Thursday, June 12, 2008

Michelle Obama Is Nobody's Damn "Baby Mama"

Have the right-wing media mercenaries over at Fox News lost their fucking minds? During a discussion Wednesday between commentators Michelle Malkin and Megyn Kelly on whether Republican attacks on Michelle Obama have been too harsh,
the following banner ran across the bottom of the screen:


This blatantly racist, unconscionable remark is an outrage, and is part of a carefully orchestrated campaign to incite America's bigoted dumbasses against Sen. Barack Obama, the first black to be on a major national ticket in Western political history. Shame on Fox for this disgusting, irresponsible act of race-baiting. Just in case anyone is still wondering, it clearly demonstrates Fox News' true motives and loyalties in this campaign and with politics in general. Fox is nothing more than a shameless, unapologetic mouthpiece for the ruthless Republican attack-machine

Michelle Obama is no damned baby mama. I still am dumbfounded by what an offensive, insensitive, racially charged reference Fox made. Born and raised on Chicago's South Side, Michelle Obama saw herself through Princeton University and Harvard Law School, and held prestigious positions in the Chicago law firm Sidley Austin and on the staff of Mayor Richard M. Daley. And now she stands to become the first black First Lady of the United States of America. She deserves respect, dammit. She's not some character out of the Jerry Springer Show. That Fox chose to tag her with this grossly disrespectful, racist label is beyond vile. Rupert Murdoch should immediately fire everyone responsible for this reprehensible act.

Get ready, Democrats, this is only the beginning...

HELP ELECT BARACK OBAMA PRESIDENT: It's now time for us to pull together as Democrats and unite behind Obama and his historic candidacy. These are exciting times. I urge you to support Obama by sending the campaign whatever you can afford. In politics, money is key. There are many swing states this year--Colorado, New Mexico, New Hampshire, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Missouri among them. With a sizeable war chest for campaigning, ground teams/staff, ads, mailings, Internet/email promotions, etc, he can win these states. I am commited to raising $25,000 for the campaign between now and November. Click here to make a contribution and help me reach this goal. Together we can change America.


Anonymous said...

Jesssssssus,calm down Andy. These are the kind of attacks the Clintons went though for 16 years.The last 12 with Fox news helping.Obama and is wonderful flock said they could handle everything the right was going to throw at them.You've got to give the people on the right credit,their just as good throwing the mud as Obama fans were at throwing mud at hillary. As the old story go's what go's around,comes around.Obama's team only showed the repuks ,if you throw enough mud it'll stick.Obama won didn't he?

Anonymous said...

Any woman offended by the way Hillary was treated should rightfully be offended by this nonsense and what nonsense we all know is to come. They did it to Hillary in the 90s and Teresa Kerry in '04.

I wanted a woman President in the worst way. But now that it won't happen this time, I will support the candidate who best represents the interests of average American families and women...

Barack Obama

Anonymous said...

I'm offended and disgusted that the right wing would do this same shit for this election. (they are even now saying that Obama wasn't born in the USA and are sending around pictures of his African relatives).

I have told lots of folks that all the racists aren't dead yet and no way is Obama going to be elected president.

I wish it weren't true and I hope with all my heart that I am wrong.

Anonymous said...

I wonder if those questioning if Obama was born in the United States know that John McCain was born in Panama?

Anonymous said...

According to recent polls Obama is losing the old white man vote. If he wins will this signal the end of the old white man reign of our society? HAHAHA That would be something!

Anonymous said...

If enough women, enlightened men, and young folks get out and vote for Obama, he will win.

But if the Republicans use fear, race, and an attack on Iran, McCain could very well win. Of course it will depend on if the voters buy their tired old song and dance.

Watch the polls. Not the national polls, but the state by state polls. Hope they are not both in the 40s. If so it could very well be a re-run of 2000 & 2004.

Remember, the Republicans all the the time Bush has been in office, have been doing all they can to scrub voter lists and use voter ID as a way to push protection from voter fraud. This will keep a number of folks from being able to vote. Sometimes we might not understand how someone can get by without picture ID, but if you pay with money orders and don't drive, you have no need for photo ID. So it is possible that folks who have been voting all their adult lives, will not be abe to vote.

The Republicans can not win on the issues, so they have to cheat, lie and deceive in order to win.

Anonymous said...

When a black woman is verbally abused it's called "racism" and becomes outrageous and not to be tolerated. Bur, when Hillary was verbablly abused it was, in some circles, not even sexism, but just "because she is "Hillary". Nothing against Hillary was ever called sexism and no one defended her except Geraldine Ferrara. (Michelle is not running, but she's part of his campaign and making racist remarks herself.) No one, however, is calling "baby mama" sexism becaise sexism is tolerated, so it's being called "racism" because everybody is beginning to rally to protect Michelle. I wonder if that makes her proud.

(I never heard the phrase before" - what does it mean)

I hope we now see from the black community: "Elect the Bro and layoff the Ho." Yeah, any day now.

Anonymous said...

I am totally with 5:38 and every word in that response.

Anonymous said...

In an article by Rachel Sklar in The Huffinton Post, she had a link to a site that has eighty-four (84) sexist remarks made about Hillary in the media. One was a picture of a "Hillary pen" which produced a "cackling laugh " when the head was pinched. Lots of fun being had by Shuster and Carlson pinching the pen's "head" on MSNBC. Did you know Olbermann suggested somebody should take Hillary into a room to convince her to leave the race,and only HE should come out of the room when it was over.

Where was the outcry protecing Hillary???? And, even now, where is the "outcry" instead of the screams, "she ran a bad campaign, she wasn't the victim of sexism." Now they're bashing Kitty Couric for saying Hillary suffered at the hands of mysogynists.

Maybe it got no coverage because it wasn't "racism."

Anonymous said...

Its not Obama's fault that the media used stereotypes against Hillary. Its the media's and our fault for accepting this bulls(*# for so long. Are you all going to argue about who gets it worse? Women or Blacks or Black Women?
The Republicans are masters of Divide and Conquer and its working.

Anonymous said...

Time for all the lefty losers and Obama to grow up. No more liberal free rides for Obama. Everything is fair game.

There's many of us out here that have memories longer than 3 seconds. We DO remember the insults hurled at Hillary and we DO remember how Obama, the media darling, pranced through the fire.

Obama is not the king and his brownshirts are not in the right. There is no bowing and scraping in America. Obama would de well to remember that he WILL be a public servant. His wife will be fair game and also she IS the mother of his babies.

So what is the outcry for?

All this is just more thumbsucking from the left wing about how 'unfair' everything is in this election.

Well boohoohoo!

Anonymous said...


Why the outcry?

Possibly because FOX Noise made a statement that "a producer on the program exercised poor judgment in using this chyron during the segment” and their own staff were offended by the comment?

Anonymous said...

Who cares ?!? Affirmative Action is racist too, what are you going to do about that racism ?

Anonymous said...

Here we go! If Obama wins the White House, anyone who dares to criticize the Obama administration will be labeled a racist.

Anonymous said...

It seems many Americans need a refresher with their dictionaries, along with a nice sandwich, a glass of milk and a chill pill.

Anonymous said...

9:08 Sounds sexist to me. By "many Americans" you probably mean "women" whom you think should "chill out" and take a pill. Just shut up.

Anonymous said...

We sit around and fuss among ourselves about what comment is the most offensive, or which group is most offended. The reThug attack machine just sits back and throws more red meat into the pen and watches us scrap over every last syllable. Had Hillary been the presumptive nominee, we be seeing grossly offensive stuff hurled at her, too. It's ON, people, and we have to realize that these are the actions and words of deperate and frightened people. We have to rescue the country now, and these squabbles among ourselves are the only thing that can keep us from doing it. That, of course, and and those hackable voting machines, and voter purge lists, and...But by all means, let's spend all our time arguing over who was more insulted. Can we just agree that the remarks and the words are repellant, and indicative of the measures they have ALWAYS used, and get back to business and win this election? It's June, already. We have a lot of this crap to wade through before November. Toughen up, and let's work together for the good of the country!

Anonymous said...

Now it's time that we start vetting
Cindy McSame,what the story with her addiction,and why is the manchurian canidate getting 100%
disability from the v.a do he have ptsd or something,we going to give them(GOP) the same treatment that they give our people from now own!

Change you Believe in! OBAMA(08)

Anonymous said...

Women's concern about sexism is not a petty "squabble" but gets to the core of life in our country. The "words" were not just "repellent words" but indicative of the devaluation of women and their concerns. We will no longer ignore this minimalization of women's issues or continue with business as uaual. The way women are treated in this country has to be addressed and remedied.

The Religious Right said "feminism" was responsbile for 9/11; the Rap cultre belittes all women and calls them "hos"; and we see reflected in Clinton's presidential race the extent of sexism among men, in general, of all races and cultures.

A good start is the coverage given the issue on the front page of the NY Times today.

And one of the worst offenders during the campaign, Keith Olbermann, makes ridiculous comments defending MSNBC.

Racism is no longer the major problem of discrimination and cruelty in our country. It's the way women are devalued and mistreated.

Anonymous said...

Folllowing this story yesterday I hit a link to Michelle Malkin's blog where she put forth the "explaination" that Michelle Obama had referred to her husband as her "Baby's Daddy," an "excuse" I've since read elsewhere. Now put aside the act that one of her two links linked to the comments board of the Chicgao Tribune where a user claimed many other unflattering things about a campaign stop by Michelle Obama. Put aside, for a minute that many married couples proudly refer to their spouse as the father or mother of their children. Michelle and Barack Obama have two small children so it should have been her babies' daddy. Even their explaination was couched in the most racist and offensive way possible.

On a brighter note...I was watching a cable news show..possibly the Abrams report..where they have four squares filled with political commentators. The had Pat Buchannan and another male Republican strategist and two younger women defending the Democratic position. Pat Buchanan and the Strategist kept on with the same old arguments and the women, very refreshingly after the Kerry display of utter spinelessness, really attacked back saying Pat and the Stategist were trying to make Obama into the scary "Other" They bantered back and forth about the Left using code for McCain's age and then the dark haired woman who was the most verbal said, paraphrasing, that the Right could just go on with politics as usual by invoking Reverend Wright and Tony Rezco and whatever inflated mud they want to throw and the Left will by talking about real problems and real issues and real solutions and we will win the election. The thing is that during this entire speech the Republican Strategist, perhaps unconciously, was nodding his head in agreement.

Afterwards Pat Buchannan was very agitated and said, "listen. you guys run your Party and we'll run our Party, OK?" and I hoped one of the women would have responded, "Well, if you run your Party like you've run this Country for the past eight years you'll just run it into the ground," but they didn't.

Anyway, it was very refreshing and more Bill Maheresque than I've typically seen in the MSM.

Anonymous said...


And there's no better example of how women are devalued and mistreated that the Lilly Ledbetter case and the Fair Pay Act of 2007.

Barack Obama sharply criticized the Supreme Court for its decision against Ms. Ledbetter as well as the Bush Administration for not supporting the Fair Pay Act, which was legislation introduced to counter the narrow interpretation of the court and extend legal protection to women in the workplace.

John McCain is against the Fair Pay Act of 2007 and could not be bothered to go back to Washington and vote on the matter (unlike Clinton and Obama) because instead of seeing it as a protection of a woman's right to equal pay for equal work, he sees it as an opportunity for trial lawyers to sue employers.

Of course the trail lawyers wouldn't be making shit off of employers if they weren't breaking the law and discriminating against women, but logic and John McCain aren't often seen in the same room...

180 said...

in her lifetime, michelle obama has been called much worse things than babymama. the real story is that fox news, with the exception of their political reporting during voting times, sucks. period.

Anonymous said...


The comment Buchanan made was that Barack Obama may be viewed as too "exotic".

When called on to explain what he meant by "exotic", it was quite delicious to watch him squirm. We all know what Pat Buchanan means by "exotic". He's a blatant xenophobe with a long history of such commentary and he's usually not apologetic for it, either.

He meant that Barack Obama is black.

Anonymous said...

Poor Obama. He's the target of racism. That's how he got to be the nominee for President of the USA and put in that position by mostly white people. Let's just keep playing the race card.

Then I'll tell you what's on my "dance card." Obama and his church and his preacher, the Rev. Wright hate me because I'm white; Black men consder me a "ho" because I'm a woman; the Demcratic Party's leader, Howard Dean, admitted they didn't "see" the sexism, so nothing was done and they threw the nomination to "the man"; a large majority of people in this country belong to the Religious Right who think women are inferior to men - I guess because of Eve - who knows (The Muslims have their reasons so that viewpoint is always "justitifed> by some doctrine); the Republicans and McCain think women are second class citizens; and men in the media think just by thinking of Hillary/woman they can be castrated.

I think I'll sit this "election dance" out.

Anonymous said...

I'm with Pacosdad: it's ON, and we all need to rally to confront crap like this.

I really can't understand some of you Hillary supporters: here's a fine example of something that's both racist AND sexist, and you use it as a platform to complain some more about Obama. That sexism played a significant role in the anti-Hillary campaign is given; that this is primarily what cost her the nomination rather than her numerous mis-steps, her Iraq War vote, etc., the deftness of the Obama ground game, is highly debatable. But it's all moot: Hillary's stepped aside for now, Barack's the nominee presumptive, and whether you like Barack or not, if you support anything Hillary stands for, the least you could do is join us all in calling these attacks what they are: sexist, racist claptrap intended to gin up the discriminatory feelings in the electorate.

11:20: if you can't see why these comments are both racist and sexist, you need to educate yourself about the meaning of the term "baby mama." Secondly, you really need to get over yourself. CLEARLY there is sexism everywhere just as you describe, but did you really think it would all of a sudden reverse course if Hillary had been elected? This is a process, and part of moving forward is the occasional stumble. Everyone has their cross to bear, and we all need each other to work toward a more equitable society. "Sitting it out" is little more than petty cowardice. Crying into your ice cream ain't gonna change things.

I think the way to combat this is not just to get angry. The way to combat it is to point out WHY it's racist/sexist, and openly mock these attackers for being so pathetic, scared, and out of touch. If we make them look feeble and ridiculous, I think that will work better than playing into the "haha, look at how apoplectic the left got, they're just race-baiters" meme.

Anonymous said...


"I think I'll sit this 'election dance' out."

What, and by doing so give ammunition to those who believe women are weaker? This white woman who was for Hillary and now backs Obama says to hell with that kind of thinking.

Women are strong and we're going to fight for interests and vote accordingly.

Anonymous said...

to the female anon,

ya, you just sit this election out

and when mccain wins, dont you dare complain about anything

hey, guess where hillary's campaign chair is speaking this a consortium of insurance companies

hillary didnt lose because she is a woman...she lost because she is a hypocritical liar who thought she could gain the potus on the backs of women

she doesnt care about you...she doesnt care about me...she cared about getting back to the wh so she could increase her bank account once more

and i would love to know how that pen with her cackling is was hillary who created that faux laff

Anonymous said...

bacco40 == You prove the point. Your low-life rant about Hillary is like that which she put up with during the campaign and now you're continuing to bash her. 11:20 and women in general. Are you one of the male "masters" in the polgyamy colony in TX? No, probably not. You're jsut the run of the mill male sexist.

11:50 and 12:07 are vocal now for Obama but I heard little support from any of Ostroy's bloggers when Hillary was being "beat up on." I therefore don't believe your forgiving magnanimity now.

Whether you mean it or not, women are strong, as Hillary proved and we're strong enough to say "We aren't going to take it anymore."

I'd also point out that the Obama /Wright/BLT/Trinity Church is not sleaze slander made up by the Republicans. It is the truth.

You'll also recall the 94 percent of the black community that voted for Obama threatened to leave the Dem Party and vote for McCain. If things were switched do you think they would feel it was their duty to vote for Hillary. I don't think so. But, women, as a group, who are used to "caving" to do their clean-up duty are expected to continue to suck it up and smile while doing it. Remember the criticism Hillary got for not smiling while endorsing Obama.

Enough already.

Anonymous said...

1"43 The Hillary pen was sexist because there was no pen of McCain singing"bomb bomb Iran" or one of Obama saying "God bless America's 57 states."

A really cool one would have been of Obama bowling, but don't think that could be engineered into a pen.

Anonymous said...


Whether you believe me or not is irrelevant. What's important is that you seem to have made the decision to sit the "election dance" out.

How else is this to be viewed in any way other than weakness? It does not take strength to leave the room in the face of torment or marginalization. Strength is forcing the media and the Republicans to look in the mirror and not only see but understand their wrongheadedness.

It's pretty clear to me that your disappointment over Hillary not winning the nomination, and I share that same disappointment, is clouding your judgment. If Hillary's message, instead of simply her gender, is what caused you to support her then there is really no choice in the election. Barack Obama supports the legislative agenda backed by women's groups and agrees with Hillary on the vast majority of issues of the day, John McCain does not.

If your support of Hillary was simply based on her gender, then you are no different than the African-Americans you seem to deride for supporting another African-American.

Anonymous said...

4:29 What a kind and intelligent response to those with whom you disagree. I am neither the one holding a "dance card" with unacceptable choices for "dancing"; nor am I 3:42, nor do I know if they are the same person. However, I agree with one or both of them which is why I'm answering you.

My idea of strength and even purpose in not voting is not to "force" the media and the Republicans to look into the mirror; but, to the contrary. I want the Democratic Party to "look in the mirror and understand their wrong headedness," Yet, even that is not my reason.

The Democratic leadership foolishly and with malice toward women chose the one of the two candidates who will not win this election. Thus, through their bias against women in general and Hillary in particular, they "gave" the presidency to McCain. Or, maybe, as one suggested, it was fear of losing the black community to the Republican party. It doesn't matter. Really.

Again, I, myself, am not staying home to try to "teach a lesson to the Party," and I have no desire to "get even" or any other wish. I just will not vote for a candidate with an association with Rev. Wright, Pfleger, Black Liberation Theology and Trinity Church. I believe that connection disqualifies anybody for leading our country.

I of course support Hillary's and Obama's Democractic Party's principles but I don't trust Obama to fulfill them. That's why I switched from surpporting him to Hillary after the Wright exposure.

Anonymous said...


Thank you for your kind words.

There's absolutely nothing in Obama's record as a public servant to indicate he will not advance the core principles of the Democratic Party. John McCain we know, as John McLaughlin says, with metaphysical certitude will not.

And it's my opinion that some people harping on Wright and Pfleger ignore the incredibly stupid things said by supporters of their chosen candidate and 99% of the people who rail about Black Liberation Theology know very little about it in practice, have never been to Trinity United Church of Christ and don't know anyone who regularly attends the church. Again this is my own opinion but it seems they are projecting their own fears of what is unknown to them instead of opening their hearts to learning.

If Obama himself had said the things Wright or Pfleger said, it would be another matter entirely. Frankly, I'd hate to be held to account for some of the things my family members, children, co-workers, etc have said in the past.

Anonymous said...

I have objections to your argument.

1 Since Obama has a skimpy public record there is little there to support an opinion one might have, one way or the other.

By contrast, McCain has been on both sides of most issues and if we're lucky he'll flip back to our side. As silly as it sounds, I'm only half kidding. At one time, he considered switching to the Dem. Party.

2.Wright and Pfleger didn't say "stupid" things. They said, hateful, devisive, and, in my opinion, threatening things.

3. They are not merely supporters. They are friends, mentors, spritiaul guides, advisors and one, the leader of the church which Obama and family attended for twenty years and supported with money - perhaps tithes.

4. What I know is what I"ve heard black preachers say about it on TV; what I've read about it; excerpts from Cone's writing and what I've heard from black people in my town. All seems to confirm Cone's words" "Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the White enemy." (Cone A BLACK THEOLOGY FOR LIBERATION.)

5. Obama was taught BLT at the church which he continued to attend and where he took his children to learn the same lesson. Those teachings would be intolerable for me to hear about black people in my church. I would not attend. I of course wouldn't listen to those words about white or any other people.

7. I would never vote for a presidential candidate who was a white racist if I knew it.

6. I'm a Democrat and I believe in everything we want to accomplish. This is very difficult for me. However, Obama's speech about Wright and the church did not reassure me.

It's not what family members,children, co-workers etc. say, it's how we deal with it.

Anonymous said...

Obama appeared on TV to help Al Sharpton get Imus fired for making racially insensitive remarks about blacks. Why didn't Obama become active in his church against racially insensitive remarks agains whites?

Anonymous said...

OK, OK, you're right. I give up. It's sexist. No, it's racist. No, it's pig-headed and stupid. No it's divisive and demeaning. Whatever. My point was not in any way, shape, or form to diminish the sexist aspect of the comment, nor the racist aspect. My point, if you will be so kind as to review, please, was about the infighting between the two Democratic candidates and their supporters. McCain even made jokes on TV about the squabbles between the two camps, and asked them to please, please, by all means, keep it up. I frankly would not care if the candidate were Hillary or Obama, THE POINT IS, stop and think: do you, for one moment, think that McCain will make things better for women, or people of color, or gays, or the military, or ANYONE, for that matter? For whatever reason, the race was run, and whether Obama won the majority of delegates or Hillary won the state of Michigan or what-freakin'-ever, we have a candidate, and with the history of hackable voting machines, voter purge lists (do I need to go on?), it will take all the Democratic voters we can possibly get to have a large enough majority to ensure that the United States continues to remotely resemble the country we now know. Please try and understand that ALL processes of this nature - civil rights, women's rights, gay rights - all of these things have taken much more than one election cycle to accomplish, but if we continue to fight among ourselves while ignoring the common threat of another 4-8 years of the same abysmal mess we've all just been through, then we've just signed the death warrant for all the progress that's been made thus far. Our country is and always has been a work in progress. There is so very much at stake here, and I cannot understand why anyone in their right mind would either go and cast a vote for the exact opposite of their own beliefs, or not vote at all. To be frank, neither of the 2 final candidates was my first choice, but I'll be damned if I'll vote against everything I hold dear out of dissapointment or spite. I, personally, have a stake in this as well - as a gay man. I have neither the time nor the energy to fight with those in my own party. I beg of you to think, carefully, about the values that we are supposed to stand for, and work for those things we have in common, and realize that those concepts should be bringing us together, not driving us apart. The Republicans are just delighted to watch that, I assure you. We have to win the election before we can even begin to fix the rest.

Anonymous said...

It's OK to object. But I'd like to rebut your arguments:

1. Barack Obama actually has a longer record of elected public service than Hillary Clinton. If his record is skimpy, what is Clintons?

The probability of John McCain suddenly becoming an advocate of a woman's right to choose is less than nil.

2. Do you honestly believe that surrogates, friends and mentors of Clinton and McCain have not said hateful, devisive and threatening things? It seems you are trying to split hairs.

3. John McCain's top campaign advisors have worked for terrorists, dictators and entities with interests directly contradictory to those of the United States. McCain has known and worked with these a-holes for decades.

4. You'd probably be wiser to investigate the source directly, rather than base your opinion of Trinity United on outtakes, excerpts and snippets - especially when they seem to be entirely one-sided.

5. Read Obama's books. I did and I found nothing to indicate he hates white people or hates America. Recently I listened again to his address to the 2004 convention. It's incredibly inspiring. Even Republicans widely praised it.

6. A racist is a racist, no matter the color, right? I don't recall where Obama has made a racist comment about white people or any other ethnicity. For decades John McCain derisively used the term "gooks" in public and was unapologetic for it. To someone of Southeast Asian background it would be as if he/she were called "nigger" or "kike" or "spic".

7. I appreciate tremendously how hard it is for you and so many others. A woman got so incredibly close to the nomination of our party we could taste it. But, in my view, we cannot in turn disregard what we and people like Hillary have fought so hard to achieve by turning our backs now. John McCain appointing another 2 or 3 Alitos or Scalias to the Supreme Court would be a setback for women and the average American that would take untold number of years to remedy. We should not cut our noses off to spite our faces.

Anonymous said...

1. Hillary is no longer in the race.
2.Obama's spritual adviser aka "Uncle" is the offender.
3.I don't even know their names.
4. A quote is a quote. More than one quote is more than one quote. Either Cone meant what he said or Wright lied on Moyers program.
5.Of course an ambitious Obama is not going to write in a book "I hate white people." He's not being accused of stupidity.
6.You keep missing the point.
7.How condescendingly obnoxious.

Anonymous said...

THe Letters to the Editor in response to the sexist article in the New York Times appear today. Almost all were from women -- read them and see how women feel about the sexism that was so evident during the primary There was only one letter from a man. Guess how he felt. Apparently men still do not wish to remedy the situation. Big surprise.

Anonymous said...

pacosdad -- You still don't "get it" A gay man can "pass" if he so chooses and not suffer the hardships and discrimination of sexism.

Anonymous said...

9:28: YOU still don't get it. Out of spite you are willing to purposefully set back women (and everyone else) decades. McCain not only advocates policies that are incredibly destructive and regressive from the point of view of anyone who calls his or herself a Democrat, he will be certain to appoint 1-2 Supreme Court nominees who will be at least as conservative as Alito/Scalia (and if you think the Dem Congress will kill off all such nominees, you are incredibly naive).

Pacosdad, really excellent points. I agree with you wholeheartedly. Shame on any Hillary supporters who will vote for McCain or not vote. That is the most spiteful, cowardly, hypocritical, demented thing I can think of.

I'm tired of treating Hillary supporters with velvet gloves: quit your bitching. Hillary lost, whether legitimately or not. She will not be the nominee this time, maybe never. If you support ANYTHING she believes in and has fought hard for, you will work your ass off to oppose McCain.

Anonymous said...

1. So to whom are you comparing Obama? If it is to McCain, Hillary's record of public services pales in comparison as well.

2. Yes, as stated, Wright is a surrogate or friend or advisor. However, you avoided the question: do you not believe surrogates, friends or advisors to Clinton or McCain have said hateful, devisive or threatening things?

3. Seems odd to me that as a Democrat you are more aware of the controversies surrounding Obama than those of John McCain. Take some time to investigate the following names: Charlie Black, Rick Davis, Terry Nelson, Donald Diamond, Rick Renzi - and that's for starters.

4. It's not as simplistic as you put it. Do you know the context of Reverend Wright's "GD America" statement?

5. So you are going to presuppose that because Wright said or did something that Obama is guilty by association of the same thoughts or actions? So is John McCain guilty of being a racist because he knew and served with Strom Thurmond and was a member of the same political party?

If you are consistent you can't say "no" because John McCain isn't stupid enough to actually say black are inferior to whites. But you'd have to question, wouldn't you?

6. So please explain your point.

7. Sorry you feel that way. Was just calling it as I see it. Women who are Democrats are typically affiliated with the party for a reason: they support the platform. If they turn around and support John McCain in this election, they are in effect thumbing their noses at the very things they have fought for - equality under the law.

Anonymous said...

To all of you mysogynists who "threw" the election to Mccain:

Here's another sexist slander I'm sure you're familiar with:

"Hell had no fury like a woman scorned."

Anonymous said...

Massa Dirk -- Please don't beat us again. Please keep on your velvet gloves We gonna do whatever you say.


Missy Nobody.

Anonymous said...

McCain and his campaign today canceled a fundraiser scheduled to be held at the home of Clayton Williams in Midland, Texas.

Those of you not from Texas may not know who Clayton Williams is or what he is most famous for, but I can promise you anyone remotely interested in politics over the age of 35 knows who he is. He was the GOP candidate for governor of the state of Texas in 1990 and had a healthy lead in the polls until he made a little joke.

He compared rape to the weather, saying "as long as it's inevitable, might as well lay back and enjoy it."

He even went so far as to refuse to shake his opponent's hand in a televised debate. My friend Ann Richards, whom I miss greatly, went on to beat that asshole and became Governor of Texas.

Unbelievably, McCain's camp is claiming ignorance of the "joke". This is complete and utter bullshit as McCain's campaign in Texas is being run by people who have known and worked with Clayton Williams for decades in the state GOP.

McCain is refusing to return any of the $300,000 raised for his campaign by Clayton Williams.

Anonymous said...

9:28 you are absolutely right. A gay man can "pass" if he so chooses. I for one choose to pass on the opportunity to "get" it, if by "getting it" means reversing the progress that was made by the efforts and suffering of countless women, people of color, and gays, in order to satisfy your anger. How DARE you suggest that that is an appropriate action to take? You could possibly "pass" as a man if you so chose, and the effort and result would be just as unseemly, degrading, false, and ineffective as a gay man "passing". How DARE you even suggest that yours is the only hardship that counts? Do you have any recollection AT ALL of how many people, no, make that Americans, DIED because of the inaction of the Reagan administration to even speak about AIDS? DIED, "anonymous", no matter what gender, color, or sexual persuasion. But that just pales in comparison, doesn't it, to what you, personally, must have somehow suffered. If a woman, or Hillary, being President is the ONLY thing that matters to you, then perhaps I was mistaken. Sit this one out. Do the rest of us less harm by not injecting your hateful prejudice into the process this time. It takes a lot to offend me these days, what with the constant drubbing from the most criminal administration in memory still working hard at all the destruction it can muster, but you just about managed to do it.
Just to be clear, the remarks about Michelle Obama were offensive, period. They were offensive to her as a woman, and as an African-American. The remarks made about Hillary were offensive to her as a woman, a person of accomplishment (of ANY gender), and beneath the dignity of the election process. The remarks hurled at _____ were offensive because they were made by uninformed, bigoted, fascist, misogynist, "conservative", classist, anti-Americans. Just fill in the G-D blank. AS I SAID, the Republicans are loving this, really they are. And you wouldn't be one of them, now would you?

Anonymous said...

Michael -- That "lay back and enjoy it " was not original with Clayton Williams. My grandmother told me when I asked her about it that its as old as a lot of other really ugly remarks made about girls that she started hearing in high school way back when. She says that doesn't excuse him, but depending on his age, it's just part of his vocabulary. You know -she says like people now adays say "bitch" all the time.

And the other point I just read about. My brother's gay,and the only one in my family who knows is me and my grandmother. And nobody cares. He I guess what you all say is "passes" all the time. He doesn't tell anybody. Nobody knows and nobody can tell unless he tells them. He's not about to start up with my mother or the peoeple in this town here in the south. I don't see anything wrong with that at all. It's nobodys business if he doesn't want to tell them. He's going to move to NY when he finishes college. I guess that guy on this blog thinks he should go around telling everybody. I think my brother should do what he wants to do.

I read this blog all the time. I really love it. I'm sure getting an earful, but my grandmother let's me read it.

Anonymous said...

No 7:05 I'm a lesbian and even so, I can't pass as a man even in drag. It's got to do with the voice, and no beard, for starters. So I'm discriminated as a woman AND as a gay person when I don't "pass" as straight. Think how lucky you are -- count your blessings and leave us women alone to deal with that aspect of our lives.

Anonymous said...

8:06 We are getting waay off topic here, but I did want to say one quick thing to your comment about your brother and telling everybody. No, no, no, no, no. I live in the south, too, and you are absolutely correct that it is nobody’s business at all whether someone is gay or not. Interestingly, you said that the only ones in your family who know about him are you and your grandmother, and nobody cares, but he doesn’t want to tell others, like his mother. Well, obviously somebody cares. My point about “passing” was that it so sad and wrong that it has to happen, and that people still feel the need to hide out of fear of rejection or even sometimes violence. But to be told that that is how one must or should lead one’s life is not a happy way to live, and is unacceptable. Your brother should never have to tell anyone anything about himself if he chooses not to, but to be unable to tell anyone about himself if he DOES want to is the painful, hurtful part. It should always be his choice, in his time, and he is very lucky to have the love and acceptance you have for him. Believe me, not everyone does.

Anonymous said...

8:15, I will now leave this alone. I have to go deal with the hardships and discrimination that I must face in my daily life. Gay, male, HIV+, alone, just lost my home, parents in assisted living, and not certain of the prospects of any of these things changing or improving. Ah, yes, so lucky. Yet I seek the greater benefit for the country, for my party, my family and friends, all those who have lost their homes to disasters and have been forgotten, the soldiers who have fought and died for an ill-begotten war, equality for all races and genders, and that whole pursuit of happiness thing as written in the Constitution. That means you, too, my friend. McCain and his ilk will set us back decades, if not forever. The only chance we have as a people, as a party, as a country, is to try and bridge these differences so to acquire those things we most desire. The fight should not, at this point, be over the Democratic candidates, it should be to make our candidate the President. I would be as willing to work for Hillary as Obama if that was how it turned out, because I KNOW that is the only chance we have. The other side wants to reverse all of the things we have gained - for what purpose? Who knows? They change their stories so much it's hard to tell whether they are lying or lying. So you see, I don't want to "leave you alone to deal with that aspect", because that affects me, too, just as it affects all of us. I only ask you to look at the larger picture and try and remember - first we need to win the election. The monumental step this country has taken by having as its two major Dem. candidates a woman and an African-American man is so utterly incredible, and so hopeful, that the changes that CAN happen to solve these other issues may be just around the corner.

Anonymous said...

pacosdad. I am so moved and touched by your letter to the young person in the south and about your own suffering and insights. I am truly sorry for your pain and suffering. Thank you for sharing. It allows me and others to see what another and others are going through.

There's not much I can think of that would be helpful to say. The only thing I can think of as a solution to your problems,my problems and the world's problems has been said before. The answer is love. Not the sentimental love of greeting cards, but the universal acceptance of all as worthy and deserving of the best. I know that probably sounds trite these days and simplistic and naive. But I didn't make it up.

Now to slip back to the immediate problem for me in that regard. The church which Obama attended for twenty years teaches hate and revenge. That bothers me above anything else. It's bad enough that some come into our lives and experience as "sheep in wolves clothing" and fool us, but that church makes no attempt to hide its hatred. Hatred is the cause of most if not all of the troubles in the world. Obama lived and moved and breathed in that atmosphere. I have no confidence in him.

Again, I don't want to argue with you are anybody else. And, again, thank you for your sharing. God Bless.

Anonymous said...

In the NYTimes today Frank Rich brags about how well Obama is doing and how badly MCCain is doing And what makes him so happy? It's that The conservative legal scholar Douglas Kmiec has endorsed Mr. Obama, as have both the economic advisers to NEWT GRINGRICH'S 'CONTRACT WITH AMERICA", Lawrence Hunger, and the NEOCON HISTORIAN Francis Fukuyama. RUPERT MURDOCH IS PUBLICLY FLIRTING WITH THE DEMOCRAT as well.'

And, dear God, Rich goes on to say:



IS FRANK RICH CRAZY in bragging about this> Why in God's name would a Dem. want to vote for a candidate that is being supported by a multitude of REPUBOICANS AND NEOCANS.

Is Rich trying to ruin Obama's chances? It's giving me another look at McCain. I don't want a Democratic President that is adored by the other side.

Anonymous said...

12:05: I think your concerns here are legit, but could be misplaced. I think the point Rich is making is that McCain's pandering on the gas issue is such bad policy that even Neocons hate the notion (quick aside: Fukuyama has recently repudiated his "end of history" thesis and neoconservatism more generally). Murdoch flirts with Obama to the extent that he wants influence and above even his conservatism loves money, and Obama drives ratings (this is my guess). Also, conservatives are not at all excited by McCain.

I don't see this as being about Obama's progressive vs. conservative cred at all. I see it as being about (1) realists who are bashing McCain's pandering; (2) GOP judo, whereby by embracing Obama they're making folks like you re-think their support; (3) making McCain, who has been much loathed among conservatives, the sacrificial lamb in order to have a triumphant return in 2012 (they fucking hate McCain, or haven't you noticed?); (4) some combination of these, in addition to some other machination I can't foresee.

BTW, Pacosdad: really, really excellent posts.

Anonymous said...


Nobody claimed Clayton Williams originated the "joke". What he so stupidly did was tell the "joke" in public with reporters and their cameras/recorders in hand.

What is a joke now is that McCain's camp is claiming ignorance about the episode.


Thank you so much for your contribution and perspective.

Oh, Happy Father's Day to all!

Anonymous said...

Silly me. I don't remember a Happy Mother's Day greeting.on May 10th of this year.

Anonymous said...

Pecosdad is sure right when he said "it is sad and wrong . . . that people still have to hide our of fear of rejection or even sometimes violence."

We of the "weaker" sex might amend it to say "it is sad and wrong . . . that women still have to hide their feelings and opinions and strength in fear of rejection and to always fear the possible violence."

We also have to fear being accused of whining for such an observation, whereas "the man" is praised.

Anonymous said...

I want so add to my sister's (my real biological sister and not in the sense of "bro" and feminism)) comment about the double standard. When "the man" was agressive and bold, Hillary was the target of castration jokes; when Hillary was serving in non-elected capacities it was not considered experience; when "the man" did community work it became a part of his adequate experience; when the "man" danced on Tv it was cool but when Hillary "threw one back" she was again the target of sexist jokes. This is all old news, but how quickly you all forget.

Anonymous said...

6:08 and 5:57: Valid points, and you're of course right to point out the ugliness of the sexism of those double standards (and for the record: I think neither community organizing nor being First Lady counts as "experience" for this level of office).

However, that doesn't mean everything leveled at Hillary, or at you, is sexist, either. Part of the project of feminism is so that women can be called out for being wrong not because they are women, but because they are wrong. Whenever a (female by claim) Hillary supporter has said she lost the nomination because of sexism, I say: I disagree. Sexism played a part, but to insist that this was the driving force, is wrong. It is also wrong to see every attack, every slight, every challenge, through the prism of sexism. All you're doing is binding yourself. Meanwhile, by couching your argument in these terms, you're willfully ignoring the extent to which racism was also a factor in this campaign.

Flip it around for a moment: how can any (non-female) person mount a challenge to folks like you without being labeled sexist? How can anyone here lay claim to feelings of structural or sociological obstacles to the full realization of their human potential without folks like you throwing your gender around in a "let's talk about who has it worse" pissing contest? Patriarchy is a system that damages men, too. Your words here seem to imply that men are the enemy, that women are always the victims, and that as a woman you are immune to any criticism of your allegedly anti-sexist position. If that's so, the only thing you're doing is essentializing gender, which is vital to the maintenance of patriarchy.

In short: as a PERSON, you are entitled to your opinion, and as a PERSON I'm entitled to tell you that this is not all about you, that sexism does not automatically trump other anti-human "isms" out there, and that as a PERSON, I think you are an idiot if out of anger about sexism in this campaign you will vote for McCain, who, as pacosdad has pointed out, will move backward at a time in history where we positively must move forward for risk of losing it all.

Anonymous said...

"The squeaky wheel gets the oil." And we really really need some oil.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Dirk says: "There are more important issues at stake than sexism."

One is the Iraq war and probably the other is health care.

Krugman pointed out today that Obama's healthcare plan won't work:

". . . it's probably not enough to pay for universal health care, which was suposed to be the overriding progressive priority in this election.?

Krugman also implied that Obama is as spineless as the Dems in power now:

"Progressives in particular, have no hope that Mr. Obama will be more willing to challenge the Bush legacy in office than he has been in the campaign."

So those two issues seem to be off the table, given Krugman's reputation for analysis.

That leaves us with sexism which may suprirse those of you who complain of our whining. It is more than being "dissed" by the Democratic Party and the media, and a large number of men.


The glass ceiling;
Women are paid 79 cents to every male]s pay of 1.00;
The Trafficking Victims Protection Act (prosecution of sex traffickers) which was dropped by Sen. Joseph Biden, Jr and Sam Brownback;
High maternal mortality;
Single mothers have to pay childcare while they work to support them (not so in most civilized countries);
Dead-beat dads;
Men deserting families;
Fathers throwing pregnant unmarried daughters out of the house because of the "disgrace" they have wrought;
Date rape;
Spousal abuse;
Murder victims largely female;
Under representation in political arena;
the challenge to Roe v. Wade;
women more likely target of scams;
polygamy colonies exist; :

high shool cheerleaders in sexually provacative outfits cheering on the "real players" in h.s. life. No athelitic programs for girl;;

MSNBC female anchors all most have low necklines; mostly very long hair-dos and finally -- they all must be "perky", "silly" and high-voiced to fulfill some exec's -- whatever. (Mika drives me crazy except when she reads the news.)

There are more but I'm "just a woman" and can't think of everything.

Oh, how about all the nasty porn businesses. No men "objects" there.

Anonymous said...

"Oh, how about all the nasty porn businesses. No men "objects" there."

What a crude, ignorant, self-serving statement. "No" men, eh? How's conflating sexism/misogyny with all men working out for ya?

All of the things you list are things I likewise abhor, and that we should all be working to oppose. Are you trying to imply Obama supports those things? Are you trying to imply he doesn't care? Are you saying that with Hillary in charge those things magically disappear? Are you saying the only things worth voting on are the war, health care, and then sexism in general? Racism doesn't matter, poverty doesn't matter, the inequalities wrought by rampant capitalism don't matter? Can we pass a law against sexism? Hey, presto: it's gone! Let's pass a law against war next!

It's perfectly appropriate to oppose Obama for purported weaknesses on progressive policy issues, and it's perfectly appropriate to try to push him more our way on those. But frankly I don't understand the point of the rest of your post except as a general complaint, through which you strongly imply that nobody cares about those things but you (and/or women). If that's the way you view the world, then I truly feel sorry for what a sad, bitter existence you must lead.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Gently You are so pathetically dense and so agressively hostile that I, as the female President (yes, President) of my community's civic group which includes men, inform you that our group will no longer attempt an intelligent exchange with you. Post your rants and insults, but we will not read them nor respond individually or as a group.

Anonymous said...

12:09: Gosh, my feelings are hurt. And a woman can make it all the way to (gulp!) civic group president?! I rescind all my comments:

Hillary should get the nomination because people said nasty things about her. All profeminist/women's issues should be tossed aside to get back at Obama and his supporters. War with Iran is a worthwhile risk in order to show anonymous sexist assholes online what for.

I have seen the light, and I will gladly ingratiate myself to your anonymous civic group so you won't think I'm a bad person.