recent tracks:
1.12.2008
A quick thought
on this apparently very broadly read Gloria Steinem piece. First, a quote from the article:
What worries me is that she is accused of “playing the gender card” when citing the old boys’ club, while he is seen as unifying by citing civil rights confrontations.I think this cuts to the fundamental misunderstanding of the disparity in public understanding of Obama and Clinton. The only thing you need note is that Clinton is seen as taking a divisive stance when she cites to the "old boys' club"--an example of the negative behavior of those she opposes; in contrast, Obama is seen as taking a unitive stance when he cites to the civil rights movement--an example of the positive behavior of those he supports. That distinction speaks for itself, I think.
Labels: linguistics, politics
posted by Max Greene at 10:41 AM
COMMENTARY & NEWS:
FRIEND:
NEWS & COMMENTARY:
PLACES
REFERENCE:
VANITY:
2 Comments:
Hillary hates to lose... She expected to be "crowned" the Democratic nominee and then President. Now she has a fight on her hands... and she complains that her opponents and the press are not being fair to her. I find that pathetic. She has no more relevant polital experience than Barak Obama, and she has way more "baggage".
Since I've been paying attention to national politics (40 years) it has been normal for primary candidates in either party to gang up on the front runner leading up to conventions. It becomes more prevalent every election cycle. When the "pile on" happens to Hillary she complains that "the men are ganging up on me because I'm a woman". She plays the gender card to the hilt. How pathetic is that!!! I think her tears were genuine... not because she has a dream for the USA, but I think she cried because she realized that she might lose.
Bill calls Obama a "youngster" and says that his platform is a "fairytale". Hillary credits LBJ and not MLK jr and JFK for advances in civil rights. Shaheen says that because Obama took drugs that maybe he sold them. The Clintons are the epitome of corrupt, dirty old school party machine politics and would assure the USA of another 4-8 years of a divisive partisan mess.The Clinton team seems to be playing the race card in an understated, underhanded way. All they care about is their hold on power and their "legacy" (such as it is).
Obama offers a ray of hope and change (real change, not Clinton change). I actually would vote for him rather than a several of the Republican front runners (Huckabee, Paul for sure, perhaps Romney or Thompson as well), even though I don't agree with all or even most of his platform. If Edwards or Clinton is on the Democrat ticket I will vote for the Republican no matter who it is.
Hillary and Bill are dividers and poll followers. They need to go away.
I'm still a registered Democrat (believe it or not)... I might actually vote in the upcoming DE Democrat Party primary.
I found H. Clinton's comment re: MLK and LBJ to be quite shocking.
In retrospect, the past 16 years have taught me that the personality of a President matters perhaps as much as the policy of a President. This is a large reason for my support of Obama, who may have been trading in rhetoric more than ideas lately, but who has the intellectual background and even-keeled manner that I think would suit the office well.
Post a Comment
<< Home