I’ve noticed this new common acronym that keeps getting repeated on Hillblogs: WWTSBJQ. Presumably, this stands for ‘Why Won’t the Stupid B*tch Just Quit’. Today, it’s in use to suggest that John Edwards is part of a network of ‘boiz’ that are conspiring to push Clinton out of the race before all the people get to vote. I guess I’m part of that network, and so is Markos and John Aravosis, and a bunch of other male pro-Obama bloggers.
I’ll let others speak for themselves, but I just want to say a few words about my own feelings. For me, the fact that Hillary Clinton is a woman is a plus. For a long time when it looked quite likely that she would be the nominee, I consoled myself with the fact that she would be an inspiration to billions of little girls all over the world. Just today, when I was doing analysis of all the House Races, I took a special interest in the women I identified that have enough money to compete. And, even though both Kay Hagan and Jeanne Shaheen are too ‘New Democrat’ centrist for my tastes, I’m willing to overlook that because I think the Senate desperately needs more female voices (especially the Judiciary Committee). So, while I have a tremendous feeling of satisfaction that Democrats rejected a restoration of the Clintons, I am saddened that so many of her female supporters are feeling such a profound feeling of loss. And, on this blog at least, I’ve maintained a basically zero tolerance policy for anyone calling Clinton gender-based epithets or otherwise negatively referring to her gender.
My opposition to Hillary Clinton has had nothing to do with her gender. I would have been an even harsher critic of her husband, had he been constitutionally permitted to run for a third-term, and done so. For me, the Clintons are largely responsible for the Gingrich Revolution of 1994. Their brand of DLC politics effectively killed off the Democratic Party in the South, and did real damage to the party in the Mountain West. The only places where Clintonism worked were in the (predominately Northern) affluent suburbs. They also ran the DNC in a totally incompetent manner, and saw their liberal and black supporters (the activist base) as a liability that had to be hidden from view.
I also resented having to defend Bill Clinton from impeachment charges. He didn’t deserve to get impeached, but we didn’t deserve to have to defend him against those charges.
Finally, the Clinton’s foreign policy was not to my liking and, in many important ways, laid predicates for the neo-conservative hijacking that followed in the Bush administration. Briefly, relentless eastward NATO expansion set the path for renewed tensions with Russia. Misinformation used to sustain the sanction regime on Iraq, was then twisted to justify the war by Bush. Going into Kosovo without a UN resolution made it much easier to go into Iraq without one.
During the Bush years, while Al Gore and Jimmy Carter were speaking out, Bill Clinton was touring the world with Poppy Bush, while Hillary Clinton was voting for the war and the Kyl-Lieberman amendment. There are so many reasons to oppose the Clintons politically, including the generally pro-war tilt of her official supporters and advisers, that it really shouldn’t be necessary to spell them all out. But I have spelled them out in a brief, cursory way, to make the point that my opposition is based on a wide array of considerations. And these considerations informed my opinion long before the campaign actually started.
I know that most of the serious Clinton supporters have the opinion that it is Barack Obama that injected race into the campaign. We’ll just have to disagree about that. But what I find somewhat curious is the high level of perceived misogyny that HillBloggers attribute to the Obama campaign and to Obama supporters. I know I’ve seen the comments and the t-shirts, and there is no question that there is a lot of misogyny and a lot of it gets directed at Clinton. But not from me. And not from any of the well known bloggers that I read. And not from Obama, or his staffers, or any of the people that have endorsed him or speak for him. There is certainly no misogyny from John Edwards, or John Kerry, or Bill Richardson.
A lot of people are frustrated that Clinton is still in the race because it costs money and time to campaign against her. Barack Obama does not really need to be campaigning in Puerto Rico and Kentucky right now. And he really doesn’t need the Clintons telling voters in West Virginia that he is an elitist. It’s not helpful for the general campaign. So, sometimes people lose their temper and say nasty things. Sometimes people wonder why she won’t drop out because she is hurting the party and hurting Obama. I mean, seriously, do you think it helped us in any way in our quest to defeat John McCain to have our nominee blown out in West Virginia last night?
And, a last point. I recently made a list of who I’d like to see as Obama’s running mate, and a woman topped the list. Gov. Kathleen Sebelius has executive experience, she’s smart, she’s talented, and she has had success attracting more conservative voters without betraying progressive principles. As far as I know, every one of the so-called ‘Boiz’ agrees with me that Gov. Sebelius deserves to be on any short-list for vice-president. And I think we’d all agree that she’d make a fantastic president in 2016, or if the need should arise before then.
Good post, Boo. We need to come together with the Clinton supporters soon. Hopefully Hillary herself will help us out on this once all of the primaries are done. Myself, I’m avoiding getting into any arguments with her supporters lately because they’re obviously going through the stages of grief. So I figure it’s best to just leave them alone to work through much of it amongst themselves, as there’s not much I can do and it seems that whatever we say will be heard as “I told you so” to them. So we wait.
I am really impressed with how Obama has been handling it though. He’s under so much stress campaigning that it would be easy to say something that would sting to the Hillary supporters – but he hasn’t. He’s been the perfect gentleman. He CAN’T come off as an “angry black man” and certainly not with that anger perceived to be directed at a white woman, but somehow her fans imagine some of this anyway. That I do not get.
Well, they’re no calling you a misogynist and suggesting that you just want the ‘b*tch’ to quit.
This is more about defending myself than trying to convince my attackers.
I hear Clinton supporters parroting the exact same talking points, and they don’t sound like they came from the campaign. So where are they coming from?
That whole “Obama injected race” is, as we know, BS. But I hear that a lot. I guess they just never actually heard Bill’s comments, just reports regarding them. I heard them when he first made them, and was shocked. Whatever else I expected, I never expected a fellow Dem to make race an issue. But they did. And they can’t pawn that off on Obama, no matter how hard they try.
And Obama has never played the gender card! Who is running around telling everyone she gets treated differently because she’s a woman? Puhleez, let’s be real here!
Oh gawd – I turned on Hannity and Colmes out of morbid curiosity – waiting through a commercial break to hear “Obama’s sexist comments caught on tape.”
Mostly, I have been truly shocked at the way one set of supporters puts down another. While I’ve seen some animosity from Obama people, nothing can compare to the venom spewed at No Quarter – truly the worst of the worst.
I don’t see any reason why we can’t disagree without calling each other names. I’ve never called anyone a “Clintonoid” but they like to call Obama supporters “Obamazoids.” Words like that are a cheap form of labelism – which, like racism or sexism, applies characters to people as a whole that really only belong to individuals. It’s wrong when Rush Limbaugh does it. And it’s wrong when our guys do it.
Btw – to be fair, I have never called anyone a “rethuglican” either. I just don’t believe in demonizing someone through language.
Our country and indeed planet are in serious trouble. We literally don’t have time for such petty childhood games. Namecalling is cheap and useless, and the resort of the immature. I refuse to go there, and hope others will resist that temptation.
We can’t fix problems in this country without reaching out a bit to our brothers and sisters in the Republican party. Those who call them names just make it harder for us ever to reach necessary agreements and compromises.
Anyway. Off my soapbox. And I still haven’t heard whatever Obama’s allegedly sexist comments were. But given the source, I’m sure the portrayal will be a stretch, at best….
He called someone sweetie. Off with his head!!
I’ve witnessed the antics at NQ since last year. There is no reaching those folks.
Like you, I’v never called them names. I admit that in frustration I did drop a few f bombs on them when they were attacking new people who trying to communicate with them. 🙁
Does anyone know a psychologist or psychiatrist who can monitor the site and write a book about aberrant behavior?
Really.
The “sweetie” thing is kind of annoying, but hey, he very quickly called the reporter to apologize. The other incident that the Taylor Marsh fans tend to cite as proof that Obama has “injected gender” into the campaign is a time when he said, “Periodically, when she’s feeling down…the claws come out.” I admit this is a little problematic, but I also think it could be entirely a coincidence. But overall, I entirely agree with BooMan’s point that Hillary’s gender is a nonfactor in the blogosphere’s and the various Democratic leaders’ resistance to her candidacy.
I confess a morbid fascination with the psychology on display at the Hillary blogs, where Obama is entirely untrustworthy and everyone who supports him is more or less a traitor (a Judas).
The “claws” comment didn’t bother me at all, because I very clearly remember Kerry using the same description of Bush and the Republicans in 2004. Politicians have been using the “claws coming out” line forever.
I didn’t even find the “sweetie” thing very annoying, although I appreciate that Obama called her to apologize. But I’ve called people — male and female (and it actually works better if the person’s male, since it throws them off) — “sweetie” and “sweetheart” in arguments if they attempt to win by talking down to me or argue something that is demonstrably false.
Marsh and her minions also use The Snub(TM) as evidence of Obama’s misogyny, which is just so laughably immature that it still brings a smile to my face. “Yeah, and she’s so not going to the prom with him if he asks her!” Come on.
I think Marsh’s motivations are entirely selfish, though. I gather she wants to be back on the radio, and I’m guessing she may have linked up with Clinton in hopes of Clinton lending a hand on that. Now that Clinton’s campaign is going down the toilet, Marsh has calmed down a bit (or at least had calmed down last I’d heard).
And, anyway, the charge of misogyny from Obama is a joke. The idea that Obama is afraid of strong women is, I think, disproved with two words: Michelle Obama.
All good points, especially the clincher re Michelle Obama.
Well, I’m a feminist woman and I say, “Why Won’t The Selfish Bighead Just Quit!?!” Much as I admire strong, intelligent women, I wouldn’t support Hillary in this primary any more than I’d vote for Maggie Thatcher.
Another rational and reasonable explanation for your perspective on why you have ended up where you are right now in your views on this race and its fallout.
And it will likely sail right past the ears of those most needing to really hear it, listen to it, digest it and understand it.
You owe no one an explanation, though.
And the truth be known, they probably have no real interest in trying to understand the facts you have laid out.
But hey, I’ll definitely give you an ‘A’ for effort.
I think it’s important to write pieces like this despite the fact that people like Lambert Strether, SusanHu, Larry Johnson and the rest of the rest of the ding-a-ling brigade will refuse to “hear it, listen to it, digest it and understand it”. Not because it smacks them down (although that is true), but because it provides a consistent, written record of your stance that can be use to debunk those assholes in the future, when they spread lies about you (or about themselves, which is more likely).
Like our boy President said, “”See in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in,…….”
But I’ll just leave out the last part of this classic Bushism as it does not apply here.
Boo, I agree totally with your assessment of the Clinton years, the DLC ascension and the mismanagement of the DNC, and rest.
People should go here:
http://consortiumnews.com/2008/050308.html
and read Robert Parry’s discovery of the Clinton campaign’s “oppo research” if you still think that it wasn’t Clinton’s people who wanted to blacken Obama.
Rob Perry is great. Also find his article about Bill Clinton not going after the Iran contra criminals.
He had no hope that Hillary would hold anyone accountable for the crimes being committed now.
Also, I told the folks at NQ that running a Southern Strategy on Obama wouldn’t work.
They didn’t listen.
Those who see mysogeny or race in the statements of her adversaries are being blinded by their of worship of Hillary. To them I would say wake up and smell the coffee. Hillary has inserted so much race-based verbiage into her statements that it is sometimes difficult to remember that she is a prominent Democrat. Living only a few miles from Chappaqua, it won’t be easy to forget the tenor of HRC’s statements when next she comes up for senate reelection.
Thank you Booman. It’s not just the boiz — it’s the girlz as well. And it’s been many decades since this particular one has been a “girl.” Those of us who support Obama are treated as traitors to their gender or anti-feminist. I get tired of explaining what I consider to be very sound reasons for not supporting Hillary — none of which have anything to do with her gender. In fact, you’ve expressed my sentiments so well that I think I’ll just pass on your post and save a lot of explaining. Actually, the only thing missing, from my perspective, is that I think Hillary gives feminism a bad name. Kudos!
Thank you. I hear a lot of women making the same argument. The vast majority of women I know are supporting Obama. And, obviously, none of them are supporting him because they think a woman can’t or shouldn’t do the job.
As my wife said, “Why did it have to be HER???” meaning the first serious female candidate for President. We both knew early on that if she did not win, a lot of the blame would be attributed to sexism instead of the real reason that she’s not the best candidate.
I agree with the whole of it.
In re: Sebelius. I think she’s at the top of my list as well, the more I think about it. I’ve been trying to get an idea of how well I think she’d do, and I’m very impressed. Not a bad speaker at all. Knows how to command a crowd (and, like Obama, has an awesome accent, but that’s just my taste).
Roots in Ohio as the daughter of a former governor (a one-term governor but a governor nonetheless). Will have massive appeal with needed constituencies, I think, and won’t sell us out to navigate groups.
Very serious, very intelligent, very likable.
The question is, “What, if anything, does she get you?”
I want to know more about Kaine, and I want to know what Richardson gets us in the Southwest, but I’m leaning towards Sebelius for now.
Jack Gilligan, Sebelius’ father, was a popular Democratic Governor — a rarity in these parts. I think he would help in Ohio and perhaps even wean Ted Strickland from his Hillary attachment — she was helpful during his run and I don’t think he had much of a choice. If he and Gilligan get behind Obama, they would be dynamite. Ted, having come from that part of the state, would really help with Obama’s “Appalachian problem.”
Living in the West, I see the importance of Richardson. When Richardson dropped out just before they got here (Nevada) it really shuffled things up. Most of the Latinos (a HUGE constituency) were for Richardson but settled for Hillary at the last minute, if they even participated. All throughout the west (NM, NV, AZ, CA, OR, WA, CO, ID, TX, MT, etc) we could increase turnout for the general in a big way if we did bilingual voter registration drives and had someone who speaks Spanish on the ticket rallying the massive Latino population – who could go to McCain based on his perceived support of Comprehensive immigration reform.
But I like all of the other suggestions as well.
Here’s the biggest negative.
She’s just not “known.” And that’s Obama’s biggest negative too. One of the reasons people would give for not supporting Obama when i called them in various states was that they really didn’t know him, but the knew Hillary.
I think Obama needs a white male with a strong national profile to the ticket. I think asking people to take a black man AND a woman at the same time might be a bit much for some people. It shouldn’t be that way, and I’d take the chance if the woman was already well known. But outside wonky circles, no one outside of Kansas knows who she is.
Also available in orange.
Booman Tribune ~ A Progressive Community
Most of the world do not need a US female President as inspiration, many countries already had or have their own female leaders. Actually this is something were the US is behind.
Good point. We are at least a generation behind the times.
Yes, but this is still (despite W’s best efforts to destroy it) the most powerful single position in the world.
Hillary is the first woman who has had a chance to win the presidency and so women in particular have rallied to her but two things need to be separated: the historic moment and the actual candidate.
For eight years Hillary built her reputation as a hardworking senator. She made us proud. Negatives about the way she did healthcare in the early ’90’s were quickly forgotten. Out of the gate last year she seemed sunny, successful, and very well-prepared. But then Barack happened and the new version of Hillary began to fade.
Many of us who had supported her watched Hillary begin to transform. She tried an assortment of personae on for size: wistful, haughty, vulnerable, self-assured, policy-wonk, teller of tall tales, personable, pandering. She was sharp; she was soft, but in the end she chose to employ the type of attack techniques she had herself been the recipient of.
To me the fact that Hillary is a woman is no longer a value-added characteristic; she has chosen a political style I cannot admire.
“To me the fact that Hillary is a woman is no longer a value-added characteristic; she has chosen a political style I cannot admire.”
Exactly! I started out this campaign season rooting for Hillary until she started the dirty fighting techniques. Now I have almost as much trouble watching her on the news as I do when Bush appears on screen. I hope in the end she has the class to pull the party together whether she’s on the ticket or not. Another Republican administration would be a disaster in terms of appointments to the Supreme Court.
Clinton has been called a “bitch” all over the internet, primarily on DailyKos. You condemned the use of the term here but if Kos ever did, I didn’t see it. More importantly, though, is that OBAMA never denounced it. Letting your supporters say this kind of stuff is worse than saying it yourself. It’s cowardly.
I don’t think Obama needs to apologize for all the misogyny in America. Yes, there have been extremely dreadful things said about women and Hillary- things that I called out each and every time I saw them. Vile t-shirts, “jokes” violent phrases etc. But he didn’t do them and is not responsible for apologizing for the actions of another. He did not use misogyny to play to a set of voters, unlike Clinton who personally uttered racist statements.
Thinking of it another way, when a wife apologizes for the actions of her boorish husband does she not come off as a weak and pathetic figure? When a father apologizes for the actions of his teenager, rather than ensuring the kid does so himself, isn’t that humiliating for the dad? Strong adults take ownership of their own actions, and not the actions of everyone around them.
And there’s yet another way to think of it- asking Obama to “save me” from the mean kids puts him in a position of authority (like a school principal) over the savee. Hillary is far from powerless, and it demeans her to have others beg Obama from attacks he neither created not enabled.
One thing that’s apparent to me is that there are Republicans throughout the nets stirring up emotions, either using the “b word” or the “n word” or their equivalents in order to push the old divide and conquer.
Yep. Your comment is 100% nonsense.
So Booman is responsible for the actions of people who post on DK? No, that’s insane at all. Obama is responsible for what supporters on a blog say? Okay, so when exactly will Clinton denounce the racist stuff that’s written at No Quarter?
Find a comment at DKos in which someone called Hillary a “bitch” that wasn’t troll-rated. I would be interested to see. The blatant misogyny at DKos is often cited by Hillary bloggers as evidence of gender-based opposition to Hillary’s candidacy, but I’ve never, ever seen such a comment there. If you’re going to accuse a site of condoning misogyny, it seems fair to provide some evidence to back it up.
all 4,610 results?
Nonsense indeed.
Obama is not responsible for what his supporters say, and neither is Clinton.
Until you ask Hillary to denounce the use of the term “Obamazoid” (and worse, n__ lover) by HER supporters you’re just a silly hypocrite on this issue.
Certainly no worse than than “Clintonista”. As to “n_lover”, can you cite where this was used?
You took the words out of my mouth.
It’s not that I don’t want a woman for president or that i don’t think a woman can be president: in fact it’s a national embarrassment that it’s taken so long.
Well, this one has been smelly on both sides on the Net but it does seem to me that the Clintonistas are the author of their own woe. They’ve come across as a bunch of Stormtroopers. Jack and Jill Politics has been referring to Clinton as “Hillpatine” and it does seem apt, give what I’ve seen both from the campaign itself and from the Hillblogs. Not to say that there hasn’t been real venom from our side but I see a lot of that as reaction. It raises my blood pressure to read Jerome or Turkana or Big Tent Democrat so I don’t but lots of us do. As for misogyny, well how is Eva Peron a radical feminist statement? Sure Hillary is a woman but she’s also Bill’s stalking horse for a job he wants but can’t have. Texas had a governor like that in the ’20’s, Ma Ferguson, whose husband was barred from re-election, so his wife ran. Same deal with the Clintons, if you ask me. I’m an anti-imperialist and had a poem printed in Chalmers Johnson’s last book. Chal has the Clintons down as more dangerous as imperialists (because they’re better at it) than either of the Bushes, so that’s it for them, as far as I’m concerned.
I found the poem
NEIGHBORHOOD GIRL
By John Shreffler
She’s new to the neighborhood, her family just moved in
From Greece or somewhere, she’s a great, tall, gawky girl
With braces and earrings and uneven skin:
Hormones and acne, her change is coming in,
And today, she’s playing hooky. January fog.
Orange lights on the school zone sign beat out their tattoo
And caution the Homeland’s socked-in morning rush
With their strobe-light samba: Condition Amber,
As she sits invisible, swinging her legs to the beat,
Perched up high on aluminum over
The uncanny Day-Glo of the key-lime fluorescence
That says: School at the top of this composition.
I see her and she lets me. I’m an old family friend:
Sometimes I play poker with her Aunt Erato.
Her name is Nemesis and she’s just moved in,
She’s new to the neighborhood, she’s checking it out.
[Source: Chalmers Johnson, Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic (Metropolitan Books, 2007), p. 282 n.16.]
Last comment on Chalmers assessment of the Clintons hits the target. Bill, with the help of conservative DLC Dems and Republicans, gave up all the trade agreements that gutted the working class. That’s helped usher in the economic demise we see all around us.
John Shreffler, your poem is magnificent. I was deeply impressed when I first read it in Nemesis The Last Days of the American Republic by Chalmers Johnson.
And, yes, I believe the goddess of divine justice and vengeance is checking us out. This is why I am recommending to my adult children that they move to New Zealand.
Relax, rejoice, go barefoot.
Thanks all. I’m not any more vain than any other poet but I cherish this sub-thread and its kind words. I’ve been busting a gut pulling for something to make my poem moot since I wrote it 4 years ago. Perhaps Obama can help us pull it off. it’s not too late, even now, though Bush and Cheney are working overtime to hit Iran and then Nemesis is gonna sing. Hope for the best.
Boo,
I share your views. I really value your opinion because not many people on our side spoke out to oppose what Bill did in Kosovo because he was a democrat.
People didn’t think of the consequences.
They would have done the same thing with his wife in the WH as she obliterated Iran and anyone else the neocons wanted wiped off the map.
I don’t share your opinion on the female Clinton supporters. As a woman…they shame me.
Obama is not responsible for all of the slights that men inflicted on some of them.
They need to get over it.
For them to think that Hillary should be rewarded in some way in spite of her despicable behavior and the vile campaign tactics she employed is outrageous!
Let them sulk.
OT: Bush is on CNN comparing democrats to the Nazi regime. Ya think Hillary and her supporters will speak out against Bush?
I say no.
You can take a map of Eastern Europe in the middle of WWII, when the Nazis ruled the continent, and it looks remarkably like it does now.
Fascism gives people nationalism and an outlet for prejudice and hatred in exchange for the people’s wealth. When the Nazis took over they looted the national treasuries and gave the Croats permission to kill Serbs. Look at how ethnic hatreds get played up nowadays. And up from the ground come a bubblin’ crude, or some other resource.
Divide and conquer. Where have I seen that lately?
Also look at how history is distorted. I bet you most people had were lead to turn against the Serbs had no idea that the US was supporting a Croat (Alija Izetbegovic) who had been a member of the SS in his youth.
ooops, he was a Bosnian….still a member of the SS. The Croation guy named Tudjman worked with the Nazi regime.
When your only options are Nazis or Communists then you’re guaranteed to get screwed…
Thank you, thank you by the 10-tonner load.
every word BooMan, a hearty Amen. especially this tops my resentment:
Hillary’s time chart expired a long time ago in 2002.
Agree. When blogs first became popular, I was shocked and dismayed by all the love for the Clinton’s that was sporadically expressed. I never felt that way. I hated what they did to us with NAFTA, the Helms Burton Act, the forerunner to the Patriot Act, etc.
I saw them as better than the alternative, and that was the best I could say for them.
Boo, I salute your fairness to HRC in this excruciating campaign and I acknowledge your swiftness in correcting anyone who dipped into the tempting waters of misogyny. (Nevertheless, I stand by my descriptions of this deeply wounded and deeply wounding human being.)
Your summation of the Clinton faults at home and abroad is concise and very accurate IMO. This is a fine posting and I agree totally with it. Keep up the great work!
Let’s slow down the American steamroller, before it flattens the planet.
Ahhh…so we’re going to blood now? one tenth, one tenth of one percent what are we looking at as the rock bottom definition.
Perhaps I can get remarried, have kids and start a Quatroon branch of my family tree?
One Drop…
The real reason Obama is pushing forward to the nomination is due to the twitter message I received earlier today: