Maybe Barack Obama ought to go looking for his Inner Atheist, because lately, his spiritual advisers are throwing him under the bus instead of leading him towards a Sweet Chariot.
The performance of a Catholic priest in Obama's Chicago church, mocking Hillary Clinton in a cruel and humiliating way, is just the latest of the slings and arrows Obama's spiritual mentors have inflicted. And the raucous laughter inside the church did not help either, because Barack Obama has a woman problem, and not a small one.
I recently talked to several women that I had never regarded as overtly political, who surprised me by said they were not going to vote for Obama because of the way Clinton has been treated. The rage is wide and deep, as reporters who have been out around the country can testify.
And you can talk yourself blue in the face saying that claims of sexism are exaggerated, that Clinton's problems are of her own making, that women are too thin skinned etc. etc. Women have been shocked by the sexism that has emerged in the media, from their bosses and co-workers, and from some political operatives. The emotion is real, and it is deep. Obama needs to move to blunt this anger if he hopes to be elected president.
He needs to offer Hillary Clinton a high-profile position, so that he can energize her passionate supporters, who will be desperately needed in the fall. He should either put her on the ticket as vice president or proclaim that she will be his first nominee for the Supreme Court.
As to the veep spot, conventional wisdom has it that vice presidents should be chosen for their geographic appeal, because they are popular or have a strong organization in a state that might prove crucial in the general election. Bill Clinton and Al Gore ignored that arithmetic, offering two attractive young Southerners, a team with sex appeal. "Young Guns," a Newsweek cover called them.
Hillary Clinton could offer that sort of sizzle. She has become a mega-celebrity, a politician who has astonishingly turned herself from a cool, commanding "inevitable" candidate into a feisty, scrappy, comeback kid. A lot of people have come to love her, warts and all. She's great in diners, at truck stops and in local bars, places where Obama does not seem comfortable. She's become a tireless, fabulous campaigner, a Yale law grad who can belt down a boilermaker with the boys with gusto. This talent doesn't seem to have anything to do with social class. I saw Nelson Rockefeller working a rope line in his prime and he had the common touch. So did jack Kennedy, a son of Harvard and fabulous wealth. Working-class boy Richard Nixon was uneasy with his peers; wealthy John Kerry seemed to have a tin ear, asking for Swiss cheese on a Philly cheese steak.
Hillary could help the Democratic ticket in Appalachia and the rust belt, areas that elect presidents. Her ability to connect with working-class whites and women could shore up what seems to be a real weakness in the Obama campaign. Die-hard Hillary haters can say that she's the "old politics," that she was too late at being against the war, that her hardball tactics were offensive, that she's not left enough, and so on. But I am tired of purist Democrats who lose. If Al Gore had won his own state, the 4000 American servicemen and women who have died in Iraq would most likely be alive today. (Yes, Gore won the popular vote, but Republican hardball trumped popular sentiment.)
You can argue that Hillary as veep would energize the Republican base, and that's true. But does anybody think the base will not be emerged with all the 527's running constant video feedback loops featuring the Rev. Wright and Bill Ayers and chanting "Barack HUSSEIN Obama?"
As to the second option, a great many women would breathe a sigh of relief knowing that Hillary Clinton would be one of the Supremes. Roe v. Wade would be safe, and a fine legal mind would be added to the court. A journalist I know who heard presentations by McCain, Obama and Hillary came away absolutely awed by Hillary's smarts. The others took prepared questions, he said, but Hillary just stood up and took all the reporters' questions and answered them off the cuff.
I could see a Hillary term on the court as harking back to the great liberal, William O. Douglas. He was not content to closet himself in his chambers. He traveled and spoke tirelessly all around the US. An early environmentalist, in his 80s he hiked much of the length of the Chesapeake and Ohio canal and put a very human face on what is too often seen as an austere and unsympathetic institution. As a Justice, Hillary Clinton would be one of the most important and powerful women in the nation.
The Obama-Clinton race has been one of the closest races in electoral history. It has energized Democrats and brought new voters to the party. No matter what you think of her, Hillary has proved herself a fighter, a tireless campaigner and someone who can inspire true passion in her many supporters.
Democrats disrespect her at their peril.
There are - however - plenty of women, men, blacks and whites who have their own problems - some self-inflicted, others inflicted by the imperfections of our society.
People who decide not to vote for Barack because of the residual effects of sexism or racism in their own hearts and minds will do what they do, and should not be pandered to by the rest of us.
And in case you're not bright enough to realize it - sexism and racism and their residual after effects are problems of consciousness that can afflict men and women, blacks and whites.
One of the best things about this primary campaign is that it has been an immense purgative of the albatross of liberal guilt. You've had a tough ride because of your race or gender? I'm sorry for that. You want to use it to manipulate me? I'm sorry about that, too - and I'm not buying what you're selling.
In an age when the planet, as well as the country, are going to hell in a handbasket, no one's handing out much in the way of reparations. Get over yourself and your grievances, and let's get on with it together - or not.
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/07/clinton200807
which is also featured on the HuffPost home page. It is about Bill Clinton, mainly, and his activities since leaving the White House. There is no way on God's earth that anyone with a spouse's record like this could ever get a VP nomination or a Supreme Court nomination or a cabinet post. Also, anyone who thinks Sen. Clinton has the qualifications to be a Supreme Court justice is indulging in wishful thinking anyway.
I understand, to a degree, how disappointed Sen. Clinton's supporters are but this is not the last chance for a woman president in their lifetimes. Look at the amazing collection of women senators, governors, congresspersons, etc. Sen. Clinton is not your last, best hope.
===
Exactly so.
In fact, many many women - intelligent, educated women - decided she was in fact merely their first, worst hope...and chose not to support her on that basis.
And I'd say the exact same thing about both Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton in terms of the black community's hopes to see a black POTUS someday.
And yes, that article was a pisser - by Dee Dee Myers husband, no less. Jeez Louise, would we want this mess floating around the White House AGAIN?
Rev. Wright.
The looney tunes white rapper priest.
Sammi Powers the Irish moonbat.
Likening him to a stud race horse, dredging up arcane " Sambo" references. If he is suppose to apologize for sexism in this country, you should apologize for racism.
And if you are able to ignore the race baiting enacted by the Clinton campaign, the subtle insinuations of his Islamic ties ( the infamous non-denial confirmation "not that I know of"", the ridiculous charges of elitism ( which work as both code for " that Barack Obama with his ten dollar words thinks your bitter, and he's better than you" and concurrently synonymous with " uppity") then you clearly have no regard for the plight of African Americans.
Its called solipsism. Not being able to see outside the range of your own eyesight. Not being able to empathize with the plight of others. Expecting the White House based on what is or isn't between your legs.
Well I beg your pardon, we never promised you a rose garden...
Right now, I'm feeling that my sense of equity and equality as a white woman in US society is an illusion. Nasty personal attacks are routinely flung at Hillary Clinton by the media (notably MSNBC), Obama's weird and hateful church, and the old boy network in the Democratic party. If I were in Hillary's position I am sure that I would receive the same vitriolic harangue that she gets. That the disrespectful comments and gender-based attacks haven't resulted in much-deserved universal outrage and condemnation is appalling to me.
Obama has many willing surrogates who do his dirty business of slander and defamation toward his more mature female opponent. He'll never have to soil his hands or even feign disapproval about the overt sexism, because in our society it is okay to be sexist.
I wish I had another party to turn to this election year.
What, because he couldn't stop pundits, and surrogates from speaking their mind, he's culpable for sexist statement they make?
He's done nothing sexist in his campaign, save for using a term of endearment " sweetie" in regard to a reporter.
But you would let more Americans die in an unnecessary and illegitimate war, because of your misdirected anger at Barack Obama.
Maybe its your father you're mad at, or some asshole employer, or men in general. But you have absolutely no case of sexism against Barack Obama. Save for these ridiculous assertions he condones something someone else said.
He's not his brothers or pastors keeper. And you should really try to present one credible point substantiating a claim of sexism on his part, before abandoning your party.
There is a reality that is about to smack you on the side of the head. It's called the main event and its Obama V McCain. Cool off and think of McCain clinching the five plus justices to overturn Roe V Wade and 4/8 years of corrupt inept GOP white house.
If any petty need for vengeance requires you to disrupt or impede the democrats, so be it. But I'd be quiet about such stupidity.
is the Democratic Party doing what it does best: snatching defeat from the jaws of victory!
States have, for the last 40 years at least, held a variety of electoral processes, caucuses, primaries, open, closed. The rules of each state are set by each state and its state party organization, not the DNC. And it wasn't the people of my generation who designed it. Blame your own.
Misdirected anger at parties not responsible, much of the world's problems can be attributed to this. Black men have been on the receiving end of the shaft in this country ( and black women ) since being shanghaied from their native country centuries ago and set to work as slaves.
He owes you nothing. And yet he promises fairness, for all races and both genders. It's a very gracious individual who can look beyond personal grievances on behald of the greater good. Perhaps you should try it yourself some time.
As for offering her a Vice Presidential slot, don't hold your breath. She threw the kitchen sink, she diminished his career to a speech, she insinuated he'd let soccer moms sleeping blond angels die at 3:00 a.m. He owes her nothing.
Both are breaking barriers (i.e. 43 white male presidents all beat 43 white guys to get there) so I am just happy my party is the one these two contented in for the chance at being president. But as an Obama supporter I just don't get how not 1 Hillary supporter ever talks about the level a racsim Barack has had to deal with. THEY ARE BOTH DEALING WITH CRAP NO ONE PERSON SHOULD HAVE TO DEAL WITH so as long as you keep talking about sexism and not talking about racism why should Barack and his supporters feel for Hillary, we should, but its tough when we can't see that you feel for Barack.
if you seriously think that the Democratic Party should give up the Presidency because of slights and imperfect intentions and innuendos and blah, blah, blah, then you will get McCain. Where have you been the last seven years? in a coma?
Rinse, repeat!
d
Do you want to risk Roe vs. Wade? A Supreme Court that will shackle your daughters' reproductive rights for at least one, if not two, generations? More war in Iraq? Our standing among the family of nations?
Yes, it is enraging to see women treated poorly. It makes mad, so mad that I am going to be sure that McCain doesn't reach the White House.
exactly right. My wife, my sister-in-law, the women I work with, are so mad at Obama, I think the Democratic Party is in danger of losing them for good. The solution is to give the Hillary base half the ticket.
On the otherhand, if the Obama campaign and the Obamamaniacs think they can win without us, it may be instructive for the future to prove them wrong, i.e., a McCain victory. Young people and political purists often isolate themselves from others, and feel so confident in their righteousness, that defeat is inevitable.
Anyway, a truly great article.
If you remember, there were other candidates at the beginning of this process who TRUMPED Hillary when it came to experience and "electability". They lost. Why isn't anybody upset that some rookie took what was "rightfully" theirs.
Have you even CONSIDERED the possibility that YOU might be proved wrong??
Michale.....
You're right--it's not as though there's any modern historical precedent showing that Democrats have a bad habit of trying to please one tiny, self-righteous segment of the electorate and nominating someone who is doomed in November.
....I am tired of purist Democrats who lose....
And how. That's the key line.
Senator Obama and his supporters have to decide what really matters--winning the general election and helping the entire _world_, or pretending Senator Clinton is the Big Bad Wolf, and making _sure_ that he will lose by a landslide in November.
Putting one's head in the sand and pretending that PA/FL/OH and so forth don't matter is just the height of hubris--and stupidity. Senator Obama should do the math--and then, make a smart choice. The free ride the media has been giving him won't last forever.