Grar.
So, there's this pundit, Rachel Maddow, who's got a show on MSNBC and Air America, and who does commentary on some of MSNBC's other news shows. I've seen a couple of clips of her interviews on the Tubes (which are very good), and just went and watched a few more before I posted this. She's center-left, no-nonsense, focused-on-the-facts, straightforward -- in other words, not really a controversial figure, unlike many of her colleagues. She reminds me of what Cokie Roberts would have been like in her younger years if she took herself just a little less seriously.
I mention this to explain my outrage at Fox News' criticism of her this morning. A "media analyst" they had on referred to her as "that lesbian Air America host", and the collected Fox News crew started laughing. It doesn't take too much insight to realize that this is a crude appeal to the homophobia of the average Fox News watcher.
Yes, she's a lesbian; I had to go look this up on Wikipedia.
So what?
If you don't like someone's analysis, attack it. Figure out how it's wrong, and say so. But dredging up questions of sex, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, religion, hair color, whatever just to appeal to bigotry is absurd and shameful. This crap has been going on for a while in this election, and it's time that it stop.
Does her lesbianism have anything to do with whether or not she's got valid things to say about the news? Of course not.
Does Obama's race have any bearing on whether or not he's qualified to be president? Well, maybe; there's always the concern that someone will preferentially look out for the interests of his own race. But that's a policy concern. Nobody's been saying that; they've just been saying "Oooh, look! Black candidate!" as though it matters. Sure, it's historically interesting, but does it really have any bearing on his qualifications for President? Hell no.
People made a big deal about Clinton's sex. Sure, it's historically interesting. Does it have any bearing on her worthiness to be President? Nope. She is no more or less worthy to lead this country because of her sex, and it pissed me off that people kept obsessing over it during the primaries rather than talking about the issues. Will her sex affect how she governs? Somehow I don't think so. What do they think, she's going to give tax credits for bras or something? It was The Black Candidate vs. The Woman Candidate*, as though their demographics overshadow the real issues.
(*Intentionally offensive use of "woman" as adjective is intentional)
Now, there's Palin. Everyone's made a big deal about her having b00bi35. Her choice (especially in light of some of the speeches she gave) was pretty clearly an attempt to use her sex to appeal to a segment of voters. A bunch of conservative commentators who didn't cut their mikes even think so.
Here we go again: a candidate's most salient characteristic is her sex. She's quite clearly unsuited to be VP, but the GOP's hoping that her b00bi35 will outweigh everything else for the voters.
She's also been questioned about her religion: Pentecostal/Assembly of God fundamentalist Christianity. Does her belief in God make her more or less qualified to hold office? Hell no. But, just as it's fine to ask whether Obama's race might lead him to make decisions that aren't good for the country as a whole (which I don't believe is the case, of course), it's also proper to question whether she might make poor decisions motivated by her faith. She's told her church to pray for an oil pipeline, she's said that the war in Iraq is "God's plan", she opposes the teaching of biology in schools, and she supports "abstinence-only sex education"... which has been shown to be worse than useless. (She's got access to a pretty convincing n=1 study on that.)
It is right to ask these questions -- in fact, Ms. Maddow did in one of the clips I just went to go watch. Palin's answer might be "My faith won't lead me to make bad decisions; it's a personal matter." If she can convince us of that, like Kennedy did in 1960 regarding his Catholicism, then fine. It's a valid question, because it's a policy question.
But I am fucking sick of people making a big deal about the race/sex/sexual orientation/whatever of candidates/pundits/figures. It doesn't matter that Obama's black; it didn't matter that Clinton's female; it shouldn't matter (but the GOP hopes that it does) that Palin's female; and it sure as fuck shouldn't matter to the talking heads at Fox News that their opposite number at MSNBC is a lesbian.
Maybe they're just sore that she's smarter than they are.
I mention this to explain my outrage at Fox News' criticism of her this morning. A "media analyst" they had on referred to her as "that lesbian Air America host", and the collected Fox News crew started laughing. It doesn't take too much insight to realize that this is a crude appeal to the homophobia of the average Fox News watcher.
Yes, she's a lesbian; I had to go look this up on Wikipedia.
So what?
If you don't like someone's analysis, attack it. Figure out how it's wrong, and say so. But dredging up questions of sex, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, religion, hair color, whatever just to appeal to bigotry is absurd and shameful. This crap has been going on for a while in this election, and it's time that it stop.
Does her lesbianism have anything to do with whether or not she's got valid things to say about the news? Of course not.
Does Obama's race have any bearing on whether or not he's qualified to be president? Well, maybe; there's always the concern that someone will preferentially look out for the interests of his own race. But that's a policy concern. Nobody's been saying that; they've just been saying "Oooh, look! Black candidate!" as though it matters. Sure, it's historically interesting, but does it really have any bearing on his qualifications for President? Hell no.
People made a big deal about Clinton's sex. Sure, it's historically interesting. Does it have any bearing on her worthiness to be President? Nope. She is no more or less worthy to lead this country because of her sex, and it pissed me off that people kept obsessing over it during the primaries rather than talking about the issues. Will her sex affect how she governs? Somehow I don't think so. What do they think, she's going to give tax credits for bras or something? It was The Black Candidate vs. The Woman Candidate*, as though their demographics overshadow the real issues.
(*Intentionally offensive use of "woman" as adjective is intentional)
Now, there's Palin. Everyone's made a big deal about her having b00bi35. Her choice (especially in light of some of the speeches she gave) was pretty clearly an attempt to use her sex to appeal to a segment of voters. A bunch of conservative commentators who didn't cut their mikes even think so.
Here we go again: a candidate's most salient characteristic is her sex. She's quite clearly unsuited to be VP, but the GOP's hoping that her b00bi35 will outweigh everything else for the voters.
She's also been questioned about her religion: Pentecostal/Assembly of God fundamentalist Christianity. Does her belief in God make her more or less qualified to hold office? Hell no. But, just as it's fine to ask whether Obama's race might lead him to make decisions that aren't good for the country as a whole (which I don't believe is the case, of course), it's also proper to question whether she might make poor decisions motivated by her faith. She's told her church to pray for an oil pipeline, she's said that the war in Iraq is "God's plan", she opposes the teaching of biology in schools, and she supports "abstinence-only sex education"... which has been shown to be worse than useless. (She's got access to a pretty convincing n=1 study on that.)
It is right to ask these questions -- in fact, Ms. Maddow did in one of the clips I just went to go watch. Palin's answer might be "My faith won't lead me to make bad decisions; it's a personal matter." If she can convince us of that, like Kennedy did in 1960 regarding his Catholicism, then fine. It's a valid question, because it's a policy question.
But I am fucking sick of people making a big deal about the race/sex/sexual orientation/whatever of candidates/pundits/figures. It doesn't matter that Obama's black; it didn't matter that Clinton's female; it shouldn't matter (but the GOP hopes that it does) that Palin's female; and it sure as fuck shouldn't matter to the talking heads at Fox News that their opposite number at MSNBC is a lesbian.
Maybe they're just sore that she's smarter than they are.