Picture of Hillary with devil horns disappears

Disclaimer: This is not an attack on Barack Obama, but on the mainstream media.

I noticed that a picture by Reuters of Hillary Clinton with horns strategically placed behind her, portraying her as some sort of devil, has disappeared from their website:

The picture had been here until it was pulled presumably because Slate Magazine noticed the fact that other candidates were being portrayed as good religious figures such as Jesus, etc.

Today, for example, an MSNBC story was accompanied by an AP photo in which a candidate is depicted as Jesus Christ himself being baptized by the holy spirit.

I can already hear some argue, "blah, that's all a coincidence, those objects just happened to be there".

But if there are any photographers here, they will tell you that every element in a picture is supposed to be there for a reason. A professional photographer places the elements he wants to include, in the spot he wants them included, in order to achieve the desired outcome.

This is just a reminder that the media will utilize all its weapons: the word, the image, the sound, to destroy the ones it despises.

There's more...

No one said "Hillary lost because" of sexism

I see yet another diary pretending that the main theme being discussed in the sexism debate is "Did Hillary lose because of sexism or not"?

Thiis what many call "playing dumb".

They seem to believe that if sexism, racism, or any other "ism" cannot be blamed as the main reason for the loss of a candidate, then it is to be condoned, and opposition to them is nothing but "whining".

Instead of analyzing and taking steps towards the elimination of sexist attacks by major pundits, some anti-Hillary analysts and diarists use the common red herring.

Did Marie Cocco, probably the highest-ranked journalist to express dismay against anti-Clinton sexism, mention even once that Hillary "lost" because of sexism in her now famous column titled "Misogyny I won't miss"?

The answer is no.

Did Howard Dean, when calling the "very sexist approach" by the media "very appalling", suggest that Hillary had "lost" because of sexism"? No. He did not.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/13/us/pol itics/13women.html?ex=1371096000&en= a18ee0662e5adf8d&ei=5124&partner =permalink&exprod=permalink

Did Katie Couric say Hillary had "lost" because of sexism when she said,

"Like her or not, one of the great lessons of that campaign is the continued -- and accepted -- role of sexism in American life, particularly in the media,"

The answer is no.

Please stop twisting the argument and and playing dumb.

There's more...

Sexism as Convenient Truth: Rationalizing Hillary's Loss and the Politics of Sexism

The "Hillary lost because of sexism" meme simply will not die.    I keep seeing diary after diary rehashing this subject, with bloggers repeating the same arguments over and over again.  

In this diary, instead of engaging in a fruitless attempt to prove or disprove the role of sexism in Hillary's loss, I want to address the appeal and attraction of the sexism meme.  Why have Hillary supporters made sexism the primary reason for Hillary's loss?  My thoughts:

1. The "sexism destroyed Hillary" narrative has a lot of legs because it's a powerful and convenient tool to accomplish one fundamental goal - to continue to attack the legitimacy of Obama's victory over Clinton.  

2. Those who keep using sexism to explain Hillary's defeat simply have not yet been able to accept the fact that she lost the race and that the primary race is over.  Finished.  Kaput.  Done.  It's as if in writing these "Sexists destroyed Hillary!!" diaries, they are continuing to make the case to superdelegates that they should realize that Obama won unfairly and switch their votes to Hillary.      

3. Sexism has been seized as the "true" cause of Hillary's defeat because it imbues the continuing ugly attacks on the legitimacy of Obama's victory with a false sense of moral superiority.  It also has more resonance than the FL/MI "disenfranchisement" meme and the "caucuses are undemocratic" meme.  Notice that we don't see many diaries raising those issues anymore.  

4. The sexism charge is about creating scapegoats for Hillary's defeat.  Most people analyzing what went wrong with Hillary's campaign point mostly to the mistakes Hillary and her campaign made.  Except for Clinton supporters.  For them, Hillary and the way she managed her campaign are beyond reproach; she did nothing wrong.  She lost because Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, MSNBC, Maureen Dowd, the NY Times, Tim Russert, et al, sexists all, had it in for Hillary.

5. The sexism charge is a way of denying and obfuscating the significant role race/racism played during the primary.  Obama's race did not matter.  Ultimately, Obama benefited because of his gender.  Actually, those that argue Obama's race did matter contend, a la Geraldine Ferraro, that Obama doubly benefited from being both male and black.  Hence, all these posts noting all those positive stories about Obama in comparison to Clinton, as proof that the media was biased in favor of the black man.  

6. People jumping on the sexism charge have done so only as it relates to Hillary Clinton.  They don't have very much interest in discussing sexism when it has to do with Michelle Obama, for example.  These very same people writing diary after diary talking about sexism in relation to why Hillary lost have written few, if any, diaries about sexism and anyone else but Hillary.

7. Clintonites who see KO and Chris Matthews as sexism personified oddly ignore the person whose sexism probably had the biggest impact on Hillary's campaign - that would be the sexist statements and antics by Bill Clinton, both past and present.  That guy almost single-handedly brought down his wife's campaign, and yet, I don't think I've seen a single diary by a Clintonite critically examining Bill's role in Hillary's defeat.  

Bill Clinton should be public enemy number one for those who contend sexism defeated Hillary, yet he's getting a total pass.  I'm not totally sure why, but my guess is that as long as Hillary is married to Bill, any attack on Bill amounts to an attack on Hillary's judgment, and so that can't be done.  

8.  Hillary hate gets conveniently conflated with and reduced to misogyny.  People can't or refuse to accept the very simple concept that some people may hate Hillary because she's Hillary Clinton, not because she's a woman.  It would be just as silly to say that all those people who hate Obama must therefore be racists.

There's more...

Racism and Sexism

There is no doubt in my humble opinion that there is bias everywhere you look. We like some people more than others for many different reasons. The word and the issue of sexism is thrown around a lot now and it should be. But I don't believe we should use it to explain why Senator Clinton lost. I believe Senator Clinton lost for other reasons just like her male conterparts of the past. I'm sure Senator Obama would have improved his numbers if more racists had voted for him. Racism and Sexism is a way to divide us. If we want to raise the bar on these issues then lets get behind our candiate. The only way I can imagine conquering sexism and racism is by leveling the playing field and evolution. It's easy to rant and complain but what do we expect our nominee to do about these issues. How do you change a sexist or a racist these are much more difficult questions to answer. Michelle Obama seems like an amazing person to me and I imagine she knows something about both issues. Senator Clinton didn't enter this race worried about sexism she
was very confident and did very well and really should have won if only she had a better game plan. Senator Obama entered this race not worried about racism. We should fight both issues with everything we have as one people.

There's more...

'Keith-ing it.'

Update [2008-6-13 1:41:2 by canadian gal]: I encourage you all to watch the videos below so that you can construe the comments on your own. I will also add that the purpose of this diary is to point out KO's use of the word 'nonsense.'

On Wednesday, CBS' Katie Couric was honored by the Sewall-Belmont House and Museum at their Alice Award Luncheon Gala. She was recognized for "her remarkable career in news media, her ground breaking role as the first female solo anchor of a weekday network evening broadcast and her tireless advocacy for colorectal cancer screening, which has helped save the lives of countless men and women each year" (according to a release).

At the event, Couric weighed in on the media treatment in the primary.  'However you feel about her politics, I feel that Sen. Clinton received some of the most unfair, hostile coverage I've ever seen.' She went on to say that latent sexism contributed, in part, to Hillary's defeat.  She referred to one "prominent member of the commentariat" who said he "found it hard to be objective when it came to Obama.""That's your job," she remembers thinking when hearing this, before suggesting that he "find another line of work."

Last night, Keith Olbermann - on his show Countdown, named Couric "Worst Person in the World" for her remarks.  Here is a summary of his comments with regard to Couric:

-called her sexism charge against the media "nonsense" and "a little Kool-aid ish but that's her opinion and she's entitled to it."

-said she wasn't entitled to her comments about the "prominent member of the commentariat" who struggled to be objective.

-said "he didn't name him, maybe because she didn't bother to look it up," and he went on to identify the individual as an NBC correspondent whom in Olbermann's view had been "speaking with refreshing honesty, acknowledging that the environment of that campaign and the ferocity of the candidate's supporters in the primaries challenged a reporter to be especially professional and vigilant in separating the hype from the news."

-said the reporter was "utterly objective and accurate" and of Couric's charge that he "should find another line of work" Olbermann said that "by leaving NBC and the Today Show Ms. Couric already has."

As Rachel Sklar so impeccably points out  for Olbermann to "sit there on MSNBC and say that it's nonsense is a bit rich, considering that some of the higher-profile episodes of embarrassing sexist-or-perceived-as-sexist commentary has come from that network."

So - in light of this, I propose a new term for continually jumping the shark...

'Keith-ing it.'

There's more...


Advertise Blogads