Obama '08?

I don't think sexism doesn't exist -- I don't think Edwards and Obama (I mean, Edwards and Obama of all people!) were "beating up on her" because of any kind of sexism. They were standing up to the front-runner. As a woman, I find the idea that they would give her some kind of space just because she's a woman more annoying than just reacting to her the same way as they would if she happened to be a man who was doing as well as she is in the campaign so far.

Meanwhile, did you read the NYT article? Highly recommended, if not.

"We can't let them do this in a presidential race. They say we're playing the gender card. We are not. We are not. We have got to stand up. It's discrimination against her as a candidate because she is a woman."

Oh man, and now I just found this!

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/07/us/politics/07campaign.html

Quote:

Bill Clinton's suggestion that his wife faced a Republican-style "Swift boat" attack during and after the last Democratic debate drew a rebuke yesterday from Senator Barack Obama, who said, "I was pretty stunned by that statement."

The comments by the former president, at a postal workers' convention in Nevada on Monday, came as he discussed efforts by the moderators and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's Democratic rivals at the debate on Oct. 30 to get Mrs. Clinton to give a quick and clear answer on the issue of driver's licenses for illegal immigrants.

The rest of Ferraro's comments:

Quote:

"We can't let them do this in a presidential race. They say we're playing the gender card. We are not. We are not. We have got to stand up. It's discrimination against her as a candidate because she is a woman."

(And "immigrants," above, not "immigration.")

http://www.reuters.com/article/wtMostRead/idUSN0254101120071102

Obama chides Clinton for playing gender card
Fri Nov 2, 2007 8:38am EDT
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrat Barack Obama, the only black candidate for president, accused rival Hillary Clinton on Friday of hiding behind her gender after she was pummeled in a debate with six male candidates.

"I am assuming and I hope that Sen. Clinton wants to be treated like everybody else," the Illinois senator said in an interview with NBC's "Today Show."

"When we had a debate back in Iowa awhile back, we spent I think the first 15 minutes of the debate hitting me on various foreign policy issues. And I didn't come out and say: 'Look, I'm being hit on because I look different from the rest of the folks on the stage'," he said.

"I assumed it was because there were real policy differences there, and I think that has to be the attitude that all of us take. We're not running for the president of the city council. We're running for the presidency of the United States."

He was speaking a day after New York Sen. Clinton -- the only woman running for president -- urged women voters to rally behind her against "the boys club of presidential politics."

Obama and former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, who are both trailing Clinton in polls by a wide margin, attacked the former first lady's honesty, leadership and ability to win the November 2008 election in a Tuesday night debate.

Obama noted on Friday that Clinton is widely viewed as a tough figure in national politics.

"So it doesn't make sense for her, after having run that way for eight months, the first time that people start challenging her point of view, that suddenly she backs off and says: 'Don't pick on me'," he said.

"That is not obviously how we would expect her to operate if she were president."

(And "immigrants," above, not "immigration.")

But I must say I found Russert to be a dick (with everyone) in that debate. Not least on the Spitzer question, for sure.

The advancement of the likes of Powell and Rice within the Bush administration, argues Davis, exemplifies a flawed understanding of what it means to tackle modern-day racism. "The Republican administration is the most diverse in history. But when the inclusion of black people into the machine of oppression is designed to make that machine work more efficiently, then it does not represent progress at all. We have more black people in more visible and powerful positions. But then we have far more black people who have been pushed down to the bottom of the ladder. When people call for diversity and link it to justice and equality, that's fine. But there's a model of diversity as the difference that makes no difference, the change that brings about no change."

This, she says, is how the presidential candidacy of Barack Obama is generally understood. "He is being consumed as the embodiment of colour blindness. It's the notion that we have moved beyond racism by not taking race into account. That's what makes him conceivable as a presidential candidate. He's become the model of diversity in this period, and what's interesting about his campaign is that it has not sought to invoke engagements with race other than those that have already existed."

Davis's initial response to Obama is one she often gives to questions both specific and general: "It's complicated," she says. Her answers are candid but measured. Not measured necessarily to fit prevailing public opinion - she believes prisons should be abolished, for example - but for their consistency and precision. She talks slowly and in long whole sentences and will often deconstruct the question before replying. Asked about the class stratification in the black community and its implications for black political leadership, she says, "It's complicated. We used to think there was a black community. It was always heterogenous but we were always able to imagine ourselves as part of that community. I would go so far as to say that many middle-class black people have internalised the same racist attitudes to working-class black people as white people have of the black criminal. The young black man with the sagging pants walking down the street is understood as a threat by the black middle class as well. So I don't think it's possible to mobilise black communities in the way it was in the past.

"I don't even know that I would even look for black leadership now. We looked to work with that category because it gave us a sense of hope. But that category assumes a link between race and progressive politics and, as Stuart Hall says, 'There aren't any guarantees.' What's more important than the racial identification of the person is how that person thinks about race."

Walter, as long as some black leaders preach that becoming successful is not being black, you will continue to see the problems that we have. The true racists are the race hustlers like Jesse Jackson, Sharpton, and others like them, almost entirely residing in the Democratic side of American politics.

blatham wrote:

But I must say I found Russert to be a dick (with everyone) in that debate. Not least on the Spitzer question, for sure.

How dare Russert or anyone ask an honest question to expect an honest answer from the Clintons! What a novel concept, to ask a question and expect a straight answer from Hillary.

I can't wait for the mainstream media to finally catch on, and start asking pertinent questions of the Clintons and expect an honest and straight answer. How about asking about what happened to Kathleen Willey in the Whitehouse by serial sex offender, Bill Clinton, whose behavior was protected and enabled by his wife through a network of private investigations and intimidations of his accusers.

I would say if the press would catch on and begin to stand up to this pair of intimidators and their web of supporters, and if Obama and Edwards want to really make some headway, they could do it, and finally get rid of this troublesome twosome from Little Rock. What a great thing that would do for their political party and the country, finally after a nightmarish decade or two.

Footnote, Kathleen Willey was an avid Clinton supporter until she was forced to face the truth about them.

okie wrote:

Walter, as long as some black leaders preach that becoming successful is not being black, you will continue to see the problems that we have. The true racists are the race hustlers like Jesse Jackson, Sharpton, and others like them, almost entirely residing in the Democratic side of American politics.

Can you please show me where Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and others say that "becoming successful is not being black"?

It is commonly known that some blacks label other blacks as acting too white if they don't toe the line of their perceived agenda, a recent example of Jesse Jackson suggesting Obama is acting white.

How dare Russert or anyone ask an honest question to expect an honest answer from the Clintons! What a novel concept, to ask a question and expect a straight answer from Hillary.

okie wrote:

It is commonly known that some blacks label other blacks as acting too white if they don't toe the line of their perceived agenda, a recent example of Jesse Jackson suggesting Obama is acting white.

You haven't answered my question. I asked you to "show me where Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and others say that 'becoming successful is not being black'". Could you please provide links to citations, or admit you can't or won't provide such links? Hearsay and rhetorical questions are not going to convince me of what Jackson and Sharpton said. (On the other hand, you are under no obligation to convince me, so it's okay if you don't.)

Quote:

How dare Russert or anyone ask an honest question to expect an honest answer from the Clintons! What a novel concept, to ask a question and expect a straight answer from Hillary.

Can you really tell me, oakie that you didn't understand Hillary's response to that question? Careful now, your thinking capabilities are on display. It's a big stretch to say that her answer wasn't honest. It may have been too complicated for some in that it had two parts. Some have trouble understanding a two part answer. Heaven forbid someone should try three. Does it not seem possible to you that some questions are too complicated to answer with a yes or a no. Like, "have you finally stopped beating your wife?" Only a man who had been beating his wife could answer that question with a yes or a no. Surely you can understand the trickiness of Russert's Spitzer question.

The fact that we may rejoice in the possibility that a woman or an African American has a chance to win a presidential race doesn't eliminate the possibility that we also believe they are the best person for the job.

Walter,

Maybe Angela Davis should run for president. But oh dear, her answers have way too many parts. There's no time on TV for deconstructed sentences. Interesting article.