Bil Browning

Is it any wonder?

Filed By Bil Browning | February 12, 2008 12:36 PM | comments

Filed in: Politics, The Movement
Tags: Barack Obama, election 2008, Hillary Rodham Clinton, racism, sexism

Are you surprised that women keep telling pollsters that they're voting for Hillary even though they agree with Obama more on the issues? One look at this t-shirt outta tell you why...

bros-before-hoes.jpg

Another sexist example after the jump courtesy of Axe Deodorant.

axeadhrc.png

Maybe some of the Hillary supporters will jump in with a watermelon and fried chicken t-shirt soon so I'll be able to wear sexism and racism while still claiming to be a Democrat.

*sigh*

We still have a long way to go.


Recent Entries Filed under The Movement:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.


Hillary Clinton has already brought out the watermelons and fried chicken, if you cared to pay any attention.

Among other things, her campaign has made automated telephone calls to voters referring to "Barack Hussein Obama," a trick she borrow from the extreme right wing. Bill Clinton utterly racialized and ghettoized Obama with a string of disgusting comments both before and after the South Carolina primary, executing a successful "southern strategy" that has contributed to the alienation of white voters in the South from Obama. And her supporters are constantly depicting Obama as all "flash" and no substance, playing on longstanding anti-black stereotypes.

The capacity of Clinton supporters to generate self-righteous indignation about insignificant instances of sexism while completely ignore major incidents of racism - some perpetuated by the Clinton campaign itself - continues to disappoint.

Was the sexist T-shirt you complain about sponsored and approved by the Obama campaign? Has Michelle Obama undertaken a sexist political strategy against Hillary Clinton? Has the Obama campaign made robo-calls emphasizing her gender?

Why are you writing about a need to explain why some white women are voting for Hillary? Why aren't you writing about how African Americans are furious and have been driven to Obama? Explain to us why Obama is getting only 25% of the white vote in southern states but a much higher percentage everywhere else.

Steve, a lot of those topics have been covered here. While I'm an Obama supporter, I have to correct you in that it's not just white women voting for Hillary. African-American women are too. And Latino. And Asian.

The t-shirt wasn't sponsored by the Obama campaign. Neither was the Axe ad. The post is about how sexist our society has become that we'd find humor in demeaning women - especially in relation to blacks.

Pointing the finger back at the Clinton campaign doesn't do anything towards solving either racism or sexism. As a passionate Obama supporter, I'd expect you to bank on the "Change" call to arms and reject sexism and racism out of hand.

The capacity of Clinton supporters to generate self-righteous indignation about insignificant instances of sexism while completely ignore major incidents of racism

Steve, I don't believe in "insignificant" instances of sexism.

The Clinton's have used race and manipulated racist stereotypes in their campaigning, but that does not mean the widespread use of misogyny to sell shitty products to consumers is any less significant.

It doesn’t mean that the violence of these images is any less real, or that it will be any less harmful to the women whose lives are impacted by them.

Michael Bedwell | February 12, 2008 2:20 PM

"Dear Steve and Nick,

Congratulations! Your souvenir T-shirts of our campaign to "Swift Boat the Clintons By Falsely Demonizing Them As Racists" are in the mail. Don't worry. One size fits all. Thanks for playing!"
--------

Bil, thank you for your thoughtful comment. It would be easy for those less thinking than you to dismiss the following simply because, after detailed contrast of their positions and histories, I have come to hope that Sen. Clinton is nominated and elected. But I would say the same thing if similarly libelous and undocumented accusations were made against Sen. Obama: this is a classic example of the type of post that I feel must be challenged for its content as well as its tone.

Where is the proof that "her campaign has made automated telephone calls to voters referring to 'Barack Hussein Obama',"?

Spewing that "Bill Clinton utterly racialized and ghettoized Obama with a string of disgusting comments both before and after the South Carolina primary" is merely an opinion.

I guess some don't genuniely believe enough in their own candidate to focus only on the issues and, more importantly, and to do what he admirably asked: stop the madness and the character assassination.

"For his part, Mr. Obama said that he, “not only in hindsight, but going forward,” regretted that members of his staff had prodded reporters to pursue the issue. “Our supporters, our staff, get overzealous,” Mr. Obama said. “They start saying things that I would not say.” Mrs. Clinton concurred, saying, “We need to get this campaign where it should be.” She also said comments by the founder of Black Entertainment Television, Robert Johnson, were inappropriate."

Michael, must your comments be so fucking insufferable?

Michael Bedwell | February 12, 2008 2:39 PM

"Imitation is the highest form of flattery."

Ha, that was actually a pretty funny response.

You might want to read this from yesterday's New York Times:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/021208L.shtml

Michael Bedwell | February 12, 2008 4:27 PM

WOW, Cathryn! Thank you for drawing our attention to this. It's so on point for both "sides" it deserves sharing for those who might have problems with the link:

[ED NOTE:] Visit the link in the comment above. The link works.

More signs like that from the Right are here.

Dude, Michael, link articles, don't copy all of Krugman's column over here.

Michael Bedwell | February 12, 2008 4:53 PM

Why, Alex, do you object to that? Does Bilerico's Web host charge it by the kilobyte? Is it a copyright issue?

Thanks for helping me understand.

1. It steamrolls over others trying to participate in the comments.

2. It makes everyone scroll farther to read what's after.

3. It's annoying and comes across as anti-social.

4. No one's going to read it if it's too long.

I'm just saying, if you want people to get the point of Krugman's column, it's better to summarize and quote briefly.

And something tells me that Cathryn wasn't trying to support Clinton by linking the Times....

No matter if Cathryn was or not, it's still a violation of copyright law. I saw the comment hit my inbox and automatically came over to delete it for violating TOS.

From Section A: Operating Policies

You may not post or transmit any message, data, image or program that would violate the property rights of others, including unauthorized copyrighted text, images or programs, trade secrets or other confidential proprietary information, and trademarks or service marks used in an infringing fashion.

Plus it is bad netiquitte to post the whole article, Michael - for all the reasons that Alex mentioned. :)

Michael Bedwell | February 12, 2008 6:04 PM

Thank you for the explanation, Bil. While few do, I respect those sites which choose to try to pay respect to copyright traditions. I also appreciate Alex's perfectly valid suggestion, "it's better to summarize and quote briefly," if not the reaching of the points that precede it.

Michael: You and I tend to agree on issues and you make me laugh more than you irritate me, but Alex and Bil are right. Copy a relevant bit or give the URL if you think the whole article is relevant. Fair Use allows you to use snippets of someone else's work, but taking the whole thing is against the law - even in the comments section. They aren't your words, you don't own them. And hell, the link was already up there.

And FYI, yes, when you host a website, you pay by the kilobyte. Don't be obtuse. How else would you measure bandwidth and expect payment? They make money by hosting your site. There are only two things you can measure with webhosting - time and bandwidth. A site with our traffic cannot rely on a $10 a month bottom of the barrel webhost. Those are for blogs about cats.

Sites like Blogger don't offer the features we need to offer the vast array of content we provide. Besides, do you want your entire site's existence to be at the whims of some giant Internet company like Google? Corporations are lawsuit averse. One well written complaint and your entire site is deleted for a TOS violation. I know this is true as it just recently happened to someone I know.

Michael Bedwell | February 12, 2008 7:47 PM

Thanks for the amplification, Jerame. I really had no idea of such cost-related things as they apply to non-commercial sites and the blogosphere. I used to work for a company that licenses internet purchasing and billing software on a large scale [Wal-Mart was one their customers] and remembered they sold in "bulk" with costs per character usage above it but naively imagined something less defined in this type of application.

Now about your and Bil's status as a kind of "James Carville and Mary Matalin" during the race er run for the Democratic nomination....

:- )

Now about your and Bil's status as a kind of "James Carville and Mary Matalin" during the race er run for the Democratic nomination....

Oh my god... That so made me giggle...

Don't knock those sites about cats - icanhascheezburger.com is one of the most popular blogs out there.

Why it is, I have no idea.