"Betrayal" nonsense & NOW, Oprah-viewers

[you_with_the_face]

I’m pitting folks in the pro-Hillary camp who ain’t got no damn sense.

According to this article, Oprah is seeing backlash from women who are steamed that she endorsed Obama over HRC. Not a big deal, in and of itself. Politics can bring out the hateraide. But it’s the why they have a problem with her endorsement that bothers the heck out of me.

From the piece:

In the original post, a reader called austaz68 said she “cannot believe that women all over this country are not up in arms over Oprah’s backing of Obama. For the first time in history we actually have a shot at putting a woman in the White House and Oprah backs the black MAN. She’s choosing her race over her gender.”

Hmmm, okay. Let’s skip over the possibility that Oprah is supporting BO because she likes what he has to say, thinks he is the best person for the job, and hails from her city. But why is it any better for her to support gender over race as opposed to the converse? Have I missed something here? Sexism is better than racism? Yeah, okay, that makes a lot of sense. Interesting that Oprah’s crime is portrayed as her choosing race over gender, as opposed to race over substantive issues and experience. Good way to reduce Hillary to nothing but walking boobs and a vagina, ladies!

Then today, I came across this article which talks about how the NY state chapter of NOW flamed Ted Kennedy for his Obama endorsement.

An excerpt:

"Women have just experienced the ultimate betrayal," NOW’s New York State chapter said in a scorching rebuke. “Senator Kennedy’s endorsement of Hillary Clinton’s opponent in the Democratic presidential primary campaign has really hit women hard.”
…
“We are repaid with his abandonment!” the statement said. “He’s picked the new guy over us. He’s joined the list of progressive white men who can’t or won’t handle the prospect of a woman president who is Hillary Clinton.”

So apparently, Oprah is receiving backlash for supposedly choosing race over gender. And Kennedy is receiving grief for choosing gender over what…his race? Does he owe Hillary a vote because he’s liberal and white? This self-entitlement is rather sickening.

Why can’t people endorse whomever they want without being called traitors or abandoners? This is politics, not a gender war. A pledge for Obama doesn’t make one a gender sell-out anymore than a pledge for Clinton makes one a racial sell-out.

[scout1222]

GOD. I hate people who think that just because I’m a woman (or just because you’re black) you have to vote for that candidate. And also those who think that if I DID vote for Hillary, it’s only because I’m a lady. Right, it couldn’t be for actual issues or anything.

I’m with you on this.

[Kid_A_1]

:rolleyes:

Man guilt versus white guilt. Which sits more heavily on the conscience of America?

[jali]

I’m a black woman and I’m offended that people assume that my choice in this election will be based on either gender or race.

In making this assumption they’ve determined that I care nothing about important national issues.

[Long_Time_First_Time]

What’s really a shame is that the letter was put out by the head of the New York chapter, it is in no way reflective of the thoughts of anyone other that group.

The National NOW rapidly made it known that it was not the position of the organization as a whole.

Which isn’t going to stop EVERYONE from saying that it is the opinion of feminists.
It’s not.

[Jackmannii]

@you with the face

Interesting that Oprah’s crime is portrayed as her choosing race over gender, as opposed to race over substantive issues and experience.

The “substantive issues” thing is debatable, but the “experience” meme is getting tiresome.

An undistinguished Clinton Senate tenure best known for her rubber-stamping of the Bush Iraq mess, plus a history of First Ladydom which cannot be fully elucidated because the Clintons are stalling on releasing their papers from those years, doesn’t exactly thrill many folks as far as “experience” goes.

[cowgirl]

Can I add on a pit to the corporate media who jumped on that press release in the total absence of critical analysis to demonstrate that NOW-NY doesn’t speak for all women, feminists, or Hillary supporters? or even all of NOW?

This has been all over the blogosphere with women and feminists of all stripes saying “They don’t speak for me,” but those women don’t get the press.

This about sums up my feelings on the subject (from here):

Before diving into the NY-NOW press release, it is clear that the only reason the corporate media ran with it was its tone and demands. If NOW or any other group had sent out a press release demanding that the candidates take a stand on why the hell Congress keeps funneling money into abstinence-only sex education despite report after report that says it doesn’t work, we would likely hear crickets chirp. Despite the name calling, the race baiting and the misogyny of the press, the plain simple fact is that corporate media wants us (feminists, progressives, liberals, pick a label) to fight this identity politics war.

[Ferret_Herder]

@Jackmannii

The “substantive issues” thing is debatable, but the “experience” meme is getting tiresome.

An undistinguished Clinton Senate tenure best known for her rubber-stamping of the Bush Iraq mess, plus a history of First Ladydom which cannot be fully elucidated because the Clintons are stalling on releasing their papers from those years, doesn’t exactly thrill many folks as far as “experience” goes.

Agreed. Sen. Obama was elected to the Illinois State Senate in 1996, and re-elected in 1998 and 2002. He was elected to the US Senate in 2004. Sen. Clinton was elected to the US Senate in 2000 and re-elected in 2006.

[Marley23]

@you with the face

Why can’t people endorse whomever they want without being called traitors or abandoners? This is politics, not a gender war. A pledge for Obama doesn’t make one a gender sell-out anymore than a pledge for Clinton makes one a racial sell-out.

Because people feel entitled to get what they want. I agree that NY-NOW (or the head thereof) made asses of themselves/herself.

[monstro]

For once, Oprah is doing something without regard to ratings and appeasement of her television audience.

She’s finally free.

[you_with_the_face]

I will point out that NY NOW and the Oprah-heads don’t speak for all women. I’m a woman after all. It’s just really irksome when they act as if they do.

[Jackmannii]

@you with the face

Good way to reduce Hillary to nothing but walking boobs and a vagina, ladies!

This comment gave me the disturbing image of a body-part Hillary stomping around like one of those mission-obsessed Terminators in a Schwarzenegger movie.

I am accepting suggestions for a total brain cleanse.*
*one that does not involve watching reality TV.

[ivylass]

I’m a woman and I can tell you there’s no way in hell I’d ever vote for Hillary. Ever ever ever.

And since “my” party seems to be leaning toward John McCain, I may be standing out in the wilderness, wind whistling past, getting very chilly…

[Oredigger77]

My mom told me the other day that she went to vote for Obama but once she got there she had the realization that voting for Clinton was the right thing to do as a woman. Unfortunately idiots who vote on stupid crap are all around us.

[saoirse]

Since she’s an even money favorite to win the nomination, I’ve been trying to keep good thoughts in my head about HIllary. Her supporters are certainly making that difficult, though.

[Sal_Ammoniac]

There’s a perfect solution to all of this – just write Oprah’s name in on the ballot.

[whiterabbit]

I’m not voting for Hillary. I guess that makes me a traitor.

[E-Sabbath]

This is the second time NY-NOW has gone after Obama.

[Catamount]

@you with the face

Politics can bring out the hateraide.

I’m undecided and I endorse this word.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@monstro

For once, Oprah is doing something without regard to ratings and appeasement of her television audience.

She’s finally free.

Except that Oprah’s ratings among blacks have steadily dwindled over the years as her ratings among whites have skyrocketed; a lot of African-Americans feel that Oprah has “abandoned” them for white middle-class females, based on her topic lists, guest list, etc.

So, you could argue that this is her attempt to blacken herself up a bit.

I wouldn’t, but you could.