?

Log in

No account? Create an account
MY NEW BAND IS GOING TO BE CALLED... - an albuquerque not animate be armada. — LiveJournal [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Okrzyki, przyjaciel!

[ website | My Website ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

MY NEW BAND IS GOING TO BE CALLED... [Mar. 7th, 2008|10:28 am]
Okrzyki, przyjaciel!
Hillary Is A Monster

The resulting kerfuffle is interesting. Obama disowned the remarks, Clinton called for Samantha Power's resignation from the Obama campaign. But didn't she just blurt out what everyone was thinking anyway?

I don't think Hillary is a monster in every circumstance -- get her alone and have a cup of coffee, I'm sure she is as nice a person you could expect to find in politics. But Hillary, the candidate, is indeed a total fucking monster. She and Bill will stop at nothing to win ugly.

And I don't think I'm just being an Obama partisan on this. Case in point is the whole Canada/NAFTA business: right before the primary in Ohio, a story came out about an Obama aide telling Canadian officials that his criticism of NAFTA was just campaign rhetoric. Turns out that the aide in question denies saying anything of the sort, and the Canadian government corroborates that. Then it turns out someone in the Clinton Campaign did exactly what Obama's campaign was accused of doing.

I.E. the Clinton campaign has very little in the way of principles -- they will do whatever they can to tear Obama down, because for them winning is everything. It would be more honest if they just hired people to shoot at him -- instead they distort his position and records in weaselly political-speak, and act like they're not being the amoral hacks they so obviously are.

I have the sense with Obama that he doesn't want to go dirty with Clinton. I sure hope that's not the reason he loses the nomination. Like I said yesterday, he needs to call bullshit on the Clinton campaign wherever it occurs. He needs to make his positive case more forcefully, but he needs to make clear what an evil con job the Clinton campaign is.
linkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: clobby
2008-03-07 04:43 pm (UTC)
"You just look at her and think, 'Ergh'..."

Love it.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: mkb_technologie
2008-03-07 05:18 pm (UTC)
This is why EVERYONE should read FactCheck. It's like snopes for political ads.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: chaircrusher
2008-03-07 05:20 pm (UTC)
Political ads are by definitions lies.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: mkb_technologie
2008-03-07 05:41 pm (UTC)
Yeah, and Obama's no exception unfortunately. And there are degrees of falsehood. It's not boolean.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: speicus
2008-03-07 05:49 pm (UTC)
I wish you would be more specific and cite your sources instead of this over-the-top gender-baiting Bride of Frankenstein bullshit. The thing is you may be right, but I can't tell, and it just sounds like you have an axe to grind.
(Reply) (Thread)
From: elkay
2008-03-07 06:29 pm (UTC)
Agreed.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: chaircrusher
2008-03-07 06:54 pm (UTC)
See my reply to speicus. I know you're a feminist, and it's not the first time I've offended you because I'm not always as feminist minded as I should be. But I don't think gender politics has anything to do with my disliking Hillary Clinton. I'd vote for her in the general election, and I've no doubt she will be a better president than Bush. I don't believe she would be a better president than Obama.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: elkay
2008-03-07 07:04 pm (UTC)
Fair enough. But photoshops like that do not help your case in presenting yourself as unbiased and not being dragged into the mud-slinging that is happening in so many critiques of Hillary.

What that particular photoshop job does is not only point out that you don't like her, but it also taps into a whole 'mad woman' image and cultural referent that really doesn't have any place in a supposedly un-gender-biased discussion. It implies, amongst madness, possession, evil, and a whole host of other things which have been associated with powerful women for time immemorial. And that's one of the mildest things of this sort I've seen out there wrt her.

My being a feminist is no secret, but I don't see what it exactly has to do with it. I'm no racist and would be equally offended to see any imagery of Obama photoshopped up to reference racial constructs, too. I'd like to think that we all (as people who should be allied in wanting to find the best candidate and not have the White House stay in Republican clutches) should be able to carry on this debate without those references.

Edited at 2008-03-07 07:06 pm (UTC)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: chaircrusher
2008-03-07 07:12 pm (UTC)
As someone who has actually watched 'Bride of Frankenstein' multiple times, maybe I don't derive all those connotations out of it. The Bride (and Frankenstein, in both the book and the movie) is mostly a sympathetic character, and not at all mad or evil. Besides which the Bride & Frankenstein had no choice about being monsters. Hillary Clinton makes monstrous choices every day.

The only thing your feminism has to do with it is that you're particular sensitive to gender-baiting. I didn't intend to be a gender-baiter, and took the picture off the post, because it obviously distracts from what I was actually saying.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: chaircrusher
2008-03-07 06:51 pm (UTC)
Well I cited one specific case, where the Clinton campaign made all sort of hay out of something Obama didn't do, when they in fact had done exactly the thing they were accusing him of doing.

Pretty much everything they attack Obama with is bullshit. Obama's attacks on her are on things of real substance, like the Iraq War resolution.

And sure I have an ax to grind. I'm biased, flippant, and speak in generalities without backing them up. I'm expressing my personal opinion, and letting off steam. Sometimes I take some time to be reasoned and insightful, sometimes not.

No one's paying me to write this journal, and it's free. If I got paid to write it and it was on the Op Ed page of a newspaper, this isn't what I'd write. I'd have the time and motivation to soften my offensive language, and be more specific.

I'm sorry if I offended you, but may I point out, your reply offered no specific refutations of anything I said or anything said in the article I cited.

And gender bias? I googled "Hillary Monster" and that came up. It's a case of gender bias only in the sense that the Bride of Frankenstein was presumably female, and so is Clinton.

Believe me, I vote for women in elections every chance they get. Just not this woman.


(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: elkay
2008-03-07 07:07 pm (UTC)
Hey it's LJ, you can be flippant and crazy on here however much you like. I don't think you should censor yourself, but be prepared to have people comment on it.

Having your friends comment in is part of the fun!! We can all be silly or offended or serious or whatever, it's how LJ is.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: speicus
2008-03-07 11:24 pm (UTC)
Yeah, like elkay said, feel free to spout, but feel free to be called out too. While I'm slightly more inclined to root for Obama, I just don't get all the Hillary hate, and some of the comments about Clinton make me want to root for her just out of spite. Like, it doesn't take a genius to figure out the "monster = uppity bitch/mad woman" connection elkay pointed out above, or the sexism inherent in the nonsensical comments on her appearance ("just look at her! an older woman! ew gross!").

I don't think Clinton's run a squeaky clean campaign by any means, but all the Rove comparisons seem way over the top. Most of the stuff I've read about is her or Bill's comments taken out of context, or anecdotal, unconfirmed stuff about certain people in her campaign. And I have to balance that with the stuff that bugs me about Obama (e.g. his apologism regarding anti-abortion activists and other wackos of faith).
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)