emotionalism around it is quite frightening - that we can get whipped up into a frenzy like that. I was fortunately able to snap out of the frenzy some months ago but probably because I live overseas so again don't get the same exposure to MSM. For me the media and Clinton's use of racism just didn't match with the overwhelming numbers of white people (and others) who were voting for Obama. That doesn't mean that racism doesn't exist, it just signalled to me a lot of people aren't invested in it as much as before.
I am left feeling very cynical about American politics in general but particularly disillusioned with the Dems. If there were actual differences between the candidates, I think there'd be a lot less silly.
Maybe conversations like this will lead us back to our right minds though but it won't fix the political system unfortunately. Thanks Jack for starting this conversation!
The point being made here is the similarity between the reactions of Clinton *supporters* and that of Obama *supporters*, and the fact that they were reacting to similar insults -- albeit in the case of Clinton supporters, insults NOT coming from Obama but from media operatives, and frankly Republican media operatives in many cases.
The writer makes very clear that Obama and Clinton in fact behaved very differently from each other -- and exhorts us to follow Obama's lead, not Clinton's. It's a good piece or writing.
I wholeheartedly agree that Obama and his camp should help out in the healing process, but I'm also glad you pointed out that the initiation of healing needs to come from the Clintons, because their egos drove them to do the most damage and caused the most divisiveness in the Democratic Party.
You have given me inspiration for a post on the CBC, now that Obama has secured the nomination. It's time to get on with the business of defeating John McCain, and I, for one, will be glad to reduce Hillary Clinton to a mere footnote in this saga.
I just wanted to say thanks for your recent post, it showed some grace and humanity that I haven't seen for a while, anywhere, about the divide in the Democratic nomination battle. Of course you and I don't agree on everything, but i do respect your views. Thanks for reaching out across raw emotions and chaos, much easier to do when your side wins.
For the record I am a 31 year old white woman. And yes, I am a human being who is able to think beyond my uterus and my skin color. It's nice to not be lumped in with some or no identity.
I read the blog because I want to understand people who don't think like me. Groups poison themselves all the time by surrounding themselves with people just like them and then losing perspective- Republicans and Democrats are both guilty. Religious groups are probably the most guilty of this though.
I stopped reading JJP for a while because I just couldn't stand the name calling, and not just Tonya Harding but also handkerchief-head and stuff like that. It's bad enough that everyone gets reduced to demographic groups every four years to make someone's job at CNN easier- the Jewish vote, the Catholic vote, the Black vote, the women's vote, the values vote etc. Because no woman could also be Catholic or working-class or black married to a jew or have these elusive things we call values. It drives me crazy, and I just got sad to see JJP and many others resort to similar tactics. But it's one of those four years when we all get lumped into groups.
I hate what this race has become. The Dems were supposed to have a hands-down victory but we are still fighting inside the party. Hello McCain...
The only way I will vote for Obama is if Clinton is on the ticket or at least given a job that gives her the respect she deserves. She won a shitload of votes, all the big states, and most of the swing states. Just please stop the gratuitous character assassination. If you think Obama can win without her supporters then fine... Let's both just work for the McCain campaign instead of picking bones.
At first I thought Obama was all right, but early on I got concerned about his rockstar status in the Democratic party and among the media. Call me crazy but I get a little leery of cults of personality and stadiums full of swooning crowds. Someone who can deliver a speech well doesn't sell me, I am not that thirsty for kool-aid.
Give me a real reason why I should vote for him- because he's black? Because some kid in Pakistan will feel better because his middle name is Hussein? Because his record in the Senate is entirely unremarkable? Because he's pro-choice? Come on, it looks like a house of cards that could so easily fall down.
I am surprised the Wright scandal didn't take him out, and his speech on race in this country didn't impress me. There is a lot more than black and white in this country and I don't think that there's a context for shared experience like there was in the segregated south, e.g. I don't like to oversimplify people's experience and I don't need some politician to get teachy with me. We this, and we that... Dreams and hopes and change. And I can't talk about policy specifics to save my life. He's not my kind of politician, I want someone who can mop the floor in a debate and whose eyes don't glaze over when talking about social security. And it worries me that his ego seems to love the crowds and the spotlights.
By the way, the democratic party hasn't cracked yet and is only still alive and viable because of the Clintons. If Obama was going to win anyway, there was no need to slaughter both Clintons on the way to the door, seasoning the dish with rampant MSM collaboration and sexism. I admit it's not all sexism, the media just loves to hate the Clintons and to punish Hillary for Bill's mistakes until the cows come home. It's a good thing poor Chelsea doesn't have braces anymore, but they've gone after her too.
I still remember how important they are- Bill Clinton simply mentioned the word HIV/AIDS and he revolutionized how we treat people, test people, research the disease, and educate people- just one example. Listen, the Clintons are not angels but name a politician who is.
Anyone still standing at this stage in the race has the audacity to think he or she should lead the free world- they are all politicians. And they will all do whatever they have to for election. I am not wowed or astounded by what people will do or say to get elected, they are the most ambitious people in the world. I am suspicious of any candidate who tries to sell 'new politics' and moral cleanliness.
I think that Obama's promise of a 'new politics' is bull, because there are no new politics. If there were then Mike Dukakis or John Kerry would have thought of it. I just don't think Obama can win in the fall, and i like Clinton's policies better. Obama's foreign policy kinda weirds me out- let's get rid of all the current policies that umpteen presidents have employed and do everything in a different way? I don't buy it, I don't trust him, I don't know him, and he's green.
I am not a racist crazy person, and everytime JJP talks about so-called racist working class whites in Appalachia I will bring up the Democratic weirdos who go to caucauses in Idaho and Wyoming- not exactly the mainstream of the Democratic party. They all get to vote, but they should be proportionally represented by their delegates and Iowa and New Hampshire shouldn't get dibs on who we elect as President.
I really hate most of the system, like the Texas one- primary _and_caucus?. Every time i hear someone from the Obama camp complain about Clinton wanting to seat the delegates from FL and MI I want to scream. Is it really a good idea to piss off voters in big swing states that have cost entire elections before? They were making a good point.... Iowa, farm subsidies, ethanol, and NH should not be able to rig elections. Ethanol is tearing the global economy apart, making food (even beer) more expensive, and making Brazil want to tear down as much of the Amazon it can. Pardon my French but fuck Iowa.
Howard Dean should make a rule- no caucuses, only primaries. And then he should establish a rotating calendar for which states get to vote when. My suggestion- one day a month in an election year, 10 states vote. Five months go by and then it's over- no matter where CA and NY fall in the cards. If NH always wants to be the first state, and if we want to avoid amending the constitution, then fine. But nine other states will vote the same day, on a rotating basis. I know primaries are more expensive than caucuses but they're not nearly as expensive as having a dumb-ass president for 8 years. And sure, group the states geographically if it means that the candidates can save some money by advertising to DC, MD, and VA at the same time. Or NY, NJ, and CT, or whatever.
I am not a Democrat who likes to lose, which seems to be pretty easy in the last couple of decades. I want to win for crying out loud and i don't think Obama can do it. One thing about republicans is that they are good at winning, and we are good at losing. And we can't blame Karl Rove or the John Kerry windsurfing ad- we just suck at this. Except for the Clintons.
Bests,
Ms. Irish
Who...just lost. And if the Great Winners got beat? Then maybe you can have a little faith in the team that beat them.
I'm an Anglo-Irish Hillary supporter. I am not American. I am not a woman and I am not black. I am a white Anglo-Saxon man. I will not go into my reasons for not supporting Obama (who I have seen on the political radar since circa 2003) but as he takes on the nomination I still have doubts as to whether he can win, but I hope and pray I am wrong.
First of all... you probably don't know much about UK blogging but you Americans rock at it. Our pathetic efforts seems just like that compared with yours.
As much as I really thought it was an excellent post, it was a shame that the comments did not live up to the standards the author hoped to inspire.
Yes, its been an ugly campaign but it has been ugly on both sides and from both candidates. I can mention plenty of my female friends (both British and American overseas) who have been appalled by Obama's dog-whistle sexism as well as the sexism shown by the American (and indeed British) media towards Hillary Clinton.
Senator Clinator has her faults - vast and numerous - of course and so does Obama. Clinton can be accused of stirring racism. And while Obama has never said anything directly sexist, he has made some questionable comments whose results have been to pigeon hole Clinton by her gender.
I am equally unsure exactly what Clinton has said that is directly racist?
1) The reference to Johnson and MLK was merely pointing out that the civil rights movement was given traction by a white man. Is that racist?
2) She never called for Obama's to be assassinated. She merely pointed out that Robert Kennedy was assinated in June while he was *campaigning*.
3) Bill Clinton (not Senator Clinton) pointed out that Jesse Jackson had won primaries. This is the remark I have most problem with and can find no justification.
4) Geraldine Ferraro said that Obama would not be where he was if he was white. But isn't that true? Its no bad thing. The black vote is hugely important as is the ethnic minority vote in general. To call this racist is unfair.
5) Senator Clinton has said that she commands a majority of white working class votes. Well, isn't it true? Isn't it a bit unfair to call that racist. Obama has a constituency (the black vote and the intellectual/liberal vote), Clinton has a consituency too. Obama has failed for the moment to win over the bloc.
Please judge Obama and Clinton by the same standards. They are both flawed. And while Clinton may have to make peace with America's black community. Obama has to make peace with women as well.
It is to be expected (on both sides). We are from early age conditioned to see by their differences to us and sometimes when we are not on the receiving end of stereotypes we can be insensitive.
I do not think Obama is sexist nor that the Clintons are racist. Both were just unfortunate to be placed in such a sensitive competition. In my view neither of them has emerged from the process very well, "sweetie". (I will not tell you what my American friend said when she heard that - although she does liek John McCain.)
Until Obama supporters acknowledge this, he will struggle to unite the Democrats.
Oh, and three final things. Its 5am here and I'm knackered. I just wanted to post something on this site as I appreciated the original comment. I would appreciate it if I was not subjected to the general abuse that seems to characterise the blogosphere - calm down guys: freedom carries responsibility with it and freedom of speech is too precious to be abuse and shouted down.
Also, don't gloat too early guys. I worked out from a poll of polls that at the moment its a much tighter race for Obama than it would have been if the positions had have been reversed. Obama might have beat the Clintons, but he is not yet President. A few years ago the best candidate was beaten by a non-entity from texas. I really have to thank you guys for that one by the way... (Oh. And before you point it out - I apologise on behalf of all of the United Kingdom for Blair, Thatcher and really bad teeth)
And also as someone who heralds from the emerald isle and also who has done work with HIV/AIDS in Africa, I'll always take my hat off to those Washington insiders, the Clintons....
There is equally little doubt in my mind that you made the jump from gathering together people who supported Obama, and who objected to racism, and who wanted confirmation that what they were seeing was real, and who weren't going to take it lying down, into being one of the head cheerleaders for ugly, rampant, and often baseless Hillary hatred. And that you denied, at virtually every turn, the very real sexism that came from the mainstream media, Obama supporters, and Obama's campaign.
Neither Obama nor his campaign ever intervened to temper any of that bigoted vitriol. It's an intervention that Clinton and her campaign are equally guilty of not having made regarding the bigoted vitriol re: race.
As a Clinton supporter who will be voting for Obama in November, and trying to do outreach to disillusioned Clinton supporters who might otherwise stay home or vote for McCain, I just want to assure you that the kind of venom you've spewed, and the culture of uncritical bonding based on hatred you've helped to create and support, will be one of my--and Obama's--greatest obstacles.
I appreciate the extent to which your post is a step in the right direction. I also hope that you'll appreciate what I'm saying when I tell you that it may be too little, too late. And that you've got a whole lot more work to do towards healing the rift you've done so much to create.
At the end of the day, it doesn't make all that much difference to me whether you do it as the result of sincere soul searching or as political calculation. One way or other, this crap has to stop--on both sides.