As Hillary starts negotiating the terms of her surrender it would be so surprising and so uplifting if she would take the high road. Surely her last-ditch message to superdelegates cannot be an argument that America is too racist to elect a black president. That just cannot be the legacy of her historic campaign.
As I've written here before I gave Mrs. Clinton the benefit of the doubt for months while others saw Machiavellian manipulation, but these last death throes of her presidential bid are becoming dangerously depressing.
I keep going back to John Edwards's seemingly off-the-cuff response in the South Carolina debate. When asked if he thought some would vote for him precisely because he was neither a woman nor black he shot back, "If that's the only reason they're voting for me I don't want their vote."
With at least twenty percent of white Clinton supporters in both Kentucky and West Virginia admitting that race was a factor in their decision-making how hard would it have been for Hillary to say she didn't want to win that way; that the America she intended to lead was better than that. When John Edwards saw that ugliness he jumped back in and endorsed Obama and Jim Webb, Appalachian himself (and Obama's future VP), just chimed in urging tolerance and mutual understanding.
Instead of ducking, winking and nodding if Hillary had addressed the issue head on, wouldn't that have been the Presidential thing to do?
And as Machiavelli could have told her from his grave, she'd still have gotten the racist vote, she just wouldn't look as if she were courting it.
Trey Ellis is the author of Bedtime Stories: Adventures in the Land of Single-Fatherhood.
That is ridiculous intepretation of what's goin on. Maybe the working class voters she has attracted simply think that Clinton understands their needs better than Obama and that she is more of a fighter for them?
Maybe the pollsters who ask "is race and issue in this election?" should ask the direct questions, "are you not voting for Obama because he is black? Many people would answer "is race and issue in this election?" as yes, when they are not racist as I think everyone (and certainly the pundits on TV and in columns) agrees that race is indeed a factor, sometimes good and and sometimes bad. Maybe the people who answer yes are saying that many AAs support Obama because he is black. Whatever it is, I am so sick and tired of pollsters asking indirect quesitons and people making assumptions/interpretations about the answers that may not be there. Ask the darn question straight out , "will you not vote for Obama because he is black" or stop your assumptions otherwise and stop yet more blame on Hillary for people's shortcomings.
Hillary is not countingon racists, get over it.!
Is this what we can expect from an Obama presidency every time he is criticized or his approval ratings drop? Charges of racism at every turn? Pleeeze. Ask yourself. Why does the issue of race never come up with Colin Powell or Condoleeza Rice? Just curious.
Tell me again how Obama's not getting votes just because he's black?
And yet you all bitch and moan...."I'm not voting for a woman just because she's a woman!!" Nice if it could go both ways.
We must be truthful with ourselves about this primary. Obama is the presidential nominee and Hillary has lost with no possible way of winning. If your candidate is losing or winning, there is no need to degrade the other candidate or anyone posting on this comment board. We can call the candidates racist or sexist, but the true prejudices are exhibited by some of the people posting here.
To disrespect the candidates with rumors and untruths is harmful to the party. Making statements about Obama or Clinton without data to support your argument will only infuriate their supporters.
As my mother told me all my life—God does not like ugly. Therefore, be careful how you treat people. If we want change it must first start with us.
Instead of all of this bickering maybe we should be focusing on Bush starting a war with Iran before he leaves office.
That was not the only time. When the Rev. Wright controversy arose, she could have taken the high road and defended Obama; it would have made her more presidential and bigger in our minds.
But ambition is often blind, and her desire to win nicely was overcome by her desire to win at all costs when she fell behind, not because of sexism, as she and her feminnazi supporters assert, but because she ran a poor campaign and didn't earn the voter's trust nor did she have a pulse on what voters were thinking.
This has been a fascinating primary, revealing once and for all why so many people despise the Clintons. There is justice in the world after all.
How ironic.
Seriously. Not. Helping.
No she is loosing because of how she played the game and the disdain she showed the people she is now claiming to fight for. However use of such hateful terms as "feminazi" do more damage to your argument and your cause than the rest of the post helps it.
Three pages back I posted to Trey asking where Obama's gender speech is, and I talked a little about the intersection of race and gender. I thought it was interesting that I got these responses: (Continued content):
4. Bettysdad responded by saying feminism has a respected history ONLY with over 50 females who use it as an excuse to blame personal failure on gender. Ouch! (and I'm not over 50 btw).
5. Paganmist responded by saying that he/she feels that feminsm should be about equality, NOT PREFERENCE, and that the RULES SHOULD BE THE SAME. Yeah....rules the same. It doesn't matter if you need day care because you used your uterus, the rules must be the same, dammit! I think you should explain your theory to the black community. I'm sure they'll agree that affirmative action was also unnecessary.
All in all, I receive lots of snide reponses, but no support. I think this pretty much validates the fact that a gender speech is way, way overdue here, because folks definitely have problems with gender.
And by the way, to all those who attacked me for being a "whiny" clinton supporter, ...I voted for Obama. But who knows if he'll get elected when his supporters continue to treat people in this horrible fashion.
Like Obama's speech on race, I would hope that such a speech would call on the better angels of our nature to raise up the country as a whole to a more perfect union. While there has been a great deal of misogyny exposed in the campaign,I would not want the speech, for my daughters' sake, to focus on victimization but to emphasize the benefits to us all from the full and just inclusion of women in all aspects of society and government.
Like Obama's speech on racism, I'd like the speaker to weave their unique personal experience into a broader fabric that speaks to and challenges us all.
To answer your question directly, I think that would be a difficult speech for Senator Obama to give effectively. I suspect that he would offend some for presuming to speak for women, and could not speak as directly to personal experience.
What Senator Obama might do I suppose.. in the example of John Edwards cited by Trey... is to say that he does not want to votes of anyone supporting him just because he is a man. But does anyone really believe that any voter prejudiced enough to vote against Senator Clinton on the basis of gender would be free enough of prejudice to vote for Senator Obama?
But yes, at some point, a national conversation on the problem of sexism and women's rights is warrented for our country. And while I agree with you, when you said any speech about it shouldn't be about victimization, I don't want that a catchphrase excuse to back away from the tremendous work and strides the women's movement afforded this country. Some wrongfully believe that if you are a woman, and stand up for your gender, you're attacking men or acting like a victim. Not at all. Just as Obama's speech had no embarrassment about his people's civil rights past, no apologies for civil rights protests, no apologies for being black.......we need to get to a point where we stop apologizing for feminism. If others can't recognize and show respect, then there's no starting point for a conversation.
1. Facingrealit responsed by listing a bunch of ideas for laws he feels Obama passed, some gender related some not. But Trey's question was not about laws. You could just as easily look at Clinton laws, and there'd be more of them.
2. Southernsepia said that I should stick to the facts, and then said blacks are disproportionately at war. But that's not a fact, it's a lie. Of 45,586 enlisted combat infantryman, 10.6% are black.
3. FogCityJohn responded to this particular statement I made: "The powerful, outspoken, straight black male leader is a seductive thing in your community, and holds special status, enthusiastically supported by black females who see the larger white-controlled society as a greater foe than any gender inequality," ...........by saying that my use of the word "SEDUCTIVE" was "SEXUALIZING THE BROTHAS." My response to that, other than to laugh and say find a dictionary, is to advise you not to take a job working for the Obama campaign. They don't need to crash and burn.
To be continued.............
Obama supporters you don't need to act so desperate.
He's ahead! Whats your motivation to distort?Calm down and enjoy the ride. .
Sirs,
I had hopes that I had finally found someone who would be a voice for me, Senator Obama. I am saddened to find that the hope I once had is slowly slipping away.
I had hoped that the democratic party would stand up to Senator Clinton after her race baiting comments "Hard working Americans, White Americans", but to my disappointment that is not the case.
My pledge to you:
I will not vote for her.
I will not vote for Obama/HRC...
I will donate to any campaign that apposes Hillary Clinton...in any elected office
I will donate to campaigns either Republican or Democrat that appose people who are her supporters.
My disgust in the Democratic Party has helped me find my own voice. That voice will be against you and all those that stand with her.
Sorry to shout, but sexism and misogyny have been FAR more prevalent in this race than race. Sexism is far more pervasive in our culture and worse, far more accepted. Obama should address this immediately. To ignore it is not presidential. Obama, show some leadership and address sexism immediately!
And this race-baiting is getting ridiculous. I think most of the grown-ups are pretty sick of it.
Yea!! Between Ferraro, Rendell, and Clinton herself, it is getting out of hand!
(From Tues 5/21)
"...while speaking the truth about tonight’s Kentucky vote. In the video clip below, Gergen says what many have been thinking for the past week: What on earth is Hillary Clinton thinking, courting the racist vote as a last-ditch effort to win the nomination?....
....He goes further, after hearing the appalling Kentucky statistics rattled off by Wolf Blitzer, challenging Hillary Clinton to take a step back and tell the racist voters that if they voted for her simply because they won’t vote for a black guy, she doesn’t want their vote either. He mixes in her sexism complaints and suggests that for someone who is complaining about sexism, she should be speaking truth about the racism inherent in the exit statistics, denouncing it, and not allowing it to be legitimized in our culture."
http://www.culturekitchen.com/liza/blog/david_gergen_and_cnn_pundits_challenge_hillary_cli
He and his wife, if not bigots, act like ones and their pastor sure as hell is one so is a white redneck a racist because he won't vote for a black bigot?
You liberals, progressives, commies, greens... whatever the hell you call yourselves are one screwed up piece of work.
1) She didn't get her question answered.
2) For calling her sweetie. He explained that he calls a lot of people sweetie. Let's remember he has a wife and two daughters, and I would bet he calls THEM sweetie. It can become automatic sometimes. I know it does for me. I call my granddaughter sweetie, as well as my daughters, and sometimes, well sometimes it just comes out when addressing other people too.
Oh, and the term "empty suit" is code.....Google is your friend.
Your comment really reeks with racism. I'll bet you have no problem though with Hagee's stance that Hitler was doing God's work.
PERIODicly when she feels down ( she's biologically unfit by reason of hormonal cycles)
J z 's " i got a 99 problems but a bitch ain't one" as a victory song
"Who does she think she is - Annie Oakley?