by Is This Snark, Sat Jun 28, 2008 at 10:51:56 AM EDT
This diary will probably be called unhelpful by some, and divisive by others, but I'm beginning to realize that we are watching the slow rolling 2008 Swiftboat campaign unfold before our very own eyes.
Like in 2004 the Rove is taking our Candidate's strength and trying to turn it on its head.See EDIT at bottom.
Obama is not a Sexist, and his Campaign was NOT sexist.
In the list provided earlier from NOW, you will notice not a single mention of an Obama team action. All media.
Yet, Obama's campaign is being painted as the eager benefactor.
Mostly because he supposedly didn't stop 'it'.
Even though as the campaign progressed the 'it' was so poorly defined and the instances so isolated that any comment from Obama would have been spun as Obama patronizing the tough as nails Clinton.
After a 6 month campaign with almost constant coverage, NOW is only able to come up with 25 'egregious' examples to rail against.
Many of the 25 are questionable at best.
My question is, how are you supposed to talk about a woman you don't like? Don't like for non sex based reasons like trust, or integrity.
Here are the questionable entries on Now's list.....
1. Keith Olbermann insinuates violence against Clinton. AGAINST CLINTON. NOT WOMEN.
11. Andrew Sullivan tries to turn feminist voters away from Hillary. AND THIS IS SEXIST HOW?
14. David Shuster sees Chelsea as being pimped out. SURE, EVERYTHING IS SEXIST IF YOU REMOVE CONTEXT.
17. Daryl Cagle draws violent imagery of Hillary Clinton as the slain beast. WHAT COULD THE CARTOONIST HAVE DRAWN TO SHOW OBAMA DEFEATING A CLINTON WAS A DAVID/GOLIATH TYPE VICTORY?
18. Sandy Huffaker draws Hillary as a sleazeball slugger. SAME QUESTION AS ABOVE, AND ADD, WHAT IS A SLEAZE BALL SLUGGER?
20. Jack Cafferty imagines Obama wanting to run over Clinton with a truck. ?????
23. Randi Rhodes slurs Clinton and Geraldine Ferraro. OH YEA RANDI IS A HUGE SEXIST. AN ATTENTION WHORE AS WELL. OOPS.
Mix in all the dis-information designed to piss women off, and I'm not surprised seemingly intelligent people would be confused.
The worst instance of this dis-info, is feminists like Stein stating as if fact that no other candidate in history had been asked by so many to drop out.
It's total bullshit. The Kennedy fight to the convention often cited by Clinton supporters as justification for continuing against impossible odds, included the VERY SAME calls to withdraw.
The quotes have been amply provided yet it's a mantra required to make other benign incidents into something more.
Does sexism exists? Of Course.
Was is a factor in the DEMOCRATIC primary? NO. [EDIT: IMHO only]
Are rove minions trying to gin up resentment in order to peel off some votes? You tell me.
Do you think there is a reason these PUMA losers refuse to be interviewed by progressive media?
Any idea why the PUMA losers all look and sound like Stepford Democrats?
Any guess why FOX CNN and MSNBC constantly give air time to people that attack our nominee claiming to be one of us?
Reminds me of the last time our nominee had his cohorts on tv telling us what a scumbag he really was.
The 2008 Swiftboat campaign has ALREADY begun.
EDIT: EDIT: It has been pointed out I haven't been clear and it looks like I'm trying to say NOW is making a charge against Senator Obama and/or his campaign. That is not my intention.
I am however saying these concerns have been, and continue to be, used by people looking to create the impression that the Democratic Party has abandoned women and have conspired with the Obama campaign to do so.
The point of bringing up NOW and the questionable entries is to show that even the NOW can't produce a sold list of examples that would justify the DAILY media offensive to promote people spewing falsehoods and innuendo aimed at discrediting our party and de-legitimizing our nominee.
At what point do we start comparing the free air time PUMA types are getting to spread lies and smear our nominee to the free air time the swiftboat asshole were given to do the same to Kerry?
IMO it is exactly the same, but this time they are trying to peel off votes from a different demographic.