• yeah, McCain has as much baggage as all of the other 2008 candidates combined.  

  • He was pandering AND screwed it up.  He could have scored points with gospel fans in SC and nobody outside of that demographic would have known or cared, but for lack of proper vetting or proper training of staff, he ended up hiring someone who has made hateful remarks about a core constituency.  Ooops!  Now he can finesse no longer.  He won't get away w/o taking a stand, & since the devil is in the details he will certainly lose some support from somewhere.  

  • 1) McClurkin got outspoken in 2002, right?  If I recall correctly, that's after Mr. Clinton's term ended.

    & more importantly

    2) Being in the audience is one thing; hiring someone to perform at an official campaign event is another.  Generally extra caution is advised for the latter, and I am truly shocked that Obama was not more careful.  

    Disclaimer:  not affiliated with any of the candidates, and would probably have called Obama my 2nd choice or 1st for VP before this mistake.

  • Pardon me for my "intolerance" of McClurkin's statements that there's something wrong with me and my family and that I'm cursed.  

    Blame the moron staffer who put Obama's campaign in this position, not LGBT people for not sitting down and shutting up about it, and not the principled heterosexual Democrats who are calling Obama on it.

    Unless this whole controversy was intended as some bizarre attempt at an anti-gay "Sister Souljah" moment to win points in S.C.--in which case it could have been done much more subtly at much less cost to his campaign--it was a really big mistake, and Obama will pay for it.  

  • McClurkin has already been on the soapbox; that's the problem.

    Imagine if some Democratic candidate hired David Duke, Louis Farrakhan, or OJ Simpson to sing the national anthem at their event.  Even if [divisive figure] said not one word and behaved impeccably, that candidate has now associated her/his campaign with that person.  

  • comment on a post Open Thread over 6 years ago

    I am baffled by this:

    http://www.americablog.com/2007/10/obama -to-do-gospel-tour-with-radical.html

  • Haven't past polls always shown that women are less likely to vote for women candidates (but more likely to consider voting for non-hetero/white/male candidates), and less optimistic about women candidates' chances to win?  I recall seeing similar numbers many times before.  

    I don't think this is a HRC-related phenomenon, regardless of her popularity or lack thereof in certain demographic groups.  

    Shifting to "race", here on mydd.com we have seen a diary or two about African Americans' more realistic/jaded/pessimistic views on Obama's chances.  While optimism != support, I could imagine that pessimism about a candidate's chances is related to voting patterns.

  • comment on a post Fred Thompson's Watergate Problem over 7 years ago

    Thompson lobbied for Aristide?  or the dictator Baby Doc Duvalier (or his pere, Papa Doc)?  

  • i'm with you on how everyone ignores this extreme misogyny.

    but in this instance there was at least one key difference:  Imus was insulting specific people in addition to offending all women as a group, all African Americans as a group, & especially all African-American women as a group.   yes, he has done that sort of thing many times, and he's used to getting away with it, but i am really glad he didn't this time.  

    door.  ass.  bang.  

    good riddance.  

  • if this were the first incident, i'd agree, but he does this over and over again.  and as of this morning, he still hadn't apologized to the people he insulted--why?  because Al Sharpton is the designated representative of the Rutgers women's basketball team, or because he still doesn't give a rat's ass about women in general, people of color in general, & especially non-famous women of color?  

  • on a comment on RainbowPUSH Rally over 7 years ago

    yes.  advertisers and guests should take a stand--do you or do you not want to associate yourself with a rich white ostensibly hetero guy who likes to insult black men, all women, all LGBT people, all Jewish people, & basically everyone less privileged than he is.  

    this is not censorship.  when 87% of talk show hosts are queer black women and one of them starts dissing the Tennessee men's basketball team as "square-headed crackers", i will worry more about Imus's free speech.  

  • on a comment on RainbowPUSH Rally over 7 years ago

    if Imus wants to insult men of color, all women, all Jewish people, all LGBT people, all other people w/o his privileges, he is free to do so.  

    if we all had access to free (or even well paid) airtime on MSNBC or CBS, i would demand that Imus have the same time as the rest of us, as loathesome as i find his pathetic attempts at humor.  (here's a hint:  satire directed at the powerful is funny.  cutting sexualized and racialized insults directed at people less privileged than you?  not as funny unless you're an emotionally stunted fascist wanker.)  

    this is not about the First Amendment, it's about MSNBC's priorities for their $$$$$$$$.  if their business model is selling this kind of racist misogynist spew, people who don't like racism and misogyny can AND SHOULD let them know they'll be losing our business.  

  • comment on a post Imus Receives Two Week Suspension over 7 years ago

    Gwen Ifill nailed it in her NYT op-ed today:  "...For all their grit, hard work and courage, [the team] got branded "nappy-headed ho's" -- a shockingly concise sexual and racial insult, tossed out in a volley of male camaraderie by a group of amused, middle-aged white men. The "joke" -- as delivered and later recanted -- by the radio and television personality Don Imus failed one big test: it was not funny.

    The serial apologies of Mr. Imus, who was suspended yesterday by both NBC News and CBS Radio for his remarks, have failed another test. The sincerity seems forced and suspect because he's done some version of this several times before...."

    if this had been the first time, fine.  if Imus was hired purely as an entertainer and was satisfying some puerile market segment, fine.  someone who consistently hits all women, men of color, & other less privileged demographic groups with his below-the-belt unfunny diatribes on a mainstream show?  no.  

    time for CBS and MSNBC to stop equivocating on this jerk--where do they stand on calling young African-American college students "nappy-headed hos"?   if they aren't in favor of it, they'd better damn well stop hiring Imus to do it.  

  • comment on a post Imus Receives Two Week Suspension over 7 years ago

    he made a mistake by using the word "ho" to describe college women athletes?   along with, of course, more of his usual vile racist spew.  

    in what universe is it acceptable for someone on a major network to call a group of young college athletes "hos"?   (and then he begrudgingly apologizes...  to Al Sharpton, rather than to the people he insulted, who are apparently beneath his notice.)  

    this jerk has gone on far too long with his outrageously insulting remarks about all women, men of color, all Jewish people, &--um, let's see, just about everyone except rich heterosexual able-bodied white males.  

    two-week suspension, my ass.  he's gotta go.   this is way over the line.  

  • comment on a post Blog Against Sexism Day 2007 - Highlights over 7 years ago

    Jeff on Blog of the Moderate Left posts extensively about free speech and harassment in the law-school world

    Rawkkiddo reflects on life as Mr. Mom

    David talks about disability & gender issues


Advertise Blogads