Friday, June 6


Struggling to articulate my feelings about what's happened this week, I stumbled across this:

The president of NOW sends a thank-you to Hillary Clinton.

Yes, Hillary Clinton persevered to win contest after contest, despite the ridicule, scorn and derision that was heaped on her by the frat-boy commentariat, and we salute her courage and determination not to allow the self-important pundit class to drum her out of the race with their endless name-calling. But will that treatment be the norm for women who run in the future? Has it become acceptable?

Television commentary on her voice, her laugh, her clapping, her clothing, even her ankles - not to mention calling her a bitch and a she-devil, and comparing her to a crazed murderer, a hated ex-wife or a scolding mother - became so commonplace that we came to expect it. And Hillary rose above it, as we knew she would, but it took a toll on her campaign and on all of us. We should vow today, here and now, that we will not allow the media to do it to any woman ever again.
Until then, a salute to Hillary Clinton, who said on Tuesday: "I made you -- and everyone who supported me -- a promise: to stand up for our shared values and to never back down. I'm going to keep that promise today, tomorrow, and for the rest of my life."

Hillary, you have made a mark on history for eternity, giving little girls and little boys the full knowledge that women can compete, take risks, take the heat, make hard decisions, and be strong leaders. Whether you are President, Vice President, on the Supreme Court, serving as the Senate Majority Leader or just plain being the best-ever senator for New York and for ALL of us, we will be with you -- as we work together for equality for all, and a better, safer, more peaceful world for everyone, not just the privileged few. Yes, we will. Thank you, Hillary.

Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, June 4


If more Obama supporters (and the Obamas themselves) would take this seriously, there might be a chance for the Democratic Party to unite in common cause going into the GE. Problem is, they're not showing any eagerness to do it.

By winning the nomination, Obama supporters may feel that they have gained the upper hand in debates with Hillary supporters, but this is a false perception. This campaign is not over until the race is over. Political campaigns can never afford the luxury of feeling superior to anyone. Obama may have won the nomination but it will mean nothing if he does not win the General Election in November, and to do that he needs the votes and even the enthusiastic support of Hillary and her supporters. Clinton's supporters cannot be insulted, bullied, or guilted into enthusiastic support in the fall. Like any other key voting bloc, Obama and his supporters can only gain these votes by understanding Clinton's supporters' real concerns, making a connection with them and making a compelling case for their support.
First, stop labeling Clinton and her supporters as the politics of the past.
Second, Democrats need to reclaim the luster of the Clinton years.
Third, embrace feminism as one of the indispensable pillars of the Democratic coalition.
In victory or defeat, Clinton and her supporters deserve to be heard regarding their views about the sexist climate of this campaign. The sexism that just as much as racism persists in our culture, and consciously or unconsciously in our political campaigns must be "denounced and rejected." The Chinese proverb, "women hold up half the sky" does not even fully describe the Democratic Party where numerically, women account for substantially more than half of the votes we will need to win in November and this core group of Democrats deserves real respect from the Democratic Party and its new presidential nominee.

Problem is, few Obamatrons show any willingness to go there. And they need to, fast and furiously. Those Democrats-for-life among us who have been fixtures in local party politics, the volunteers who stuff and stamp envelopes and man voting booths, have been told in no uncertain terms that the party no longer needs us, that we're witchy old broads and relics of "old politics." So it's going to take a lot to win us over. And this kind of approach won't get it done:

Obama is not, one of his senior advisers assured me Tuesday night, going to spend a lot of time in the next few months wooing Clinton supporters whose feelings may be hurting.

“I think there are always immediate feelings of disappointment and anger,” Anita Dunn said. “But in the months ahead, he must appeal not just to the constituency groups who favored her in the primaries, but those he wants in the general election, and that includes independents and Republicans.”

So he wants independents and Republicans and not the Democratic constituency groups he lost, eh? Careful what you wish for. That kind of attitude could convert a lot of Dems into (I)s and (R)s. Would that then make us more palatable to The Precious?

Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, June 3


He couldn't help himself.

MSNBC sez AP reporting that Clinton campaign officials say that (MSNBC CHYRON): "Clinton will admit tonight that Obama has nomination."

And then the deranged harpy will bite down on his jugular, suck the blood out of him, and screech BUT NOW IT'S MINE ALL MINE!*

*In case you weren't sure, this is satire.

I hope someone's making a list and checking it twice for all the so-called progressive and/or Democratic blogs that have demonstrated overt sexism and unseemly, classless, graceless remarks about candidate Clinton and her supporters.

Labels: , , , ,

Monday, June 2


This op-ed in HuffPost is the most arrogant, repulsive bit of nonsense I've read in the past couple of days. The author claims that because Hillary ran such a divisive campaign during the last, "quixotic" phase, it is her responsibility to heal the wounds in the party that she, and only she, has created. Therefore, in order to be forgiven by the more noble of the party, she must definitively declare in a concession speech and often thereafter:

1. That she was treated fairly in all ways (ed. note: all evidence to the contrary).
2. Her loss was due to her own poor choices.
3. She'll be fine and will continue to fight the good fight for women's causes.
4. The campaign demonstrated that women can do anything, that there are no more glass ceilings.
5. She wouldn't have won no matter what the DNC rules were, and her name recognition was more powerful that actual campaigning.
6. She MUSN'T say the party rules should be changed; and it would be helpful if she would actually say outright that the rules were actually designed to help people like her.
7. Neither she nor her supporters are owed anything by Obama or the party, and they'll be delighted to bow down and take another one you-know-where for the privilege.

And if she does all this, she should be invited to keynote the convention.

I'm speechless.

Labels: , ,

Sunday, June 1


It may still be called by the same name, but it's not the party I've been voting for since I cast my first vote in 1968. It's no longer the party of the working man and woman; it says it doesn't need us any longer. It's not the party of equal rights; it's the party of misogyny and sexism. It's not the party of the "one person, one vote" principle; it's the party of elite insiders awarding unearned votes to their chosen candidate and favoring undemocratic caucases over primaries. It's not the party of political courage; it's the party of words without substance and consequences.

Riverdaughter calls yesterday "a day that will live in infamy," and I completely agree. In every other race over the past 40 years where my favored candidate was defeated, I was able to rally loyally around the Democratic banner, assured that our standard-bearer would be an immense improvement over the Republican. I cannot and will not do this in the GE this year. The only slightly legitimate arguments for Obama over McCain concern Supreme Court appointments and ending the war in Iraq. Obama himself has delegitimized them by voicing support for the John Roberts appointment, and his own advisers have said that he won't end the war anytime soon. We've not heard the breath of a plan for withdrawing our troops, and Obama has demonstrated an ignorance of foreign and domestic policy that equals McCain's. So where's the advantage in our sucking it up once again for a party that disdains us, our contributions, our experience and our judgment?

Movement conservatives have flirted with the idea of withholding their votes from McCain to prove to Republican party leaders that their votes are essential to Republican victories. Democratic insiders appear to believe that that won't happen with Clinton backers, but they're simply, once again, not listening to voters. This is not a case of first-choice, second-choice. We do not accept Obama as our leader, and will not no matter who he selects as his running mate. The extent of party leaders' tone-deafness (and include the media in this as well!) is the popular meme that choosing a female such as McCaskill, Napolitano or Sibelius will placate Clintonistas and cause us to fall in line behind BO. Are they kidding? McCaskill is such an idiot that she openly declares that her CHILDREN persuaded her to support Obama. In fact, I've been appalled all season by the number of otherwise-seemingly-intelligent Dems who have set aside their own judgment in favor of that of their adolescent and young adult children. Some leadership! I listen to, and respect, my own adult children's views, but as a parent I exert a little more leadership in my own family.

Get this, Dem leaders: Hillary is not interchangeable with "any woman." We support her because of her specific policies, her resume, her history, her character. We reject Obama for the same reasons. And we are now rejecting our party because it first rejected us.

Labels: , , ,


Well, it's done! Our oldest daughter is married and left for her honeymoon yesterday, and all is well. This felt like one of those month-long tribal weddings, with activities from Thursday through Tuesday (the wedding was on the Saturday before Memorial Day) and oodles of out-of-town guests (all of whom, fortunately, stayed in the hotel and not with us). We're exhausted but satisfied, and the newlyweds are deliriously happy.

So on to politics. I'd decided to resist at all costs any discussion of politics during the week to avoid conflict and keep the peace among our numerous and diverse family, but it proved impossible and, frankly, unnecessary. Other than a couple of our twenty-something sons who are lukewarm Obama supporters, both the Democrats and the Republicans are uniformly appalled and bewildered at the notion that Barack Obama will be the next president. The Repubs among us had several themes to their conversation: (1) How could you Democrats be so stupid to nominate such a completely unqualified, unvetted candidate over the very qualified and well-known Hillary Clinton? (2) There's so little we actually know about Obama that the thought of him as POTUS is downright scary, and what we do know about his associations only exacerbates that fear. (3) The military wing of the family would feel vastly better about Hillary beating John McCain since so many of our flag officers have endorsed her; that means a great deal to them, as they're all relatively comfortably economically and national security is their top issue.

My older sister and her ex-fighter-jock husband had come to us directly from their annual reunion of Vietnam-era fighter pilots, where they'd discussed the race and the mystery that the Dems would shoot ourselves in the foot and risk losing an election that should have been a slam-dunk for us this year. My brother-in-law quoted one of them as saying that if you want an old war hero who most everyone respects but few really like, vote McCain; if you want someone who will give speeches talking about bringing us all together while dividing us, vote Obama; if you want someone who will actually find solutions to the problems we face, vote Hillary.

So now the festivities have ended and I'm catching up on the news and developments. More than ever it appears that we're on a runaway train, and the media and Democratic Party leaders are shoveling the coal as fast as they can. They want this thing wound up, and they're going to get their way. Clearly, they want the Clintons destroyed and discredited more than they want electoral victory. They're giddy at the idea of booting the working class non-AA's and older women out of the Party and replacing us with ... what? Some amorphous young voters who have no historical memory, no party loyalty (theirs is reserved for the person of Obama, not ideology) and no real agenda other than the thrill of their own influence? The young Obama supporters in our family first backed Ron Paul. How's that for ideological consistency?

I continue to have hope because Hillary inspires it with her dogged determination to do what is best for the country despite the personal cost. But I realize the odds are greatly against her chances of winning the nomination. I will not, ever, vote for John McCain, and I will not vote for Obama. I have not the slightest modicum of confidence that Obama would be an improvement over McCain in either foreign or domestic policy. And don't hand me that sad "it's the Supremes!" argument. BO had to be talked out of supporting John Roberts, of all people, for SCOTUS and for what? Political expediency. There is no CORE to Obama that can be identified, no principles for which he would fight, and his much-vaunted "judgment" is a myth supported by a single speech made at no cost to himself. Other examples of his good judgment are almost impossible to find and are overwhelmed by the myriad of instances in which he has been exposed as a Chicago machine-style politico who has associated himself with the most hateful, divisive elements in our culture.

What will I do downticket? Cast my vote on a person-by-person basis. The Democratic Party leadership has betrayed its base and its principles, and I'm prepared to check out of politics until my confidence is restored. It's taken a lot to turn me against the Party. I could have easily supported any one of the early nominees. I could even have backed Obama in the early days, before we knew much about him and I was simply thrilled at the prospect of an African-American being a viable candidate. But again, that was before he began to diss universal healthcare and talk about "fixing" Social Security, before he demonstrated that all he has to offer are teleprompter-assisted speeches and Republican talking points, before he gave evidence of an arrogant and entitled attitude that has exacerbated the racial and gender divide in the country rather than unifying anybody. But it is not just Obama, David Axelrod and his campaign that I resent. It is Howard Dean, Donna Brazile, Teddy Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, and practically the entire media, all the elites who determined that they should select the nominee, not the voters, and who have given evidence of an animus against the Clintons, both Hillary and Bill, that is unseemly and threatens to split the party right down the middle.

As soon as Obama is confirmed as the party nominee, I will immediately switch my registration to Independent. How many more formerly loyal Democrats, I wonder, will do likewise?

Labels: , ,