Certain Hillary posters here continue posting-without evidence-that Obama has run a sexist campaign.

Give a verifiable example of this, or shut the fuck up. I'm not talking about asshat posters here who've said nasty things, or the "iron my shirts" assholes from this past winter. You keep saying "he's run a sexist campaign," but when pressed for examples, you offer NOTHING.

Time to put up or shut up.

:sarcasm:

Right back atcha, buddy.

with you non-response to the question, thanks:dilemma:

It needs to stop.

the only ones that post "hideously ugly accusations" here. I'm signing off the computer for tonight, have a good night. :hi:

Oops, not enough room in the title... entire OP:

yadayadayada (1000+ posts) Mon May-26-08 07:28 PM

Original message

When BO sat in the pews for 20 years do you think his children were there and heard Rev Wright's racist talk?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=6139439

--------------------

Is this your idea of "unity"?

If you have, could you show me the link? I'd be glad to kick it up for you.

always agreed with them when they have. If I started such a thread I'd be pummeled.

I couldn't care less about unity and brotherhood and hope and change. We're all faced with the same choices, and the same consequences. I don't care if we play nice getting there, and don't have much respect for those who need that to do what's right.

If I started such a thread I'd be pummeled.

So do it anyways. Better than just complaining about the lack of it, no? :shrug:

I won't pummel you, I promise.

Notice the posting date?

yadayadayada (1000+ posts) Mon May-26-08 07:28 PM

Original message

When BO sat in the pews for 20 years do you think his children were there and heard Rev Wright's racist talk?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=6139439

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

:nopity:

:applause:

sarcasm

Which is a sexist code word, apparently.

However, I do believe he has looked the other way when the body politik has engaged in demeaning stereotypes like what you've mentioned above.

I really wish he'd say something against such statements, especially after Clinton officially concedes.

concedes).

It would be nice if he gave a dressed up, nuanced speech on feminism and politics as he did on race-relations and politics.

He could give the speech on race in part because he is black. He's not a woman, so a speech about sexism or feminism wouldn't have the same impact.

as does Hillary. All is fair in love and war and politics, if you put yourself out there as a candidate and hope to become a world leader, you better be willing to be examined under a microscope, picked at and ridiculed. That is the nature of our politics, that is what happens when freedom of speech is a treasured right. HRC has said it, Bill has said it, if you can't stand the scrutiny, the mockery, the examinations and the dissent then get out of the race/kitchen/game.

Nothing hillary has been subjected to differs from anything any other candidate has been subjected to. Maybe an adjective change, maybe a different noun used in the name calling, but all in all, she shouldn't expect anything more or less than what she has received and she is no victim.

As a female, I resent like hell the victim game she plays and her campaign and husband play and some of her supporters foster. She is running for the toughest job in the world, she better be able to take the heat, take the pressure, the name calling, the mockery. If not, why the hell is she running?

I find this quote disgusting. "Nothing hillary has been subjected to differs from anything any other candidate has been subjected to."

I'll show you...on this forum and in the media...where Hillary has been called a bitch, a cunt, a ball breaker, a nut cracker, and on and on and on. Show me where, on this forum Obama has been called the N word or anything like it.

One of the problems women have had since they decided they wanted the vote was other women running to walk behind their men while their men patted them on the head and told them to get back in the kitchen.
I don't give a sh** whether you feel like a victim or not. It has nothing to do with that. It has to do with the lack of respect shown to ALL women when using the terms we hear and see in the media and from Obama supporters. I don't care whether you vote for Obama or the woman in the moon. That kind of insulting sexist language would not be tolerated one moment if it were racist language and you know it. People would speak against it, not condone it or deny it. Where are the people who stand just as tall against sexism?
This really has little to do with Hillary. It has to do with the terms used to describe and humiliate her, and, in the process, all women.
And a person running for President who doesn't have the guts to stand up and say that kind of language is not tolerable can hardly get my vote.

to belittle, insult and minimize their efforts and person? Oh please, the adjectives used to describe her may be different, the nouns she has been called are different, but the intent is the same and is what she knew or should know would happen.

Think of the names Margaret Thatcher has been called, the Queens over the centuries. Consider every foul thing you have called Bush or Reagan or another other politician that angers you, disgusts you or that you don't like.

The misogyny heaped on Clinton by the MSM has been disgusting (though not unexpected since we live under a patriarchy, duh). I wish he would have mentioned it in his otherwise excellent speech on race.

but i am afraid that at his point he would then be ridiculed for pandering... He is kinda in a damned if you do damned if you don't position. I think that it would be great if he was able to give this type of speech with Hillary by his side after she has officially endorsed him. (assuming he is the winner of course) What do you think?

If it were earlier and he were chasing Dem women's votes, then he'd likely look like he was pandering, but now it would be one of the most beneficial olive branches he could offer Clinton supporters.

thanks for your opinion.

Oh yes, she joined in the barrage.

Where were Hillary's comments in support of Obama against McCain?
Oh that? she led the charge.

I thought Hillary said she could handle anything because she had experience, and that Obama would wither under right-wing like tactics.

The only one who seems to have withered is Hillary.

Barack Obama.

Who will have the mike after this is all over?

Barack Obama.

Who needs to reach out to Clinton supporters after this is all said and done?

Barack Obama.

I bet he will. :)

Shit like this gets posted DAILY:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6173941&mesg_id=6173941

And it gets posted over and over, with zero evidence to back it up (because there IS NONE).

It's a hideous accusation, it's untrue, and it needs to STOP.

What's the issue here?

I am NOT TALKING about the poll. I'm talking about the OP's statement that Obama has run a sexist campaign.

But the Pew Poll that she posted demonstrates the swaying of white female opinion away from Obama. She believes that it's indicative of Obama's sexist campaign, with which I disagree. I think it's because Clinton has solidified stronger female support since January.

Now, if I'm supposed to be liable for someone else's statements, perhaps you can run after every person who has called the Clinton's racists?

Then we'd be even.

She explicitly said Obama has run a sexist campaign. When pressed for examples, she (or he) does not respond. That's true for every other Hillary supporter here who's done the same thing.

If someone is going to post over and over that something is true, then they'd better be prepared to back that up with some evidence, especially when it's such a nasty accusation.

Don't throw a hissy fit in a new OP telling people to "shut the fuck up" when we all don't ascribe to those notions.

I'm very calm, but very irritated. One does not have to be in a froth of rage (or having a "hissy fit") to tell someone to shut the fuck up.

My OP is addressed specifically to the people throwing out the accusations--if that doesn't apply to you, then there's no reason to take offense, now is there?

I happen to feel it's appropiate at the moment.

and the author of that other thread.

I saw yet ANOTHER "You Obama people should stop being so MEAN!" whinefest today.

I can't imagine the shit I'd see that would... you know... kinda go a ways toward explainin that whole "fucking fed up and willing to fire back" thing, if I didn't have most of the fuckwittiest of fuckwits on ignore.

:eyes:

It probably has more to do with the mud that's been slung against Obama for his patriotism or his pastor than it does with any perception of sexism on his part. And actually those approval numbers are pretty good anyway, despite having gone up since the beginning of the race. Which isn't uncommon. McWarhero's disapproval numbers have finally started to creep up and I expect them to go up exponentially once the GE season gets going.

Yep, hypocrites

Like making molehills out of the statement "as far as I know."

and since you seem to think that Obama has not run a sexist campaign why don't you go into some of the "Obama is a sexist thread" and tell them about it. On any given day you will find a least two of these threads and whenever someone ask for proof the OP throws out a straw man. I sure hope Hillary comes out against racism once she ends her campaign. I mean since she has been banking on racism to win her the nomination. It wasn't until a few weeks ago that she said she didn't want the vote of racist; of course this was after WV and Kentucky.

And there is no discernible proof that Clinton is a racist other than the words and intentions shoved down her throat.

Furthermore, I will argue that Obama has been banking on sexism to cripple his opponent, and if the tables were turned he'd hit that button as many times as he could to stir the dirt.

~Writer~

P.S. When someone types "shut the fuck up" in an OP, my first reaction is to pull out the tranquilizer gun. Yes, the OP needs to calm down. We all don't agree that Obama is a sexist person, and it would behoove her to explore a more nuanced exposure to Clinton supporters than the limited bunch here on DU.

The Clintons have very demonstrably played the race card ("hard-working white voters," "Jesse Jackson won SC, too" and every freaking syllable that's tumbled out of Ferraro's mouth, for starters). Obama has not done anything of the kind with regard to sexism.

And I strongly disagree. If anything because I believe Obama needed to neutralize the Clinton's longstanding relationship with the black community by twisting both of their words to imply something that they're not saying.

So now, after these many decades of some rather non-racist political participation, the Clinton's are now propagators of racism. Wow. How aptly timed for Barack Obama's campaign!

But Obama is most assuredly going to win this. Did he need to play the "gender" card? (I hate stupid phrases like that, btw.) No. Because gender already was working well against Clinton in this campaign. The way the body politik and on-air commentators have characterized her as a shrew and a harpy have done Obama's job for him. He didn't need to go down that road, but I think he would have if the tables were turned; if the n- word held less weight than the c- word. If a shirt comparing Obama to Curious George didn't get as much media heat as a shirt stating "bro's, not ho's." In this disgusting battle between -isms, Barack Obama has a greater public charge against racism than Hillary Clinton has against sexism...

... and we will not understand how much so until we're out of the heat of this campaign and can think more clearly.

And Obama didn't "twist" anybody's words--I heard the exact words myself, sans spin, and drew the obvious conclusion all by myself. And was extremely disgusted by it. Do I think the Clintons are racists? Nope. But I do think they'll sacrifice their personal beliefs in the name of political expediency, and in a way, that's even worse. And I think it's glaringly obvious they've done just that.

But back to the topic at hand--Obama has not run a sexist campaign, NOBODY can offer any examples to show that he did, and saying "well, he would have if he'd needed to" is ridiculous speculation, and nothing about Obama's campaign and the way he's run it supports that kind of speculation.

Who, by the way, called her a shrew or a harpy? I keep seeing that thrown about, but without specific references. Matt Taibbi wrote an excellent piece in Rolling Stone a couple of months ago that pretty much refutes the idea that the media has been sexist in its treatment of her. It's worth reading if you can find a copy.

Here's a couple of links you can sink your teeth into:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=vjG-jdybbIg

This one is better:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ke64670GkZ8&feature=related

Look, we're obviously not going to agree on this point. This horrible battle between -isms is a false dichotomy. One -ism doesn't displace the other. Both racism and sexism exists in this campaign, and it was inevitable in this historic campaign. The worst perpetrators of both come not from the campaigns, but from the people. We're fallible beings who don't always have a grip on the realities of other people and other lives, and from that comes a complete lack of understanding.

And we will not understand fully what's happened here until we're out from under the heat of this campaign.

I'm not setting up a competition between isms, and we do agree on that point. The whole point of this OP was to demand proof of a spurious, baseless accusation that gets thrown about here day after day after day, and goes mostly unchallenged.

The clips you posted still don't show members of the media using sexist terms to refer to her (Maher is hardly a news person).

I'm as hardcore a feminist as you'll find, but beyond a segment of obnoxious citizenry unconnected with any campaign, I just haven't seen a great deal of sexism thrown Hillary's way. I have found the racism directed at Obama (and I'm only RECENTLY an Obama supporter) to be far more rampant, and downright disturbing in their implications of violence.

Back, once more, to my OP--the Hillary supporters who continue stating as fact that Obama has run a sexist campaign need to cease that nonsense immediately. Many of them are using that as their sole basis for rejecting him as a candidate, and it's pure fantasy.

Not that either is any greater a threat than the other; however, I think that we don't have as firm a handle on forms of prejudice against women as we do against African-Americans. For African-Americans, it's well-established that it's a terrible thing to use the n- word or to compare black men to monkeys. But here we are online debating as to whether or not it's okay to call a woman a bitch or a c---, or whether a Facebook group called "Hillary Clinton: Stop Running for President and Make Me a Sandwich" is demeaning. I think that's interesting, and the fact that women disagree between themselves provides even greater complication to this issue.

But we cannot have a good discussion about these issues when our hearts are wedded to opponents in a campaign. We have dogs in the fight and therefore cannot objectively discuss them. It simply can't happen now, but it must happen once this election season ends.

BTW: Given the roll call of articles detailing the sexist comments about Hillary Clinton I'm dumbfounded that you haven't picked up on this. So here is a list of several articles in which you will be able to find what some media folks have said. Note that these articles go back to January, before Clinton was most assuredly falling behind in the primary:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/01/medias_sexism_unfair_to_clinton.html
http://mediamatters.org/items/200801110011
http://www.yaledailynews.com/articles/view/23813
http://nymag.com/news/features/46011/

NOW does an excellent job detailing this in their own right:
http://www.now.org/issues/media/070315hillary_media.html

Here's a Media Matters article from DECEMBER - before she became the racist, maniacal "bitch" that some have accused her of being:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200712180002

A very interesting discussion that I wish all women could have at some point over the next year:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jessica-wakeman/on-sexist-media-coverage_b_98869.html

The point is that, say what you want about how she ran her campaign, it has been much harder for her to rise from her stumbles when she was already cut off at the ankles. The media made it much, much harder for her to recover.

"Furthermore, I will argue that Obama has been banking on sexism to cripple his opponent, and if the tables were turned he'd hit that button as many times as he could to stir the dirt."

Do you have any evidence to support this argument or is it just an assumption?

peg the Clinton campaign with the racist label.

To me, if Obama's back was against the wall, he'd make that move. I think it would be politically derelict if he didn't.

But he's ahead. For all intents and purposes, he doesn't need to go down that road. All he needs to do is to look the other way.

Coincidence, I'm sure.

:sarcasm:

Glad to hear a rational post. I think Obama could have done more to speak up against sexism in the campaign, just as Hillary could have done more to speak up about racism, or at least refrained from subtly encouraging it. Even my coworker who supports Clinton thinks she and Bill deliberately stoked racial tensions in order to increase her share of the white vote after it was clear that the black vote was lost to her.

Exactly.

Now put that on a scale against his not speaking out.

Which side sinks lower?

Christ, this is not fucking rocket science. :banghead:

Poor Nell.

Where's Dudley when she needs him?

Ya really gotta wonder WHO'S perpetuating the demeaning female stereotypes, don't ya??

racist stereotypes?

Why must Clinton act for Obama's benefit, but not vice versa?

In FACT, he's specifically stated that "it wouldn't be due to racism" if he lost. He's pushed that away EVERY time. He's handled the racism smears in a manner I admire. (I doubt I'd be able to do it.)

This is the saddest primary ever. So much willful self-delusion, fed by what used to be a respected Dem. Not to mention the whole working with the GOP to attack our nominee thing.

Just pathetic. All of it.

And you're right--this IS the saddest primary ever, for precisely those reasons. :-(

to go to - for selecting a nominee!! :woohoo:

Some of them sure like to throw the sexism around as if it was a fucking badge. Hillary and some of her supporters have really done women a disservice all over the world. I have yet to see Obama feed off the so called sexism that Hillary and her supporters keep bitching about yet Hillary and her supporters are more than happy to feed off the ignorance and racism of some of her voters.

If I'd been the biggest fan of Hillary in the world, I'd drop her like a hot rock for playing BOTH -isms for self-centered advantage.

'brushing dirt off your shoulders' and calling Hillary 'Annie Oakley'

that lady's gone off her rocker. :rofl:

I felt guilty appropriating Tom Servo as an avatar because I couldn't begin to match the wit, but Shakespeare?

Well, I definitely feel better about Tom Servo. :hi:

Something else you wanted to say?

I would imagine taking a screen name such as that would indicate a writer of superb wit, with knowledgable references to the plays and sonnets, as well as, perhaps, a turn of an Elizabethan phrase or two.

You took the name but offer nothing which reflects at all on the source. Perhaps you were trying for farce? :hi:

...if picking on someone's screen name is all you are going to do in this thread.

:rofl:

Sorry to hurt your feelings and get your issues in an uproar. Now back to our regularly scheduled brilliant reparte as evidenced by this astute, insightful OP and thread. :rofl:

He's been beating a woman since Iowa.

and read.

Jeez some people are thick.

If you have it, post it.

:)

Emphasis on "specific."

it is so tiring to have this crap parroted here.

but my sources could be wrong.

How much more proof do you need that the man is a raving misogynist? :sarcasm:

They are pathetic and hopefully, the women's movement for equality won't be too damaged by this bullshit.

Tucker, "Every time I see her I feel I need to cross my legs", certainly Matthews (being called on the carpet for it and delivering a ham-handed 'apology' he then turned into a slam on her husband further slandering through the back door her choices as a woman coast to coast :eyes:), etc, and others. Obama has benefited from it. Benefited as well from decades of Clinton bashing up to today and likely tomorrow and beyond. But a 'sexist' campaign? Well no, not per se. That has been in greater measure the sport of others.

But if anyone thought Obama was going to stand up and say, "Now you guys start being nice to Hillary" then they're just not getting the back & forth of this primary season to say the least.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

And then talk about it????

You're being irrational.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

You have a list of Obama supporters on here, and you checked against the list and saw that 9 out of 10 of them made sexist statements?

on DU. So any argument put forth is a waste of time.

That's Hillary's campaign manager for you.

But those dregs of our society that harbor sexist attitudes sure crawled out of the woodwork this primary season.

To Obama's credit, I believe this would have happened if any woman or any man would have been the nominee. People are deluding themselves if they think that sexism wasn't a factor in this campaign. It doesn't mean that the candidates themselves are guilty of it, though.

As a woman that has followed both campaigns I don't see. I think to cry sexism without saying which acts your talking about is sexism in itself.
To vote for a candidate based on sex is wrong and that goes both ways.