Embarassing, painful to watch, but hell, there's probably drunker crazier people saying stupider things right now off camera. I wonder what she does for a living.
"I was a second-class citizen then and I'm nothing now."
Yes, because Obama will win the nomination women are being oppressed? I guess some women really do identify with Hillary. I still don't see how HRC would represent women's rights better than Obama. What, in particular, has she done to that end?
All of this frames many women’s reactions to Hillary. If she’s a feminist, how could she continue to support this war for so long? If she’s such a passionate advocate for children, women and families, how could she countenance the ongoing killing of innocent Iraqi families, and of American soldiers who are also someone’s children? If it would be so revolutionary to have a female as president, why does she feel like the same old poll-driven opportunistic politician who seems to craft her positions accordingly?
Well, my allegiances are known (and volunteered for) but I do have to say one thing about her litany did resonate- can you imagine if this were a Barack Obama v. Joe Biden race? Or Tom Harkin? In that alternate reality, Obama would be the Nader candidate- a great idea, really, we mean it, but just not workable (so step away from the opposition now.) He is still in the race because his opponent is Hillary Clinton, not because she's female or because she's unable to control her sense of entitlement, but because she's so bad at assuming the mantle of entitlement. She gets caught making up outrageous lies not because the media is hard on her, but because actually, most of these "old poll-driven opportunistic politicians" have spent their adult lives courting the exact photogenic moments she'd give her eyeteeth to pull off. If you're in the fold, even if you aren't currently running for office, you know you have to go to at least one war zone where the snipers are shooting at you on camera, if only to pass out a couple ceremonial MREs
( ... )
And Golda Meir. But, then again, when has Israel ever had peace?
"He is still in the race because his opponent is Hillary Clinton. . ."
I think both candidates benefited from the presence of the other. Without either of the candidates you would have a different race altogether.
From now on all major political races should be a 2/1 competition between everyone vs. "the straight white protestant guy." I think it will be healthy for the country. We can just beat on each other until we're too tired. Like when we were kids! Whatever the outcome, the good ol' boy establishment network will slowly lose ground.
Next up: Barney Frank vs. Bill Richardson. Git'er done.
"He is still in the race because his opponent is Hillary Clinton, not because she's female or because she's unable to control her sense of entitlement. . ."I think she's losing because she's running your conventional Democrat's campaign. I don't think she's doing anything that Gore or Kerry wouldn't have done in her exact position, although at least they'd be more gracious
( ... )
"Also, I mean, there's no guarantee that women are any less prone to starting idiotic wars or supporting horrible social welfare rollbacks-"
I think what you are proving is that successful female politicians win by adopting and mastering the (all-male) political culture. You could argue that feminism has advocated two contradicting attitudes: Equality and Reform. Many women have defined feminism as the right to compete equally with men. And to do that they have embraced the values of the system that retarded their own success. (When did Margaret Thatcher ever declare her devotion to any woman but herself?) But then other feminists have said, "Fuck the patriarchy. We want to subvert it." Those are two different and opposing goals. Of course, as accommodating as women are conditioned to be, we knock ourselves senseless trying to do both.
Uh, I think I just said what basically every issue of BUST magazine has said since its inception. So. . . THAT'S embarrassing.
Click to view
Reply
Yes, because Obama will win the nomination women are being oppressed? I guess some women really do identify with Hillary. I still don't see how HRC would represent women's rights better than Obama. What, in particular, has she done to that end?
I like this paragraph I found on the netz:
All of this frames many women’s reactions to Hillary. If she’s a feminist, how could she continue to support this war for so long? If she’s such a passionate advocate for children, women and families, how could she countenance the ongoing killing of innocent Iraqi families, and of American soldiers who are also someone’s children? If it would be so revolutionary to have a female as president, why does she feel like the same old poll-driven opportunistic politician who seems to craft her positions accordingly?
Reply
Reply
"He is still in the race because his opponent is Hillary Clinton. . ."
I think both candidates benefited from the presence of the other. Without either of the candidates you would have a different race altogether.
From now on all major political races should be a 2/1 competition between everyone vs. "the straight white protestant guy." I think it will be healthy for the country. We can just beat on each other until we're too tired. Like when we were kids! Whatever the outcome, the good ol' boy establishment network will slowly lose ground.
Next up: Barney Frank vs. Bill Richardson. Git'er done.
"He is still in the race because his opponent is Hillary Clinton, not because she's female or because she's unable to control her sense of entitlement. . ."I think she's losing because she's running your conventional Democrat's campaign. I don't think she's doing anything that Gore or Kerry wouldn't have done in her exact position, although at least they'd be more gracious ( ... )
Reply
Reply
I think what you are proving is that successful female politicians win by adopting and mastering the (all-male) political culture. You could argue that feminism has advocated two contradicting attitudes: Equality and Reform. Many women have defined feminism as the right to compete equally with men. And to do that they have embraced the values of the system that retarded their own success. (When did Margaret Thatcher ever declare her devotion to any woman but herself?) But then other feminists have said, "Fuck the patriarchy. We want to subvert it." Those are two different and opposing goals. Of course, as accommodating as women are conditioned to be, we knock ourselves senseless trying to do both.
Uh, I think I just said what basically every issue of BUST magazine has said since its inception. So. . . THAT'S embarrassing.
Reply
Leave a comment