Your Ad Here
2008 May 26 Monday
Noonan And Paglia On Hillary Clinton's Sexism Whining

Peggy Noonan says Golda Meir and Margaret Thatcher never complained about sexism - unlike that whiner Hillary Clinton.

Great women, all different, but great in terms of size, of impact on the world and of struggles overcome. Struggle was not something they read about in a book. They did not use guilt to win election -- it comes up zero if you Google "Thatcher" and "You're just picking on me because I'm a woman." Instead they used the appeals men used: stronger leadership, better ideas, a superior philosophy.

You know where I'm going, for you know where she went. Hillary Clinton complained again this week that sexism has been a major dynamic in her unsuccessful bid for political dominance. She is quoted by the Washington Post's Lois Romano decrying the "sexist" treatment she received during the campaign, and the "incredible vitriol that has been engendered" by those who are "nothing but misogynists." The New York Times reported she told sympathetic bloggers in a conference call that she is saddened by the "mean-spiritedness and terrible insults" that have been thrown "at you, for supporting me, and at women in general."

Where to begin? One wants to be sympathetic to Mrs. Clinton at this point, if for no other reason than to show one's range. But her last weeks have been, and her next weeks will likely be, one long exercise in summoning further denunciations. It is something new in politics, the How Else Can I Offend You Tour. And I suppose it is aimed not at voters -- you don't persuade anyone by complaining in this way, you only reinforce what your supporters already think -- but at history, at the way history will tell the story of the reasons for her loss.

So, to address the charge that sexism did her in:

It is insulting, because it asserts that those who supported someone else this year were driven by low prejudice and mindless bias.

It is manipulative, because it asserts that if you want to be understood, both within the community and in the larger brotherhood of man, to be wholly without bias and prejudice, you must support Mrs. Clinton.

This is a very difficult primary period for Democrats who eat up identity politics. They are torn between being not sexist and not racist. It is not surprising that Obama is winning given this split. Racism is a far more powerful charge than sexism. Plus, Obama has got the overwhelming support of blacks who are clear that they should support their own above all else.

Still, Hillary has done very well among white voters. Does anyone have a good source of the demographic breakdown of all votes in Democratic primaries in this election season? My impression is that Obama does well in states that have very few blacks and large numbers of blacks but not in states in between. The higher the black portion of the population in a state the more the whites vote for Hillary. But has Hillary won a majority of the white vote overall?

Camille Paglia also takes on Hillary.

Hillary has tried to have it both ways: to batten on her husband's nostalgic popularity while simultaneously claiming to be a victim of sexism.

Well, which is it? Are men convenient sugar daddies or condescending oppressors?

As her presidential hopes have begun to evaporate, Hillary has upped the ante in the crusading feminist department. Her surrogates are beating the grievance drums, trying to scare every angry female out of the bush.

From that rag-tag crew, she will build her army. Let the red flags fly! Hillary is positioning herself as the Crucified One, betrayed, mocked, flogged, and shunted aside for the cause of Ultimate Womanhood. But doesn't this saccharine melodrama undermine the central goals of feminism?

Maybe men are condescending oppressor sugar daddies?

Will President Obama complain much? His stump speeches are all very uplifting and cheery. But once in power and fighting daily battles can he sustain the positive tone he's primarily used so far?

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2008 May 26 12:04 PM  Politics Identity


Comments
TangoMan said at May 26, 2008 4:07 PM:

Does anyone have a good source of the demographic breakdown of all votes in Democratic primaries in this election season?

Here is an interesting analysis which details the buyer's remorse that is setting in around Obama.

Rick Darby said at May 26, 2008 4:34 PM:

The ideological mayhem among the Democrat lefties is fun to watch, with each candidate's supporters trying to score through the formerly devastating accusation of "-ism."

Unfortunately, there is no better Republican candidate. Even if Obama and Clinton knock each other out and Juan McAmnesty is the beneficiary, it will be a Pyrrhic victory.

Paul V said at May 26, 2008 6:44 PM:

First let me say
I think its a outrage,, how the new media take something completely out context,Just like the obama supporter,don't like it,, CNN & Msnbc, everyone knows what Hilary said,, to add word to it, these new agency should be working for the Bush Administration, or for a third world country, who trying to rig the election, I am for Hilary,,Obama has no agenda,, He running on nothing more than Corporate Media hype,
Every seems to be caught up in this Barack Obama Magic show. since the media is pushing Hilary out ,, and certain democrats, then 75% to 80% Hilary voter will do what Obama supports said they will do,, Obama support seen on CNN and Msnbc saying if obama don't win the primary, they are going to vote for McCain, well since then Between certian Democrats and Corporate,,, there already a campaign of Hilary supporter,,
Even if Hilary decide to back Obama, up to 80% of hilary supporter will not vote for Obama or flat out vote for McCain,
I voted for Hilary and no matter what, I will not vote for Obama and better yet, I will not waste my vote, I will vote for McCain, I do think America is ready for a black President, Not Obama, and better yet ,, Obama voter now are saying if you don't vote for him it Racist, I am not going to Obama because he is a Fraud, No more No Less, Not because he black or white, just because on every single one of his debates He could not answer a hard question for the simple fact they gave them to Hilary,, not only that, everything Hilary said she was going to do, Obama Agreed, with her every single time,, and uses her way on his campaign, Obama needs the other half of Hilary Votes, to win against McCain, and that is a fact, ,,,, Remember if Obama supporter can say they will VOte for McCain if Obama don't win, then guess what All Hilary voter are uniting and doing the same thing,, what goes around comes around,

Dragon Horse said at May 27, 2008 6:39 PM:


This is the best breakdown
I have seen of race and region so far:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2008/05/a_review_of_obamas_voting_coalition_1.html

Part II is coming out tomorrow.


Taylor Marsh assumes all whites are the same so his analysis is flawed from jump.

you have to look at the states that voted in March, compared to February. A decline in Obama's appeal to "whites" in March from February is more an issue of the states that voted and their region than anything else. Working class whites (especially males) in West Virginia and Kentucky have little in common culturally with their socio-economic counterparts in Wisconsin or other areas of the UpperMidwest, where Obama wins White working class males (as well as he did in Virginia). He has only had problems in the Deep South (where the best state was Georgia for him) and in states with significant Appalachian populations. He has not done very bad among white males anywhere else, but Missouri to my knowledge. Even in Texas he didn't do very poorly.

Marsh fells to take any of this into account and assumes race is some type of homogenizing variable, it is not. Well maybe for black voters, but not for white Americans voters in the Demographic primaries. Another example is that Obama almost always wins young people and educated or affluent voters. He lost those groups in Kentucky, the same night he won them in Oregon, and he also won them in Ohio and Pennsylvania, so the deeper into Appalachia you get the more resistance there is to him, regardless of demographics, that is a cultural issue with whites in that region.

Luckily for Obama he can likely win the election without ever getting a significant amount of Appalachian whites (well not over 40%)...he can win Pennsylvania with maybe 25% if he can run up numbers in the urban areas with Hillary out of the race. I don't think he will win Ohio, WV is out, Kentucky is out and most of the South but for Virginia (VA has been trending Democrat for about 3 years and Obama is very popular in Northern VA and even around the Hampton Roads area). The key for Obama is the Midwest (West of Indiana) and the Southwest. If he can can win Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado, Virginia, Iowa, Kansas, Wisconsin, South Dakota, Oregon, California, Washington, Michigan, from Virginia north to Maine along the coast...he will win the election by a good margin. That is, I believe his plan. He is not trying to repeat Kerry and Gore, because he can't, just like he has not beat Hillary in the primaries by going the traditional route...I most worry about Pennsylvania and Virgina...also maybe Missouri...the rest I think he can get fairly easily...unless something really bad happens.

Dragon Horse said at May 27, 2008 6:50 PM:

Paul V sounds just like right wing Republicans crying over McCain knowing out Romney and Huckabee...everyone who is a real democrat who actually cares about the issues will come home. I seriously doubt woman are going to vote for McCain who is definately not pro-feminist agenda. Feelings will be hurt and people will grow up and get over it because in the end the gap between any Democrat (Clinton or Obama) is huge compared with McCain and the gap between Clinton and Obama is quite small. If one is not obsessed with the Clinton cult of personality, political dynasty, etc they will vote for the person who reps their interests. I am personally not too concerned about it because the most hardcore HIllary supporters (in West VA, Kentucky, Arkansas) based on CNN election center polls live in states that won't go Democrat.

In the end...Hillary has so alienated black voters, how does a Hillary support expect her to win Ohio, Michigan, Missouri, and Pennsylvania with suppressed black turnout? No Democrat has got a majority of the white vote since before JFK and no Democrat can win the general without black support. WHy do you think Super Delegates are lining up being Obama...one reason is they are scared of black backlash, lets be honest...they feel most white women will come home and some men...they know those who definately won't live in states that likely won't go Democrat. What they do know is black turnout for Democrats will be 80+% with Hillary but it will be suppressed by 15% in overall numbers...which means Hillary will lose quite a few swing states...it is not just blacks either, white liberal true believers in places like Oregon won't show up.

Most Super Delegates are elected officials and politicians don't tend to be risk takers...they do what is in their interest...if anything else they know Hillary will be polarizing (just like her husband) and hurt them down ticket, just as Bill lost the Democratic congress with his 8 years of scandals. The Repubs have tried, in Louisiana and Mississippi to attack Obama supporting congressional candidates in special elections in the last 2 months with the Rev. Wright issue, the Obama flag pin, fake nonsense smear campaigns about his father being a radical Muslim (he was an atheist BTW)...etc. Didn't work, both Dems won hands down.

I think you better get used to saying President Barack H. Obama. :-)

Randall Parker said at May 27, 2008 7:09 PM:

Dragon Horse,

I think Obama's got about a 90% chance of winning. The economy alone would ruin it for any Republican candidate. McCain is weak and alienates the Republican base. I do not see how McCain can win.

Now, maybe McCain gets a heart attack and someone takes his place. Or a scandal pops up and hurts Obama in a big way. There are always events. But barring some big event Obama wins.

Dragon Horse said at May 27, 2008 8:02 PM:

I agree, I think Obama wins, short of a scandal. Now be honest, did you ever think in your life time you would see a president sworn in as Barrack Hussein Obama. I mean...that is going to stand out when elementary kids learn the presidents names. :-) I always thought the first black president would named something like Leon Tyrone Jackson. :-) I definately never thought he would be the son of a man straight from Africa who was not even a citizen and a white woman from the Midwest...that is just so bizarre it would not even be in a movie. After this...expect a Hispanic president in 10 years (he will just be a white Hispanic) and he will open up the border and make America Norte Mexico. :-)


Post a comment
Comments:
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
URL:
Remember info?

      
 
Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright