Hillary has always been dissed - from the get go. Think of how she was treated as First Lady. Reporters and pundits alike went after her with knives drawn. She began as Hillary Rodham - but that wasn't acceptable. So she added Clinton - and they bashed her all the more for it. Frankly - I never liked her personally - not until the latter part of this campaign. I felt for her, from a purely feminine point of view - but I never warmed to the woman. And I was angry over her war vote (still am) - but the increasing misogyny and gender bashing made me take a second look. I began really listening - researching her role as Senator and her presidential position papers. I liked what I saw.
But like or not - my outrage over how she's been treated still stands. And the same people who dissed Hillary are now going after Michelle Obama - in the exact same way. Why? Because they got away with it. It was allowed (and in some cases cheered on) by those media types you say loved Hillary so much. Now they are targeting Michelle Obama - adding an extra leavening of race just to make it worse. Will you stand against gender bias when it's directed against her? When you do - will you give a thought to Hillary and what she went through? Or will you tell yourself it was warranted because, well, Hillary deserved it?
You and I both know that voting for McCain is not the answer - but how many people are all that plugged in? I have friends who've never even seen a blog, don't follow anything past the evening news - and they're pissed off! They are considering McCain. They listen to the MSM and are told he's a 'maverick'. To them that means not like Bush. They're not happy with Obama because they feel he agreed with all the sexist rhetoric directed towards Clinton. A couple of women I know were hassled by Obama supporters when they went to vote (heckled on the way in and out of the polling place - gender based, which made it worse). That sense of outrage is being transferred to Obama - right or wrong. Continuing to bash these people over the head by telling them they're stupid won't cut it. I really hope Senator Obama takes the opportunity to address some of these issues.
was put together by Media Matters in conjunction with The Woman's Media Center. It did not, as you suggest, lay anything at the feet of Senator Obama. It was a compilation of clips culled mostly from MSNBC pundits and commentators. I refer you to Canada Gal's diary, "Sexism Might Sell, But We're Not Buying It!" if you'd like to actually see what you're commenting about.
I also never said that I am voting for McCain. I said the exact opposite, actually - but you seem not to have heard that - which kinda proves my point. And for the record? Sexism is wrong. Racism is wrong. This is not an either/or thing - and it has absolutely nothing to do with the election, candidates or who is voting for who. They have always been wrong, they always will be wrong. Period.
I've said this before - but it bears repeating. Olbermann is making a mistake others have before him: he is buying into his own myth. Just think Arthur Godfrey or Walter Winchell. That both those men have at one time or another been referenced by Olbermann as exemplars of exactly what I am saying tells me Olbermann is aware of the pitfalls. But like Winchell before him - the man thinks he is immune - that he can literally say anything about anybody and have us swallow hook, line and sinker.
Well not me, my friends. I call 'em like I see 'em. Olbermann and MSNBC are tacking a dangerous course. FOX did this when they decided to jump in bed with the Republicans. It was a bad idea then - and it's a bad idea now - no matter who's being lionized. I want truth with my reporting - not opinion gussied up to resemble it. We need more Jack Andersons!
You could come up with example after example - and still those convinced that MSNBC and all those who work there walk on water will refuse to see. They'll either say that Clinton deserved it because she really was whatever bad thing was said or that no one at MSNBC ever actually said anything out of line.
It reminds me of a scene in the film "A Guide for the Married Man". One of the characters comes home to find her husband in bed with another woman. Despite her sharp accusations, the husband denies he's even there: "What bed? What girl?" And all the while he and the other woman are getting up, getting dressed and eventually leaving entirely. The wife ends up alone in an empty room wondering if she imagined it all.
Well we didn't imagine it. But you'll never convince anyone any different. There have been two diaries I know of posted here featuring video snippets of the sexist attacks Senator Clinton was subjected to during the campaign - not the other bullshit, mind - just the gender bashing. Even in the face of that, people posted comments denying they saw anything untoward. And if you complain about it - bring up the subject as you have done here - you are immediately anti-Obama. You're not, I'm not, we are both going to vote for him come November - but that's immaterial. Clinton was a bad person, and bad people deserve bad things said about them, the end.
So give up, my friend. There are just some people who refuse to see either the forest or the trees!
When was the last time he apologized for anything? Don't let who the man was blind you to who he is morphing into. He's believing his own hype - buying into the myth. That's disastrous in a commentator. And it's happened before. Brush up on your broadcast media history. The last 50 years are rife with examples of fallen heroes and tarnished gods. Olbermann'd better take a good, long look inside if doesn't want to find himself mentioned in the same breath as Arthur Godfrey.
according to Olbermann's rules? That's scary. And stupid. Look what happened when Al Gore tried to remake his image according to Saturday Night Live. And that's not even addressing the morality of it all.
God I hope Obama doesn't mold his opinions according to the latest poll (or some pundit's dictums). Who know who we'd get for president?
Rating people on whether or not you'll 'get them' if they don't fit into your perfect political box. I was attacked in the real world last summer by right wing extremists who took exception to my feminist viewpoint. The local police and FBI were brought in because I received what they called `credible' threats both on the phone and through the mail. Is that what you're planning to do? Threaten and harass Alegre, Linfar and anyone else you don't like? Well have a care. There are consequences to that kind of behavior.
I hope you got the response you were going for jdusek.