Sexism and double-standards

The front-runner is always 'attacked.'

The front-runner always points out that they're being 'attacked.'

That's the way the game is played. In 2003, Howard Dean complained about "pulling buckshot" out of his rear end. This is just what happens.

But when Hillary Clinton points out the same thing, people assume she's "whimpering," saying "poor little me," and "playing the woman card."

Is this not a double standard?

but, when it comes to Hatin' on Hillary, fact, reason, clarity, sense and all those other qualities I usually associate with Democrats rarely come into play.

but there's so much hypocrisy when it comes to anything Clinton, I'm not surprised.

OPrah and a lot of the blacks to vote for him. Isn't that pandering to the blacks and if we did wouldn't we be called racist...Sure we would..double standard. But then you all can bitch about HIllary, saying she is a woman, but we don't dare mention Obama being black.

Obama is black.

There. I mentioned it. :shrug:

... racist.

it's understandable.

She hasn't said, "They're attacking me BECAUSE I am a woman."

perhaps he had a Donny ditty on his mind?

were Hillary I would tell them to go to HELL!!! either you vote for me or you don't:evilgrin:

:spray:

Dems forget that way too often.

A pile-on suggests cooperation between the pilers, doesn't it? An exculusive club based on gender means being opposed by them means it's about gender, doesn't it? Glass ceilings are unfair limitations put on women and enforced by big meanie men, aren't they?

(Let's not forget the exaggeration in this spectacle of self-pity: only three of these cads were attacking her; she's literally doubling the horrid peril with this distortion.)

Patti Solis Doyle says:

"On that stage in Philadelphia, we saw six against one. Candidates who had pledged the politics of hope practiced the politics of pile on instead. Her opponents tried a whole host of attacks on Hillary.

She is one strong woman. She came through it well. But Hillary's going to need your help."

That's "...one strong WOMAN...", not "...but she's tougher than that..." or even "...but that can't stop her..."

They're being very careful about not coming out and saying that this group of beastly men are taking her down because she's a woman, but they're definitely playing to the cheap seats about her being a strong woman; hell, you can even hear her roar.

Here's some not-too-subtle accusing of sexist bullying from everybody's friend Mark Penn, quoted from an article in The Hill by Sam Youngman:

"He also said criticisms from Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and former Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) would backfire and that he was already “detecting some backlash,” particularly among female voters. Those female voters are saying, “Sen. Clinton needs our support now more than ever if we’re going to see this six-on-one to try to bring her down,” Penn told those on the campaign call."

That makes her the champion of women in his eyes, and that they see their heroine being unfairly beset by gender exclusivists from the evil primitive club. That's playing the gender card.

It's a coy, passive-aggresive way of saying that the males are attacking especially because of her gender.

Combine the statements "all-boys club of presidential politics" with a "six against one pile-on", and it's basically a version of they're all ganging up on me and being so mean because I'm not a boy.

Of course she doesn't come right out and say it; she's a bit off balance, but she's smart and she's got a hell of a lot of self-control.

Journalists are characterizing it as such, as in the Washington Post, and the panelists on "The View" are saying it pretty clearly. Surely the Clinton campaign has some pull with them, so if they don't want this impression to be brought forth by others they could stop it.

Obviously, they want it both ways: play for sympathy without being seen as doing it themselves.

Rick never said "Play it again, Sam" either, but that's what he meant.

It's about her campaign's "pull" with the media?

I think it's a tempest in a teapot.

a woman running for pres, just because of gender. but I've growed up a bit and read a lot more. Hillary dissapoints greatly. Different underwear, same corporate schtick.

I'm talking about something different.

it's a given. But I have not really noticed much of that here - most criticisms toward her are on policy, voting, etc.,
I refuse to give her any Slack 'because she's a woman'.

About being a woman in politics.

And they are all true for a woman in politics.

It is a boys club. The presidency is the highest glass ceiling. Hillary just happens to be a woman and would be the first in history to be president if she wins. She is already in a historic position as a woman in this race. The idea that she isn't allowed to talk about this is absurd.