Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Tonights Saturday Night Live opened with a devastating opening skit about how in the tank the news media is for Obama and how totally unfair it is to Hillary. This will become a big deal inside the media "village". I live in DC and know that every single political reporter and pundit fool watches every SNL during election time and all saw or will see this. They were or will be shocked, I mean quite shocked, to find out that THEY WERE THE ONES BEING RIDICULED.

The DC Press corps REALLY doesn't like being criticized and that's why only trusted fellow members of the press "club" are ever allowed to fill one of the few MSM slots alloted for "press critics". That keeps them pretty much toothless. Ever notice that?

We pretty much have the same national press corps today that we had in 2000. These are the people who trashed Gore and loved Bush, but now they trash Hillary and love Obama. It's simple really. Through their bias and false coverage in 2000, they selected the last President and once again, through their bias and false coverage, they want to select the next one too.


But, one thing that will really set the talking head's and the "media elite" all spinning around even more confused than usual will be the surprising thing that happened during last nights SNL news segment.

That's when guest host Tina Fey did a very funny commentary on the Weekend Update that shockingly was also very pro Hillary. Even though some of NBC's cable news stars want Hillary to give up and quit, some of NBC's networks stars want her to fight back and win!


FEY: And finally, the most important Women’s News item there is, we have our first serious female presidential candidate in Hillary Clinton.

And yet, women have come so far as feminists, that they don’t feel obligated to vote for a candidate just because she’s a woman.

Women today feel perfectly free to make whatever choice Oprah tells them to.

Which raises the question, why are people abandoning Hillary for Obama?

Some say that they’re put off by the fact that Hillary can’t control her husband, and that we would end up with co-presidents.

‘Cause that would be terrible, having two intelligent, qualified people working together to solve problems. Ugh.

Why would you let Starsky talk to Hutch? I wanna watch that show, Starsky.

You know, what is it, America? What is it, are you weirded out that they’re married?

‘Cause I can promise you that they are having exactly as much sex with each other as George Bush and Jeb Bush are.

Then there is the physical scrutiny of her physical appearance.

Rush Limbaugh, the Jeff Conaway of right wing radio, said that he doesn’t think America is ready to watch their president quote “turn into an old lady in front of them.” Really?

They didn’t seem to mind when Ronald Reagan did that.

Maybe what bothers me the most is that people say that Hillary is a bitch.

Let me say something about that: Yeah, she is.

And so am I and so is this one. (pointing to Amy Poehler)

POEHLER: Yeah, deal with it.

FEY: Know what? Bitches get stuff done.

(Amy says yeah and starts nodding her head, together they get in a rhythm, with Amy saying in response, more yeahs, uh huhs, with a 'you go girl' style)

Like back in grammar school,

they could have had priests teaching you but, no,

they had those tough old nuns who slept on cots

and who could hit ya and you HATED those bitches

But at the end of the school year

you sure KNEW the capital of Vermont!

So COME ON Texas and Ohio

Get on board, it's not too late!...


Then they high-fived, or at least I'd like to think they did...

Image and video hosting by TinyPic





FUNNIEST PART YET! An Obamacrat chat site complaining of, get this, a repeated pro Hillary "media bias", is trying to organize a protest of SNL. Guess the head "chatter" missed the whole point of the opening skit or he doesn't have a clue what the word "ironic" means. My guess, probably both.


The pro-Hillary SNL segment

Wow, Tina Fey (who I normally love) just royally screwed Obama on live television. During the last couple minutes of the last Weekend Update segment, she basically gave what amounted to a Hillary endorsement -- played on everyone's sympathies (which is always Hillary's biggest vote getter), made a defacto "feminist call to action", made all kinds of excuses for Clinton, and said "Come on Texas and Ohio, get on board, it's not too late!"


Apparently the demise of the Fairness Doctrine in the 80's allows TV stars to issue blatant and unbalanced appeals for people's votes now?

SNL has picked on one politician or another fairly equally plenty of times in the past, during skits -- but I've never seen them do a "news" segment that was entirely just someone blatantly stumping for a candidate.

I wonder if they plan on balancing that segment before March 4th? I bet if there was enough of an uproar, they'd have to. Man, this was just as bad as Letterman having Hillary on the night before Super Tuesday.


Update: Anyone who saw the show and wants to register their opinion of Tina's on-air live endorsement of Clinton (hey Tina, whatever happened to going on the campaign trail with them instead?) -- can do so on NBC's community forums, as well as by calling or writing NBC directly, obviously. Maybe if they get a flood of (polite) flak for that nonsense, they'll balance it out next Saturday (which would be even more effective for 3/4) with an equal endorsement of Obama.

Ha-ha-ha...to infinity.

Image and video hosting by TinyPic


Fave comments so far.

From DU, a faux outraged Obama supporter tried to stir up a ruckus and said he "guessed it's okay to start referring to Hillary as a bitch, now. I guess those who do call her this shouldn't expect any complaints about it. As an Obama supporter, I can totally see how this is offensive. Since when is a woman, who gets shit done and is strong, is supposed to be called a bitch? I guess they are trying to "own" the word. Whatever.":

Two commentors responded:

They weren't "trying" to own the word. On national TV this evening, they told us all that they DID own it. They were taking it back, defining it to suit their purposes, and slapping whiners who "don't get it" across the face with their new, improved, definition. And then repeating it, for those who didn't get it the first time. I am not arguing with those ladies! Bitch IS the new BLACK! Yes, ma'am, Ms. Fey, whatever you say! I trust her to get things done!
I thought it was brilliant. So did the rest of the audience watching with me here.

It was the best POSSIBLE endorsement of Clinton I've seen thus far.

Two ladies in my house were on their feet hollering in approval. They weren't insulted in the slightest. They were...empowered.

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

To support a quick witted and I'm sure very underfunded woman comic and be the first to get cool "Hillary: Bitches get stuff done" gear - go to - www.gigglechick.com/erin/blog/index.htm tt


(Note: Unlike McCain, this is a guy that even Obama probably could have beaten)

Tags: Obama Hillary (all tags)




Thanks, Uncle Wiggly! I was afraid the skit was going to be anti-Hillary but was very relieved it wasn't. Good for them!

I just finished reading a few of SecretSquirrel's links posted on another thread. This one is awesome!

Is Obama the Frankenstein of Karl Rove?
http://www.thecityedition.com/Pages/Arch ive/Winter08/2008Election.html

I also concur with women should rule about Obama.

The same MSM that brought you the Iraq war is bringing you Obama. Think about it.

by Nobama 2008-02-23 08:39PM | 0 recs
Hillary's vote brought us the Iraq war. Now she's supporting war against Iran. 2 for 2. It's Sillary season in politics and we're hunting political hacks! Obama / Sebelius '08 (HRC for Senate Majority Leader... MAYBE and ONLY if she cuts her crap NOW voluntarily! Otherwise it'll be stopped for her by We the People on March 4th!)
by VT COnQuest 2008-02-24 12:38AM | 0 recs

No, no, no, no, no!!!! Bush brought us the Iraq war and don't you ever forget it!

by zenful6219 2008-02-24 05:44AM | 0 recs

Without the AUMF (Authorization for Use of Military Force) which HILLARY signed that ENABLED BUSH to invade Iraq, he would have not been able to invade Iraq. PERIOD.

by VT COnQuest 2008-02-24 08:38AM | 0 recs

Clinton never "signed" anything. Was she the lone voter for the Iraq war? No, over 2/3 of Congress voted for this war. Over 3/4 of the country supporter this war. Bush got us into this war. Clinton does not have the authority to send our troops into a foreign country. Bush does. Bush mismanaged the war, and I don't believe I am saying this, but if we had listened to Powell, McCain and Clinton in 2003, we would have defeated the terrorist and be back home within two years. War is not easy. Everyone knows that. You don't just go in and expect to come out victorious with the snap of the fingers. So Obama could give a speech against the war, then come out and fund it in the Senate and say he has the same position as Bush, but get real, putting sole blame on Clinton is ridiculous.

by RJEvans 2008-02-24 09:50AM | 0 recs

Sorry... yes she "only" voted for the war and didn't sign anything. I stand corrected.... pfff. Also, which part of she ENABLED Bush to lead us into the war by "only" voting to give him and the administration AUTHORIZATION to do so do you NOT understand? Who's solely blaming only her? I'm not. I'm certainly blaming her WITH everyone else though because she is part of the reason that we have this problem in Iraq and now all over the world. As far as Obama "funding" the war, that's not the case. He has made sure to fund the TROOPS since they have no choice other than to be stuck over there because of Bush and his administration's mismanagement of the war in Iraq, AUTHORIZED BY HILLARY (and many others). But NOT Obama.

by VT COnQuest 2008-02-24 01:40PM | 0 recs
The Iraq War

I have grown over the part that I was for war in 2003.  I'm not ashamed to admit that I fell for Bush/Chenney/Rumfeld persuasive words about the war.  

I don't have the urge to hand someone's neck to redeem my sin that I was for the war.   Only the necks of those 3 amigos should be hung.

by JoeySky18 2008-02-24 05:45PM | 0 recs

Did you vote for Kerry in 2004?

by BklynDem 2008-02-24 06:13PM | 0 recs

Hillary's vote did not cause the Iraq War.  Bush's lies did.  Hillary did not vote to invade Iran, even though Bush is trying like hell to.

You Obameans need to start reading or researching.  You are following the lies of a charlatan.

Is the Kool-Aid next???

by john5750 2008-02-24 08:50AM | 0 recs

She ENABLED Bush to go to war with Iraq when others like Barack had the wisdom to see through the already known divisive, illegitimate President Bush. On Iran: "Hillary backs a bill that affirms what is already codified in the Constitution, and then pokes it with loopholes big enough to drive armored columns through. I just can't see how offering Dubya exemptions from the Constitution is supposed to be a good idea - at least make him use a signing statement or something.

This sounds an awful lot like the AUMF all over again, where Hillary and the other Democrats who voted for it believed (supposedly) that Dubya would act in good faith, despite all evidence to the contrary." - http://firedoglake.com/2007/10/02/hillar y-supports-war-with-iran/

by VT COnQuest 2008-02-24 01:49PM | 0 recs

"Hillary's vote did not cause the Iraq War.  Bush's lies did."

What UTTER bullshit.  If you are not smart enough
to tell that George Bush is lying to you then
you are not smart enough to be President.

______________ ____


by VT COnQuest 2008-02-24 01:57PM | 0 recs

"Hillary's vote brought us the Iraq war."

More of Obama's right wing talking points attacking a quality progressive candidate, parroted by his followers.

Obama himself said that he didn't know how he would have voted on the authorization bill, had he been in the Senate when it was voted on, and been privy to the national security briefing that all Senators received before voting. He admitted he held his views based in ignorance, not in some sort of prescient wisdom. Now he unfairly attacks Clinton, for his own ambitions.

BUSH deliberately misrepresented the situation and abused the authority given to him by an overwhelming majority in the Senate, intended only to give the administration a diplomatic club to wield. Bush started the Iraq war, and any Democratic candidate who misrepresents that is acting as a shill for the right wing.

by 07rescue 2008-02-24 01:34PM | 0 recs

You know what was nice about that bit? Fey didn't feel the need to call those supporting Obama "cultists" or "fools" or "idiots" or any of the other names that those supporting Hillary's opponent are called here on a daily basis.

It was a fiercely pro-Hillary rant, but righteous, too.

No, "Obama promotes voter fraud" or other such nonsense.

by Bob Johnson 2008-02-23 09:03PM | 0 recs

Fey just responded to what "those who support Hillary's opponent" call her pretty often-- a bitch.....
Although, personally, I think, since so many who "support Hillary's opponent" think she's a bitch anyway, Tina may as well have brought up more 'nonsense' like 'righteously' supporting Hillary's right to defend herself against lies.
Or do we all REALLY think she's going to "force people to buy healthcare they can't afford"... but that wouldn't have been very funny for a comedy show would it... I don't find it very funny anyway.

Good thing I'm a bitch though, because I have no problems defending Hillary with my own brand of 'nonsense'.

by Maole 2008-02-23 09:12PM | 0 recs
Re: No

What did what you wrote have to do with what I wrote?

I noted that Fey laid down righteous rant for Hillary without the slurs and putdowns found here on a daily basis against those who support Hillary's opponent.

I note that she did not use "cult" or "cultist," a common refrain here on MyDD.

by Bob Johnson 2008-02-23 09:15PM | 0 recs
what did it have to do

with what you wrote?  Not very sharp tonight are we?  It was IRONIC Bob, that you thought that people on THIS site are the big offenders attacking Obama all the time,

Especially considering you PRAISED Tina for defending Hillary against an attack she gets from OBAMA supporters all the time--- that she's a BITCH.  I was being sarcastic Bob, I think that the 'nonsense' is overwhelmingly coming from Obama supporters... HENCE Tina having to defend Hillary from all the namecalling she gets from them!

by Maole 2008-02-23 09:21PM | 0 recs
Re: what did it have to do

Where do Obama supporters call her a "bitch?"

by Bob Johnson 2008-02-23 09:42PM | 0 recs
where do Obama supporters

call her a bitch?

On Daily Kos....

almost daily.

by Maole 2008-02-23 09:44PM | 0 recs
Re: where do Obama supporters

Those few posts that do get trolled out of existence quickly.

You cannot show me a post like that that has not been hidden.

And they are rare, indeed.

by Bob Johnson 2008-02-23 09:45PM | 0 recs
Oh, Bob....

Cough, cough, cough, bullshit, cough.

by River103 2008-02-23 09:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Oh, Bob....

Prove it, then. Show me one post that is not hidden on Daily Kos where she is called "bitch." Even one.

by Bob Johnson 2008-02-23 09:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Oh, Bob....

How about YOU providing a link to where I said I vote for McCain? You lied. Just that simple.

by River103 2008-02-23 09:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Oh, Bob....

That was my assumption. You have wrotten over and over that you will never vote for Obama. If he wins the nod, what are going to do?




by Bob Johnson 2008-02-23 09:57PM | 0 recs

I saw a post there other day that said "now can we call her a bitch?" which was RECC'D by two people.......... and NO I'm not going to waste my precious time going to look for it, but I'm no liar.  On Dailykos there is NO lack of sexist comments about her, bullshit comments accusing the Clintons of being racist, war-mongers, or Bush-lite etc etc.... and you know it.

by Maole 2008-02-23 09:53PM | 0 recs


by River103 2008-02-23 09:55PM | 0 recs

Prove it.

You can't.

Here is a search on "bitch" over the last week.

The posts which are not hidden are nearly all posts by Hillary supporters who claim that people are calling her "bitch."

But you cannot find a post by an Obama supporter that calls her "bitch." On the rare occasion that some jackass writes such a post, it is almost always immediately hidden.

by Bob Johnson 2008-02-23 09:56PM | 0 recs
oh yeah?

that's hilarious (4+ / 0-)
Recommended by:JohnGor0, Ranting Roland, MTmofo, spotDawa
First of all, it doesn't say a damn thing about Obama--the use of Black History Month is simply to provide a handy, made-up excuse for Hillary to dismiss his victories.

Michelle Obama would need to go all Cruella on us for about a decade before she'd come close to earning the title of Bitch. Hillary's worked hard for it. After the way she's conducted herself in this election, why anyone WOULDN'T call her a bitch is beyond me. It can't be misogyny every time--some women are bitches as much as some men are raging dickheads. I could not agree more that she was unfairly tagged and labeled that way when her husband was President. But she's grown into the role.

But beyond all that, it's a joke. Duh. I hope none of you people ever makes the mistake of picking up a Lenny Bruce album.

by torridjoe on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 12:35:24 AM EST

LINK:http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2008/2/ 15/0935/71342/20#c20

it got FOUR RECOMMENDS.........  prove it my ass.

by Maole 2008-02-23 10:05PM | 0 recs
Re: oh yeah?

You had to go all the way back to February 14? Ten days ago? I though Obama backers at Daily Kos were calling her a "bitch" all the time?

No wonder it took you so long to respond.

And did you see the diary it was in?

Penn Jillette's joke should offend BOTH Obama and Clinton supporters

It was diary by TheBlaz, a Clinton backer, and her/his tip jar received 41 recs.

But to claim that Obama backers at Daily Kos are calling her a "bitch" all the time is just nonsense, as I posted above.

The four jackasses who recced that comment are a tiny group. In more ways than one.

That was also a late night post on Valentine's night.

by Bob Johnson 2008-02-23 10:15PM | 0 recs
are you KIDDING ME?
who said I was only allowed to go back 1 week??!!  I went back 1 month, and I found THREE DIFFERENT comments that called her a bitch, and not only where they not hidden, they were recommended!!!!!!!!!!!
And OBVIOUSLY, finding them to SHOW YOU was a huge waste of time, since you'd never admit being WRONG!!
by Maole 2008-02-23 10:23PM | 0 recs
Re: are you KIDDING ME?

Wow. Are you angry!

The claim that Obama backers at Daily Kos are constantly calling her a "bitch" are belied by your posts.

Agreed, occasionally, one slips through. But DK gets thousands and thousands of posts a day, and in the last month, you've found three, all of which were recommended by three or four other idiots (in addition to the idiots who made the original comments).

Out of probably 300,000 comments in the last month.

by Bob Johnson 2008-02-24 09:01AM | 0 recs


Hillary Clinton is... (4+ / 0-)
Recommended by:jre2k8, rf7777, jenontheshore, Capt Morgan
Hillary Clinton is a cold, lying, self serving, calculating, racist Bitch

Add in cheating, remove racist, and you're right on.

by DamnYankees on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 12:50:28 PM EST

by Maole 2008-02-23 10:10PM | 0 recs

Hillary Clinton is (2+ / 0-)
Recommended by:tarheelblue, jenontheshore
a cold, lying, self serving, calculating, racist Bitch who everyone hates

I don't think she is racist!

by rf7777 on Fri Feb 15, 2008 at 12:52:41 PM EST

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2008/2/ 15/124524/059/8#c8

WHAT, NO RESPONSE BOB????  Did I learn how to use your search engine a little too well for your liking?  Is it time for you to acknowledge yet how many times she's called a bitch at DailyKos, where its not only NOT HIDDEN but RECOMMENDED??

by Maole 2008-02-23 10:19PM | 0 recs
Re: another

Settle down.

I went to bed.


by Bob Johnson 2008-02-24 09:01AM | 0 recs
The name-calling is bad enough...

But, I think the lies that are coming from Obama, his campaign, and his followers are worse.

With the names, people consider the source, but if you repeat a lie often enough, as Obama is doing, people tend to believe it.

The cult (and the GOP) has given Obama enough money to repeat his lies loud and often.

by john5750 2008-02-24 09:05AM | 0 recs
you're in denial

My God, it's all over dailykos, on youtube, in the press.  You can't go to any blog and not see people calling Hillary a bitch that is an anyone can post and they are not seriously moderated.

It's brazen hatred and it's clear it's become she is a woman.  I'm sorry this is just disgusting and I think everyone should be outraged.

Right, the Democratic party stands for equality, diversity, ...oops, except when it comes to sex equality..on that one, no way do I want a woman as President.

They might as well say it but instead it's so derogatory, so abusive, so hateful it makes my skin crawl.  

by Robert Oak 2008-02-23 11:49PM | 0 recs
Re: you're in denial

"It's all over..."


My friend, here, found three instances of such comments that remained unhidden on Daily Kos in the last month.

Three, out of what, 300,000 or so comments?

So claiming it's widespread at DK is a load of crap.

by Bob Johnson 2008-02-24 09:02AM | 0 recs
full of it

right now there is a recommended diary referring to Hillary having a bowel movement.  Q.E.D.

by Robert Oak 2008-02-24 09:19AM | 0 recs
your friend here

found three such comments in the last 10 days, Feb 15th those comments were made... and there WERE more Bob, but honestly, I'm not your monkey, I'm not going to write them all out for your personal satisfaction.....

the tone at dailykos, and the comments regarding Hillary Clinton, are sexist, and offensive, if you can't see that, well, maybe you're part of the problem over there..

by Maole 2008-02-24 07:45PM | 0 recs

Oh, I see. For you and a few other folks here, the "cult" and "cultist" thing is okay because you're "fearless."

Got it.

by Bob Johnson 2008-02-23 09:16PM | 0 recs
Oh, Bob....

Go troll somewhere else. Or is that impossible since your baseline appears to be troll? Hmmmmm? Hugs and kisses, as usual.

by River103 2008-02-23 09:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Oh, Bob....

My, my, you're nearly as sensitive as Jerome!

Thanks for the chuckle.

by Bob Johnson 2008-02-23 09:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Oh, Bob....

And you lie. You claim I said I would vote for McCain. Care to produce a link? You can't, you fraud. Again, go troll elsewhere, please.

by River103 2008-02-23 09:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Oh, Bob....

Oh, so is it Nader, then? Or will you be abstaining completely if Obama wins the nomination?

by Bob Johnson 2008-02-23 09:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Oh, Bob....

I can't tolerate N. Thought queer rights is a non-issue. If Bosmugma is the nominee, I'll be writing another name in. I'll never hold my nose and vote again.

by River103 2008-02-23 09:44PM | 0 recs
Re: after readiing about tavis smiley

More power to you!

by Bob Johnson 2008-02-23 09:49PM | 0 recs

River103, why did this post deserve a 1?

You are an odd bird.

But funny!

by Bob Johnson 2008-02-23 09:36PM | 0 recs
Oh, Bob...

You're just a 1 kinda guy.

by River103 2008-02-23 09:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Oh, Bob...

Golly, River, why are you so bitter?

by Bob Johnson 2008-02-23 09:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Oh, Bob...

Uhhhhhh. Is that a snark? Care to read almost ANY of your comments at DK and then ask me why I think you come off as an arrogant ass? Not just my opinion, you know. Check yourself.

by River103 2008-02-23 09:48PM | 0 recs
sounds like the final payoff

for the Shuster comments.  

by highgrade 2008-02-23 09:18PM | 0 recs

Great skit, thanks.

For awhile, though I am pro-Hillary, I truly thought I could cheerfully vote for Obama if he got the nomination.  That is no longer the case.  I am so turned off by his wife, and the things she has said.  She is extraordinarily undignified and adolescent in the way she conducts herself and the comments she has made.   Also, after I took a closer look at him, I am also turned off by the sheer AUDACITY, yes, audacity, that Obama is even running at all.  The fellow is just not ready yet.  Style and no substance.  It's a shame.  I find him extremely condescending towards women, find him extremely young and non-presidential.  I would NEVER vote for him this time around.  NEVER!!! Maybe, if he actually did something in eight years in the Senate then I would.  But he has indeed torn the party apart.  McCain might get my vote.

Hillary is the best person for the job, she has class, she's tough, she's smart, is highly respected in the Senate, comes across amazingly well in the debates.  Obama can barely hold his own, he'll stutter around, and I keep thinking I'm going to hear "hope! hope!" and then people say he won the debate because he didn't totally bomb!  Whereas Hillary just leaves him in the dust, and people still don't think she's good enough.  The world is a mess because of the sexism in this world.  The best person won't get the job because she's female and people can't handle it.  We lose so much talent, and therefore, do not solve serious problems, because we can't handle women with power.  It's really a tragedy on so many levels.  It's disgusting.

by ilovehorses 2008-02-23 09:26PM | 0 recs

I wholeheartedly agree!

by Jessica1980 2008-02-23 09:46PM | 0 recs
Re: god

What about RI, VT, WY, MS, NC, OR, MT and SD?

Hard to claim the momentum by winning less than half of the contests left.

That would leave the final count 35 wins for Obama to 18 for Hillary, maybe you can get FL and MI to count to get her to 20.  

by matchles 2008-02-24 07:16AM | 0 recs
according to the Hillary campaign

any state she doesn't win clearly don't matter. they aren't anything but prius driving, latte sipping trust fund babies!

by highgrade 2008-02-24 07:37AM | 0 recs
Re: god

It looks even worse for her when I do that.  Most estimates now expect her to lose the delegate count in TX even if she gets the popular vote.

She'd need to win ALL of those states by a margin that she's only done once, in Arkansas. Meanwhile, Obama has won by 20 points or more in 15 different contests.

It's over, this blog is just having a hard time catching up to reality.

by matchles 2008-02-24 01:09PM | 0 recs
Re: god

Yeah the half-assed "disenfranchisement" argument saying that now that Hillary won FL and MI they should count.  Outrage only expressed by Hillary supporters outside of those states.  If Hillary has so much "mo" you guys wouldn't have such a problem with there being a second election in those states.

by matchles 2008-02-24 03:08PM | 0 recs

I'm so glad to read there are so many others out there. . . and I'm so glad Tina Fey said pretty much everything that's been on my mind the past several weeks. . .

by norwego 2008-02-23 09:51PM | 0 recs

ah mercy, I'm female. And I wasn't in the least offended. Tina Fey called herself a bitch too and Amy P. Remember. Bitches get things done. I thought it was not only funny, but at our house we stood up and cheered. The biases for this election have just been stupid. Ones too old? Ones too religious? Ones too  stong a woman? And ones, I kid you not I heard this, ones not black enough? I. Don't. Care. I care what they are going to do about Iraq, taxes, the economy, the housing market, social security, the environment, and healthcare. That's what I want to know about them. NOW. Before they get into office. The fact of their age, race, religion, or their gender just doesn't factor into it for me. In fact, I thought the whole thing did what Sen. Clinton's campaign folks haven't been able to do. Ms. Tina Fey maded the fact that Sen. Clinton was called a bitch, down right appealing. Ms. Clinton should hire Ms. Fey, not be offended by her. Bravo Tina.

by 12 dogs and a blog 2008-02-24 06:26AM | 0 recs

that was BIG?  They said she was a bitch, and that that was a GOOD thing.  It is exactly the message that she DOESN'T need.  it reinforces what people already think about her.  There's a reason she has such high negatives, rightly or wrongly, and this skit reinforced it.  Way to go Tina Fey, you idiot.

by Chili Dogg 2008-02-23 09:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Tina Fey is an idiot!

What?  Where the hell did that come from?  You're an idiot.  I was stating that endorsing her by calling her a bitch is not the way to woo undecided voters.  Grow up, man.  I wasn't attacking you or Hillary Clinton.  I was attacking Tina Fey for a foolish endorsement.  I think that calling Hillary a bitch doesn't shed the most favorable light on her, and it can only hurt her with undecided voters.  But you want to paint me as a woman-fearing misogynist.  Get a life.  Completely uncalled for.  

by Chili Dogg 2008-02-24 06:45PM | 0 recs

The B word is every bit as offensive as the N word. Maybe next week SNL can have a a satirical piece using the N word about Sen. Obama. That's the way to lift people up. Uh huh.

by Nelsons 2008-02-23 10:53PM | 0 recs

Thanks for the post. It was great. I loved the reporters fawning all over BO.

Thank God people are beginning to understand that hope is bigger than a man. Hillary is a warrior for justice, equality and empowerment for all. She rocks!

by seattlegonz 2008-02-23 11:26PM | 0 recs
Good for them

I agree and man the misogyny coming out now on the blogs is brazen.  It's really pathetic and I'm glad to see SNL point it out.  

by Robert Oak 2008-02-23 11:44PM | 0 recs

Obama looked very Presidential while Hillary did not.  It only drew attention to her past support of NAFTA and current support for a healthcare plan that will hunt you down to enforce that you pay for it.

by bigdcdem 2008-02-24 02:12AM | 0 recs
Re: Actually,

This kind of lie is what Clinton was referring to yesterday. And, it is shameful that a Democrat would use lies about Universal Health Care, to attack another Democrat. UHC is supposed to be a Democratic issue. Obama's lies are exactly what the Republicans would use against Clinton.

by zenful6219 2008-02-24 05:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Actually,

About the most awkward and unfunny opening bit they ever put on SNL.  The Obama guy was awful, or maybe that was the point.  Switched the channel in the middle of it.

by ReillyDiefenbach 2008-02-24 08:31AM | 0 recs
Obameans just can't get it right.

Hillary did NOT support NAFTA.  And plans to correct it when she is preident.

Obama also lied about her HealthCare plan.  HE mandates that parents join.  SHE makes it possible for everyone to join with subsidies.

I'm getting sick of all Obama's LIES.

by john5750 2008-02-24 08:46AM | 0 recs
Re: Obameans just can't get it right.

He also attributes a quote to her in that flyer that she never said.  Kathleen Sebelius was forced to admit that fact this morning on the Sunday Talking Heads.

by mtnspirit 2008-02-24 09:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Actually,

" current support for a healthcare plan that will hunt you down to enforce that you pay for it."

Hmmmm, so you want to be an irresponsible deadbeat who refuses to contribute even a small amount that is well within your means toward your civic responsibility to be insured, (with up to 100% subsidy from taxpayers if you are low income) and you can continue to be an unaffordable burden to your community who will have to pay for all your emergency room visits when you get sick or injured? Driving up all the costs for people working two jobs to pay for their health insurance, greatly inflated because of your irresponsibility? There are at least 7 million people with incomes over $75,000.00 per year who are doing that right now, and they raise costs for the rest of us by over $900.00 a year. Those with the means to pay and who simply refuse to are the only ones who would be affected by the mandate.

Where is your sense of civic responsibility? Do you want to opt out of paying for your fire department and public schools as well? No more of that awful foreign aid, let all those people in other countries get it together for themselves. And get rid of that Medicaid and Medicare and Social Security, why should you contribute a share toward something you may not get back from? Let those poor, sick, disabled and old people just die in the street if they cannot work. Heck, why not just opt out of paying any taxes at all, it should be everyone for himself, right?

That's what that really is saying, and you will be happy to know the Cato Institute will back you up 100% in your Obama style attacks on universal health care.

The real deal is that taxes and other contributions toward the public good are the "price of civilization" (I forget who coined this phrase, it was originally something about "Taxes are the price of civilization"). In much of the world in the best quality health care systems the only way universal health care has been established is by mandating that everyone have it. Everyone must be in the risk pool, or it cannot be affordable to all - that is the only effective way to bring down costs. Sharing the burden and being part of the solution requires contributing your share, if you want to have a sustainable safety net there for yourself when you need it.

Obama's plan will never bring down costs without a mandate, and cannot work. It is economic nonsense, and he knows it, but has cowardly ducked out of doing the right thing. I question his integrity.

by 07rescue 2008-02-24 01:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Actually,

I really don't get why mandates suddenly turned awesome.

Hmmmm, so you want to be an irresponsible deadbeat who refuses to contribute even a small amount that is well within your means toward your civic responsibility

That's my problem.  You're redefining "civic responsibility" as an incredibly regressive "in Forbes America everybody's taxes are $1!" thing.

The fire department IS civic responsibility.  That's why you pay for it out of general taxes, which are usually applied progressively, not according to how flammable your house is, or by collecting the same amount from a homeless guy and a millionaire.  English NHS is all income tax.  Canadian Medicare is 90% general fund.  THAT'S the price you pay for civilization, mandates are just a combination of quid pro quo and an ultra-flat tax.

Is Obama better?  Maybe.  Krugman had the value of a mandate to the program as $22 billion.  If Obama subsidizes to the same end result as Hillary does, which is what the plans say anyway, then yes, Obama's funding structure is slightly less regressive than Hillary's, because he moves $22 billion from premiums to income tax.  It doesn't make much of a difference, because there are already $100 billion in general fund subsidies either way, but it's moving in the right direction.

by HEAP 2008-02-24 06:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Actually,

" You're redefining "civic responsibility" as an incredibly regressive "in Forbes America everybody's taxes are $1!" thing."

There is nothing regressive about Clinton's plan, the family contribution to get health insurance is CAPPED AT A LOW PERCENTAGE OF FAMILY INCOME, and subsidized for the rest, a far, far less regressive system than the current, most regressive of all methods, paying set premiums regardless of income. This is the exact opposite of what you are claiming.

There is considerably more  money for subsidization of those who cannot afford to buy insurance in Clinton's plan than Obama's, so his plan is considerably more regressive than her's.

I really have a problem with it that Obama supporters attack Clinton's health care plan without either reading or understanding it, and them spread all this misinformation about it. It is a brilliant and very progressive plan, Obama's is far less so, as well as being contradictory nonsense that will not work.

If you want a truly progressive system, then get on board to support single payer (Clinton does), and help us spread real information about what really works in health care reform so that the American people will support it. Right now only a small minority support single payer, that is why Clinton and Edwards had to devise these hybrid plans.

by 07rescue 2008-02-24 08:18PM | 0 recs
Clinging on to support from SNL?

Sad, just sad.

by bigdcdem 2008-02-24 02:15AM | 0 recs
Hey, let me know

when you find some class.

by bigdcdem 2008-02-24 03:06AM | 0 recs
Re: Hey, let me know

Few things...

1. Hillary will not win IN if it goes that far.  KY she will win, its too much like TN, and if she wins OH i will give you PA.  I will also give her the slight edge in PR.  However, that being said Obama has a clear advantage in WY, MS, IN, NC, OR, MT and SD.  Guam might lean Hillary as well.  All this being said, at the end Obama will still end up a hundred or two Delegates and will win.

2. It's funny everyone here is big upping Tina Fey for this as i believe shes an Obama supporter, no?

3. I am sure if we look deep enough we can find a moronic Hillary fan somewhere calling Obama a racist name, just like if you look deep enough you can find a moronic Obama supporter calling Hillary a bitch.

by Socks The Cat 2008-02-24 03:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Hey, let me know

I live in Indiana and I want to tell you that BO's support here is not as strong as you might think. VERY FEW of my students want him, NONE of my colleagues, and NONE of my friends or family. Also, I regularly go to progressive and Dem. meetings. He's mentioned with some degree of interest, but Clinton support is by far more pronounced at this point.

by River103 2008-02-24 03:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Hey, let me know

yes, but this has been and continues to be the pattern. remember 2 weeks ago texas was in the bag for hillary? Well, that was the case in most states. By mid april, when the Obama ground forces start infiltrating IN, things will change drastically. It always has and no reason to think it will not continue to happen.

to summarize:
Hillary leads state by double digits.
two to three weeks before primary/caucus, Obama's ground forces invade
Three to five days before primary/caucus Obama ties or overtakes Clinton
Day of poll, obama wins by single or (as is happening more often lately, double) digits

of course thing could change. Watch OH where the pattern is not being repeated. But the Ohios are not the norm. The norm are the Texases and the Wisconsins.

by poserM 2008-02-24 05:46AM | 0 recs
Re: Hey, let me know

Well, so says you. I choose to see it differently.

by River103 2008-02-24 06:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Hey, let me know

Wow, what an intelligent, reasonable post.

Tell me what percentages Hillary will win those states by, UW, and what your rationale behind it is (IE, polling numbers).


by The Great Gatsby 2008-02-24 05:49AM | 0 recs
Uncle Wiggly, please update

Would you please update your diary with the other clip of SNL? Thank you!

by praxis1 2008-02-24 04:43AM | 0 recs

I stopped reading when you called something from SNL "devastating".

I love SNL, and Weekend Update is my favorite part.  Their satire is normally awesome, and Amy Poelher and Tina Fey are terrific.  I count seeing SNL live as one of my favorite life experiences.

But I've never seen one single skit in my history of watching SNL that I would consider "devastating" to anyone or anything.  A frequent repetition of Bush as an idiot for eight years is one thing - one night of Obama spoofing is another.

Just another straw to grab at for the Hillary supporters on MyDD.  At this point most of you aren't even about supporting Hillary, you're just here to completely destroy Barack Obama.  And it's disgusting.

by The Great Gatsby 2008-02-24 05:46AM | 0 recs
Re: Yawn

What did you do the last few months? Spread venom and hatred against Hillary? Ever tried to stop the lies against Hillary? Or you propagated them yourself?

Do you see a hypocrite in the mirror every morning?

by Sandeep 2008-02-24 07:49AM | 0 recs

Too Bad Tina Fey isn't a superdelegate.  Maybe Hillary should have her stumping for her.  Anything is worth a try right now.

by A from Phoenix 2008-02-24 06:14AM | 0 recs
that was hilarious

Funny riffs on both candidates.  The Obama actor needs to be replaced with someone who can emulate his mannerisms and voice pitch.  Too forced I say.  The Hillary actor was spot-on!  

Nice to see Huckabee has a sense of humor.  When will McCain make an appearance?

by optimusprime 2008-02-24 06:46AM | 0 recs
Re: Tina Fey is a National Hero

You mean in your adult life? ;-)

by River103 2008-02-24 07:14AM | 0 recs
This is an endorsement - CALLING TPM !!

Post this on the front page the way you have been posting the name of every dog-catcher who has been endorsing Obama.  Tina Fey endorsed Hillary last night - that is HUGE.  She is feminist enough to understand what is happening and take a stand.

by Molee 2008-02-24 07:22AM | 0 recs
Don't get ahead of yourself....

This was a pretty spot-on and very funny comedy bit, but I wouldn't chalk this up to an endorsement of Hillary.

Have you watched 30 Rock?  I'm pretty sure Fey is an Obama supporter who is annoyed with the sexism surrounding Hillary.

by davisb 2008-02-24 07:29AM | 0 recs
She said C'mon Ohio and Texas

you can still change this... to paraphrase... didn't that mean you can still vote Hillary to victory?  Sounds like an endorsement to me.  Sounds like what Kerry and Kennedy have been saying about BO.

by Molee 2008-02-24 08:13AM | 0 recs
There's also a diary up on kos

right now interpreting this as an endorsement as well. But of course they are pissed because the endorsement was not of BO.

by Molee 2008-02-24 08:19AM | 0 recs
Re: She said C'mon Ohio and Texas

Yes but it was a joke, she is a comedian.  It was very funny, but really wasn't meant to be taken seriously.  

On 30 Rock she also talks about avoiding the Clinton's house for fear of getting her boob pinched.  She also says there's an 80% chance she's going to tell her friends she's voting for Barack Obama but really vote for John McCain.  

She's riffing off US politics, not making serious political arguments.

by davisb 2008-02-24 08:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Don't get ahead of yourself....

The part where it was said by a professional satirist/comedian.  The same person who once said: "There's an 80% chance in the next election I'm going to tell all my friends I'm voting for Barack Obama but really vote for John McCain."  

Is that an endorsement of McCain?  No, it's a joke, and it's meant to be funny, and it is funny.  That's all this sketch was, too: funny jokes.

by davisb 2008-02-24 09:19AM | 0 recs
Re: Don't get ahead of yourself....

Read into it what you want, but this was a comedy bit, not political activism.

by davisb 2008-02-24 09:46AM | 0 recs
The synergy of the RWM and sites like kos

to go after Hillary is something truly unexpected (at least by me) - I NEVER thought kos would turn so hateful towards a female candidate like this and aid and abet the RWM.  The ruse that they [kos and co.] are going after a centrist candidate not a female candidate is baloney when the netroots were drooling over the likes of Salazar and  Jim Webb!

by Molee 2008-02-24 07:25AM | 0 recs
"The Bitch is Back"

Senator Clinton ought to hire Tina Fey for her campaign not be offended by her. Fey did what Clinton's campaign advisors haven't been able to do---yet. She made the fact that Hillary's been called a bitch, down right appealing.

No more sacred cows. Not for the Dems or the Republicans. Politically correct sacred cows?

Oh, and I'm serious here, Sen. Clinton ought to change her campaign song. I like that one by Elton John. You know the one.

"The Bitch is Back"

by 12 dogs and a blog 2008-02-24 07:30AM | 0 recs
That was fantastic! But poor Tina and most of the rest of the cast will probably be facing death threats from incensed Obamaniacs for the next few weeks. It was worth it, though.

Did you say that there are actually people on this earth who think the media has a pro-Hillary bias??


by sricki 2008-02-24 07:35AM | 0 recs
The "Pro-Hillary Bias"

It's funny you mention that, because in the last episode of SNL before the writers strike, they were making fun of the media for "being in the tank" for Hillary Clinton.  They had Brian Williams talking about Hillary being the candidate the media has chosen to win, etc. etc.  So take last night with a grain of salt...

I think people are reading too much into the comedy bits here.

by davisb 2008-02-24 07:38AM | 0 recs
The Funniest Bit About Last Night's SNL

The Tina Fey Weekend Update bit was a complete and total PUT DOWN of Hillary Clinton.

The saddest part about it is Hillary Supporters are jumping up and down about how great it was here and Obama supporters are jumping up and down about how terrible it was for Tina Fey to come out in support of Hillary.

TINA FEY CALLED HILLARY CLINTON A <u>BITCH!</u> She then went on to bitch at people for rejecting the bitch. Then she bitched at Texas and Ohio to climb aboar the bitchwagaon. Totally hilarious, but a put down nonetheless.

You don't get much more of a put down than that, especially when they had a game show spoof skit afterwards called What's That Bitch Talkin' About afterwards.

SNL is all about ripping on all politicians. Nobody is excluded from the fun.

by Walt Starr 2008-02-24 07:46AM | 0 recs
Re: The Funniest Bit About Last Night's SNL

Thank you Walt.  Somebody in this thread with a brain.  This is a sketch comedy show.  That was not an endorsement.  I guess people are looking for anything positive out there for Hillary these days that they'll take something where someone calls her a bitch.  Not even Howard Wolfson would try that spin.

by Chili Dogg 2008-02-24 07:14PM | 0 recs
double standard for pro v. anti Hil speak

Weird how some folks around here want to avoid the point of the conversation completely and get all huffy-like about sexist word choices when the word hysteria is used to legitimately describe Hilary's behavior with regard to Obama's health care mailers, but the same folks haven't a word to say with regard to pro Hilary "Bitches get stuff done" buttons and such.

Maybe these people had more of a problem with the conversation showing that their candidate was wrong than they had about the choice of vocabulary.    Maybe these folks just found it easier to play the sexism card even though it WAS a stretch instead of conceding that Hilary was, in fact, taking a giant step away from her good senses.

by lockewasright 2008-02-24 08:07AM | 0 recs
Re: double standard for pro v. anti Hil speak


The word used was hysterical.  The point remains.

by lockewasright 2008-02-24 08:08AM | 0 recs
Re: double standard

Context is everything.

This was clearly a female empowerment, claim a slur as our own moment, which is something that members of minority/underpowered groups do all of the time.  

So it's not a double standard.  The single standard is the context in which the word is used, not the word itself.

by KevinCinNYC 2008-02-24 08:13AM | 0 recs
Re: double standard

I would agree, but if we're going to be hypersensitive when it's convenient and use it as a tool to get off subject when losing a debate then we need to stick with the whole hypersensitive theme when the speech benefits the candidate.

Or we could drop the disingenuous use of sexism altogether, hold discussions based on the merits of ideas instead of banning words and then have the added benefit of not sounding like the we're crying wolf when someone truly is being sexist.  

by lockewasright 2008-02-24 08:20AM | 0 recs
Not sure why you're using &quot;we&quot;

Building a straw man attack on Hillary supporters, then using "we" when talking to them is very condescending.

I promise you, when Michelle Obama is the new target for all of the misogyny that will need to go somewhere should Hillary exit, you'll start seeing things a lot more clearly.  

by KevinCinNYC 2008-02-24 08:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Not sure why you're using &quot;we&quot;

I already see it clearly (talk about condescention!?)  I used we because WE are engaged in a conversation as a party and as a people.  I am every bit as against sexism right now with regard to Hilary as I will be when it's turned against Michelle Obama.  Remember, I am the one who pointed out a distaste for double standards in the first place.  

I just don't like to see trumped up charges of sexism leveled at someone as a technique to pivot on a losing argument.  It diminishes the dialogue and it weakens the charges when sexism is really truly being employed.

by lockewasright 2008-02-24 08:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Not sure why you're using &quot;we&quot;

BTW, here is a conversation that started yesterday here at  mydd wherein the people I am talking about are doing the talking for themselves:

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/23/1916 16/645

No straw man here.  It starts with the comment pasted below.  I am not even saying that I endorse the comment, but the conversation that ensues demonstrates what I am talking about.  So you can retract your accusation of creating a straw man now and you can take your condescension down a notch.  

Maybe I am here for a real conversation because I am very much against sexism and would like to see us move the cause forward  by rethinking how we're fighting it.

Here's where that conversation started:

don't make me say the "h" word (1.25 / 4)

if she keeps this up, I am going to have to say that she sounds hysterical, and she doesn't want that.

by shlenny on Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 07:28:05 PM EST
[ Reply to This |   ]

My message was consistent, even if misunderstood, from the time I joined in.

by lockewasright 2008-02-24 09:11AM | 0 recs
Kevin's point is well-taken, look at the n-word

as co-opted by Af. Americans....for another example.

by Molee 2008-02-24 08:26AM | 0 recs
Re: double standard for pro v. anti Hil speak

Sexism Card?


Every old stereotype has been resurected in this presidential campaign. Every one. Ageism. John McCain is too old. Biases against religion? You were paying attention to the critisism of Huckabee and Romney. I kept looking for comments about Huckabee's tax reform. Had trouble finding it for all the stuff about his religion. Oh and I heard of a quote from the LDS church. Seems they had no idea that folks had such problems with their religion. That would be Mitt Romney. As for race. Well let's face it. There are going to be folks who won't be voting Obama because is is black. Or not black enough. I've heard that too. And now gender. Yep. They aren't calling Sen.Clinton a bitch because she is a man.

Now me. I just don't care about their age, religion, race, or sex. Me. I care about health care, taxes, climate change, social security and Iraq. Anybody out there remember Iraq.

Funny. Just look age,religion,race, and gender.

I thought we stopped this nonsence with the Civil Rights Act. Or the Age discrimination Act 1975.

Oh and get real. I'm a woman. If I get riled up about the stupidity of this election cycle, NO ONE pats me on the back and says atta girl. Heck no. They wannna know if it's my time of the month.

No matter who I vote for, I'm glad to take back the word "bitch".

"The Bitch is Back"

As an "uppity woman" from the South.

I kind of like it.

Think that's gonna be my blog her at MyDD.

by 12 dogs and a blog 2008-02-24 08:24AM | 0 recs
Re: double standard for pro v. anti Hil speak

I agree that the level of bias and generalization in this primary has been despicable.  That is why I haven't engaged in it and it's why I find it equally wrong when someone uses it in a conversation here as a tool of convenience when a defense of Hilary's behavior begins to fall apart.  

"It's wrong, but hey everyone else is doing it too" is no justification. Sorry.  MLK taught us that.  There were two points to the pacifist sit-in approach that he espoused:

1) violence would only reinforce wrong headed stereotypes.

2) to claim the moral high ground you must actually be on the moral high ground. (like the torture argument, remember Iraq and Gitmo?)

Lastly and as an aside:
Huckabee made it fair game to attack him of the religious front.  Not because he is religious like Romney is, but because he makes not bones about wanting to insert his religious views into government.  That makes the conversation not just fair game, but absolutely necessary for an atheist like me.

by lockewasright 2008-02-24 08:42AM | 0 recs
Re: double standard for pro v. anti Hil speak

I read your post. I'm a firm believer in the first ammendment. The part that say congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion and preventing the free excercise of. That includes not believing as well. To me the first ammendment puts religion back to the individual choice. Takes it away for government. But I can understand if you are wary of a candidate with strong religious convictions. Regardless of the religion. There are Christians by the way who are just as fearful of an atheist in office.

That's the true value of separation of church and state, no over reaching on the part of anyone's religious or non religious beliefs.

But in this case, even if I were a Christian, Huckabee's tax reform. Now that isn't protected by the 1st ammendment. So I worry more about that.I want that information front and center.

by 12 dogs and a blog 2008-02-24 11:58AM | 0 recs
Re: double standard for pro v. anti Hil speak


Sorry for this extension. But I don't know how to edit my posts.

As for Mitt Romney, he had to spend much of his time trying to defend his religious beliefs. More time than defending his positions on the issues that he would actually be responsible for as president. Very much like John Kennedy had to spend much time defending his religious beliefs. While you might not have found his religion to be problematic, there are other voters who did. Me? Nope. I'm more interested in the things he'd actually be responsible for as president. Funny because the president isn't required to take an oath of faith in order to become president. To be president you don't have to believe or not believe. Like all of us it is personal.

By the way is Locke, the political theorist Locke?

by 12 dogs and a blog 2008-02-24 12:12PM | 0 recs
Re: double standard for pro v. anti Hil speak

I agree. I find it distinctly unamerican that Romney should have to spend so much time defending his religious beliefs.  It keeps the conversation from the important things.  

Suppose he had great ideas that he didn't get to share because he was busy defending his mormon beliefs. That is extremely damaging to the discourse.  He's a conservative so I doubt that I was going to agree with him much anyway.  Still it is disturbing to see so many folks make that the only conversation he could have.  He didn't make it an issue like Huckabee does with his overt desire to make legislation based on his faith.  That's why it's in bounds with Huckabee and should be, but that should not be the case with Romney imo.

That's sort of one of my points with the conversation we were just having.  Sometimes it's a huge distraction from other things when we just keep on getting hung up on the same topic (and frankly needlessly sometimes) it means that other things don't get discussed or that what was an important topic gets hijacked.

Not all resistance to a Hilary nomination is sexist.  It seems like some of her proponents won't see it any other way though.

Yes, my tag is in reference to John Locke.

by lockewasright 2008-02-24 12:39PM | 0 recs
Re: double standard for pro v. anti Hil speak

Ah sure good to know about the John Locke. I have been trying to learn about our country's history from the beginning back before the Constitution. Back with the articles of confederation. Back with the Federalists and anti federalists. You would perhaps be a lawyer or something that deals with logic and words. You are holding fast to the logical. I don't know if it is on purpose. But at least on my side of the computer you come across as trying your best to factor out the emotional and stick with the logic. I pray indulgence from Uncle Wiggly since this is getting off topic and is on their thread.

by 12 dogs and a blog 2008-02-24 01:39PM | 0 recs
Re: double standard for pro v. anti Hil speak

I wouldn't want to second guess the dead, but I think that Madison would have been saying after the last 7 years. See See. This is the reason why there should be no president and all the power should be in the Legislative branch. I have tried to read about this because of the issues as to presidential power. I was taught there was a balance of power and three branches of government in school, long ago, imagine my surprise when I read that the three branches of government doesn't exist. But maybe they were refering to Madison.

Anyway when I saw your nick I wondered if it was John Locke. He was very much in the minds of the folks who drafted the constitution. I think. Not a scholar. Just an old RedNeck trying to educamate her self. (I can say that because I am by most standards a RedNeck. Except the wheels on the house part.)

by 12 dogs and a blog 2008-02-24 01:45PM | 0 recs
Re: double standard for pro v. anti Hil speak

My entire family is composed of lawyers.  My father, in fact, taught constitutional law at THE Ohio State University.  GO BUCKS!!  Alas, I am no attorney.  I hold degrees in technical electronics and computer science.

Check with the attorneys that are always around here, but I believe that the Constitution is separated into articles which do, in fact, create each of the three branches of government.  

Madison is one of my very favorites.  I just read a biography on the man.  His letter entitled "A memorial and Remonstrance"  puts into words some of the principles that mean the very most to me. Here's a link:

http://religiousfreedom.lib.virginia.edu /sacred/madison_m&r_1785.html

I do try to separate emotions from logic. Perhaps it comes across as cold.  I have managed to really piss off a few folks around here today with what I guess have been clumsy attempts to suggest an idea to advance the fight against sexism.  It seems they think that I am in favor of it.  I think that I was just accused of calling Hilary a bitch.  I never have.  I have gotten very angry at fellow Obama supporters who have.  I guess I need to work on communicating my views better.

I appreciate your compliments though.

by lockewasright 2008-02-24 04:33PM | 0 recs
Re: double standard for pro v. anti Hil speak

Well I hope you comeback in to comment on this.

I can't quite put my finger on it, but somehow there is a parallel between Huckabee/Romney 's handling of the religious issue and Obama/Hillery's handling of the sexist/racist issue. Will have to think on it.

Hope that you revist this thread. I will have to create something on my blog. I would love to chat with you and Uncle Wiggly.

by 12 dogs and a blog 2008-02-24 02:07PM | 0 recs
Re: double standard for pro v. anti Hil speak

Well I hope you comeback in to comment on this.

I can't quite put my finger on it, but somehow there is a parallel between Huckabee/Romney 's handling of the religious issue and Obama/Hillery's handling of the sexist/racist issue. Will have to think on it.

Hope that you revist this thread. I will have to create something on my blog. I would love to chat with you and Uncle Wiggly.

by 12 dogs and a blog 2008-02-24 02:07PM | 0 recs
Re: double standard for pro v. anti Hil speak

Oh one more thing Lockewasright.

The moral high ground is not lost by being what they call here in the South, an uppity woman.

It's lost when a president or a presidential wantabe says don't question what I say. I have heard Democrats critise the Bush administration for saying don't question us about the war. Aren't the Democrats losing the political high ground when they say the same about their candidates??? Politically correct is alive and well for both Dems. and Republs. The only way your going to get past it is to question, question, question. That would include all candidates. Everyone. I believe in being fair. To each candidate. But fair doesn't mean sweetness and light for one candidate and calling another one a female dog. I don't believe in this case that Ms. Clinton is getting a fair shake from the press. I don't like that. Keeps me from getting information that I need to make my political decision. That would be regardless of who I vote for. And the Rev. King may have been for non violent change, but he was not shy with his words. He would have asked for equal treatment for both candidates. Equality for all. That's why I liked his message. And his world was really difficult. No one was being deferential to Rev King. They had him arrested when they didn't like what he had to say. But guess what. Thanks to Dr. King, Sen. Obama can run for president without fear of reprisal. I for one am listening to Sen. Obama just like I am listening to Sen. Clinton. Just don't want to disrespect the man by soft balling questions to him or treating his opponent like the little woman. I personally would feel that for the media to pull their punches for any of the candidates would be really disrespectful. They should be asking the tough questions of everyone running for office. Testing their mettle.

As to the word bitch.

The only way to neutalize the word bitch, is to own it. That's what I got from Ms Fey. Ownership of the word by women. That's not lowering one's self. That's playing folks at their own game.I took it that she was saying. A bitch? Well if being a strong woman is a bitch. You are right.

by 12 dogs and a blog 2008-02-24 12:58PM | 0 recs
Re: stfu

Yes, and the word can also have non-gender related definitions.  

Even if the person had intended the offensive meaning (and that is not established) a response of How Dare You (twice) and immediate accusations of failure to grasp sexism by someone who could find racism and general huffiness only serve to strengthen the stereotype.  Calm inquiry into whether the person understood the offensiveness followed by either repudiation or education would be more effective.

Also, if the sexism card becomes a tool of convenience (a way to change the subject) then the moral high ground is lost.

by lockewasright 2008-02-24 09:55AM | 0 recs
Re: chico es loco

Maybe loco would have been a better word to use.  Or is that another one of those words that could never ever possibly be used to describe a male and therefore is sexist?

Wouldn't have made any difference.  As soon as people went loco repudiating the word's use...

you know.

by lockewasright 2008-02-24 10:11AM | 0 recs
Re: chico es loco

well. If you were talking about using the word bitch.

The word is actually the correct one to use when describing a female dog. Not a very nice thing to call someone. But I don't see many people taking the high road when they send it Sen. Clinton's way.


none of this tells me how the candidates are going to get us out of Iraq.

by 12 dogs and a blog 2008-02-24 11:45AM | 0 recs
Re: chico es loco

I know.  And I meant you're wrong.  

It's okay.  Won't have to worry about it any more at least where Hilary vs Obama is concerned after the 4th.  By then even the most delusional of her supporters will hopefully see the writing on the wall.

Then you all can huddle up and spend years discussing how all of was sexism and for god sake, don't let it occur to any of you that you lost valuable time finding it where it wasn't and then fighting it with less than effective tactics when you actually did find it.  That'll help advance the cause.

My guy and my goals will be moving forward.  Yours won't.  That makes me the crazy one.

by lockewasright 2008-02-24 12:17PM | 0 recs
Re: chico es loco

Oh look. Another smug prick for Obama. Typical. Locke would be nodding his head knowingly at the tabula rasa your guy spins out. He may win the primary (may), but he'll never win the general. Check mate.

by River103 2008-02-24 02:54PM | 0 recs
Re: chico es loco

yes, the polls are all lying.  There's no way the candidate who beats McCain by 6 to 10 points every poll does better than the one that ties him or loses to him in every poll.  

And Yeah, I'm sure Locke would hate to see me showing a desire for the person with the most popular votes to win the primary.  How horribly undemocratic of me.  Real democrats win with party insiders and muckety mucks.

Remember, a year ago the primary was Hilary's race to lose.  Well she's managed that.  Kudos!  That's exactly the type of prowess we need in the general.

No wait, the best thing that we could do is wait for a situation where half of the conservatives won't go vote FOR there party's nominee and then put in place a candidate that they'll line up around the block to vote AGAINST.  Remember according to conservatives the most evil idea in the world is a Clinton in the White House.  For some of them it's the ONLY thing worse than McCain whom they view as a traitor.  They'll sit at home in November rather than vote for McCain unless, of course, they are threatened with another Clinton presidency.  So let's do that.  That'd be smart!

Honestly, I'm on the 3rd planet out from that really hot one in the center.  Where are you?

by lockewasright 2008-02-24 03:45PM | 0 recs
Re: chico es loco

I'm on the planet Earth. I know you might need directions back to it after your Manchurian candidate loses, but I can't say I'll help you with a map. I don't think we want you back.

by River103 2008-02-24 06:57PM | 0 recs
Re: chico es loco

Are you serious?!  You really think that he's a Manchurian candidate?!


Are you sure about which planet you're on?

How thick is the padding you had to move to get to the wall outlet and plug in your PC?

Look out now!  When the paranoia turns delusional it's time to really be careful.

Take it easy buddy.  The orderlies will be here to take you to arts and crafts soon.

by lockewasright 2008-02-25 05:49AM | 0 recs
Re: chico es loco

Nice GOP talking point though.

Hey!  Maybe you're a plant from the GOP.  Here to spread nonsense among us libruls on the intertubes!  Can I see you voter registration card?

Manchurian Commentor!!!

by lockewasright 2008-02-25 05:56AM | 0 recs
I see it's not hard for you

to spew idiocy. Not a shock, Locke (indeed) given previous statement here and elsewhere. I do see BO as hugely egotistical, vapidly smug, deplorabely deficient in details, and dangerous to the well being of the country. I'm sure you can see why he will never get my vote. There's much talk about his safety these days. While I most certainly hope nothing harmful happens to him, I can't say I would miss him. I'd feel sorry for his family and say, "Whew" for the country at the same time. That's how deeply my concern about his candidacy goes. And that is the bald truth from this lesbian feminist who has fought hard virtually all my life, as a teacher, a social worker, and an activist to protect the rights of the disenfranchised. He is toxic to me. Now I'm done with you, as I've given over enough of my time in your direction.    

by River103 2008-02-25 06:48AM | 0 recs
Re: I see it's not hard for you

So continue on your path of helping McCain get elected and watch his party use the constitution to attack lesbians and pack the supreme with even more antichoice justices.  

I am a democrat in part because I want my daughter to have fewer roadblocks than her mother's had which are fewer than my mother has had due to feminism.  That's in part because of males like myself who have voted for previous dems for exactly the same reason.

If asked today I couldn't honestly describe you or many of the other Hilary supporters as feminists though.  You are guilty of generalizations and sexism toward everyone who doesn't agree that nominating Clinton is the best strategy for advancing our causes.  In fifty years it won't be about what name is written in the history books or what gender or color they were.  My children's lives will be effected by what policies were enacted in the coming years.

Let's put it real simple for ya.  Obama (the electable democrat) won't put into place laws and constitutional amendments that hurt women and their causes.  McCain absolutely will.  Given the hysterical hate of all things Clinton on  the right, Hilary is the new Nader.  

My vote goes to Obama and you are a sexist for your assumptions about his supporters.  Hypocrite too!

by lockewasright 2008-02-25 07:17AM | 0 recs
Re: I see it's not hard for you

oops!  I worded that wrong.  3rd paragraph, 1st sentence.  I should have said "Hilary's remaining supporters".

by lockewasright 2008-02-25 07:26AM | 0 recs
Re: I see it's not hard for you

All partisan bickering aside... goodbye and I hope some day this country will treat you as an equal (until it does, we can't claim as a nation to truly believe in Jeffersonian principles).  We really are on the same side of the issues related to that.  We just disagree on how best to advance the cause.

by lockewasright 2008-02-25 07:41AM | 0 recs
Re: I see it's not hard for you
I am a Clinton supporter, and I still find this comment offensive.

Also, your double standard is very annoying. You have troll-rated god knows how many people today for saying things a lot less inflammatory than, "If something happened to Obama, I can't say I would miss him and would say 'whew' for this country" and "he is toxic to me." What horrid things to say. You even troll-rated some people simply because they didn't respond to Bob in a rude way. Inappropriate and unnecessary.

I have viewed your ratings page, and this is a pattern. Stop, or I will report you -- and soon.

by sricki 2008-02-25 11:37AM | 0 recs
Re: chico es loco

You see the latest Iowa head to head polls?  A key swing state.  McCain beats Clinton by 9.  Obama beats McCain by 17.  That's a 26 point swing.  I have trouble believing the numbers are that big, but it's still a striking number.

by Chili Dogg 2008-02-24 07:26PM | 0 recs
Re: chico es loco

Iowa has the demographics to demonstrate point that lots of folks who usually vote GOP are disillusioned with the party and don't like McCain in particular, but need someone who is not a Clinton as a voting option if they are break with the GOP or at least sit at home and teach the GOP a lesson by letting them lose.

The hatred of all things Clinton by these people is irrational (maybe even hysterical), but it is very real.

I bet if Hickabee were the GOP nominee we democrats wouldn't stand a chance in Iowa.

There are other places where Hickabee's brand of stupid won't sell at all, but Iowa is not one of them.

by lockewasright 2008-02-25 05:35AM | 0 recs
Re: chico es loco

you mean when she wins BOTH by %20 margins in order to just make it competitive again?  She's gonna do this even after that asshole Delay's illegal gerrymandering has screwed her latino base out of proportional representation.  If she does that I'll be waiting for her to turn the water into wine at gala afterward.

I think Hilary is fantastic.  I am not kidding.  She is wonderful.  She is a candidate at least 10 times better than the whole GOP field.  I hope to see her have a very successful career.  I guess I'm a prick because I think Obama gives us a better chance to win because of the irrational hatred of all things Clinton on the right.

While she is an excellent candidate, her campaign has failed her... horribly.  It WAS hers to lose.  They've lost it for her (or at least they're very very close to it).  Barack's ground game has been awesome.  

The writing is on the wall.  I'm sorry that it is no fun to see for Hilary fans.  I'm not trying to be a jerk. I mean that.  I just don't want to see desperate moves motivated by Penn damage our unity as a party and provide ammo for the GOP that causes us to lose the general.

With a B.O. in the White House our democratic agenda moves forward (including bills that Hilary gets to write and Barack doesn't).  With a McCain in the White House we don't get Habeas back.  The SCOTUS gets stacked with more conservative antichoice fuck heads.  Wire Tapping, War, Gay Marriage, Intelligent Design, torture, it goes on and on.  I don't have to list it all for you because you know.  You know because it pisses you off too.  It pisses you off too because we're on the same side.

by lockewasright 2008-02-24 04:01PM | 0 recs
Re: stfu


How do you define sexism?

Just wonderin?

by 12 dogs and a blog 2008-02-24 01:14PM | 0 recs
Re: stfu

btw, the word that was used was hysterical, not female hysteria.  So  the wiki definition isn't so relevant.

I guess you and the others are free to assume that he meant female hysteria, but that is an assumption.

So again I say, they should have calmly asked and found out what he meant instead of going apeshit and reinforcing the stereotype.

Even if he did mean what they thought, freaking out about it is harming the cause.  Staying calm and dismissing him proves he is wrong in his stereotyping at least where this exchange is involved.

by lockewasright 2008-02-24 12:48PM | 0 recs
Re: stfu

Like I said

None of it is telling me how the candidates are planning to get us out of Iraq or even if they intend to.

So how is Senator Obama going to get us out of Iraq. I'm asking because Locke mentioned they were a supporter of Obama.

And I know you could say take it to another thread but this has been my point. All this "ism" stuff but no policy. Calling Sen. Clinton a bitch instead of using the time to talk about how she's gonna get us out of Iraq? Then equal time for Sen. Obama. And Huckabee. And McCain.

Oh and it was also common at one time to use lobotomies to cure the ills of women. I think one of the Kennedy's had their daughter cured that way.

by 12 dogs and a blog 2008-02-24 01:24PM | 0 recs
Re: stfu

who called Clinton a bitch?  Not me.  Not ever.  In fact, I jumped all over a guy over at Kos for that a couple of days ago.

I am aware of the history of the term that you're hung up on.  You know the one that has nothing to do with the conversation.  Nobody said female hysteria until you brought it up.

Obama's plan to get out of Iraq is just about as specific as Hilary's.  That is to say it's not nearly specific enough.  However, he IS better positioned to debate McCain on the issue as he never voted to authorize.  I'm not saying he is a better person than her for it.  I acknowledge that he didn't have a chance to vote for it, but nonetheless he is not implicated as she is.  That fact also makes it easier for him to ask for international help once he's in the Oval Office than she would be.  So in the long run, he is better positioned than her to bring the troops home even if it's not because of anything specific that he did.

by lockewasright 2008-02-24 04:10PM | 0 recs
Re: double standard for pro v. anti Hil speak

Uncle Wiggly,

I am enjoying your blog entry on this subject very much. It is quite a joy to see so many people involved in the voting process. Passion for life and passion for the future  of our country. They are causing me to question my views. To really look at what is important in the upcoming presidential election. It is really a great thing. I love free speech because it makes us stronge as a country. And I believe, that it also promotes stability. We all want to be heard and to have our views considered. Thank goodness we live in a country  where that can still be done.


by 12 dogs and a blog 2008-02-24 01:07PM | 0 recs
It's amusing that you use a pro-Hillary MSM

piece to prove how much the MSM hates her.

It was a funny bit though.

by Mystylplx 2008-02-24 08:13AM | 0 recs

SNL isn't the MSM.   The MSM is unintentionally funny, SNL tries to be funny but usually isn't.  That's why good moments like this stand out so much!

by KevinCinNYC 2008-02-24 08:32AM | 0 recs



by john5750 2008-02-24 08:41AM | 0 recs
SNL has made fun of Hillary in the past

If there was really an Obama supporter who wants to protest SNL, that guy needs to get a life because SNL has made fun of Hillary in the past on at least two occasions. They nailed her on the war. And something else i forget.

by Pravin 2008-02-24 08:43AM | 0 recs

Of all nights, I was sick with flu and fell asleep.

Everyone I know is talking about SNL.

I wish they would rerun it or have a special showing.

I heard it was great!!!

by john5750 2008-02-24 08:55AM | 0 recs
Re: I AM SO MAD !!!

I'm totally bummed too!  I saw much of the episode but fell asleep before Tina Fey's commentary.  Damn that nyquil.

by mtnspirit 2008-02-24 09:46AM | 0 recs
Re: I AM SO MAD !!!

I was kinda hoping that they would bring back the "Where's my stuff" girl from the 92 Clinton campaign, a flash forward would be hilarious.. especially if she was still looking for her "stuff"...

by Why Not 2008-02-24 01:52PM | 0 recs
Re: I AM SO MAD !!!

YOUTube removed all the links.

by KnowVox 2008-02-25 06:54AM | 0 recs
Smart satire

I think that the skit/monologue simply was comedy at its best and most powerful: pointing out sharp truths through humor and satire.

I don't think that Tina Fey necessarily endorsed Hillary--remember, she was playing a reporter for "WomensNews" and so anything her character said was going to have a pro-woman bent to it. That being said, Tina's monologue was an smart counterargument to the rampant sexist attacks on Hillary in the media and elsewhere. I clapped when I saw the live segment and I agree that she took ownership of the word "bitch"--smart, successful women like Tina, Amy, and Hillary are bitches who get stuff done.

by haelig 2008-02-24 10:28AM | 0 recs
Re: Smart satire

I think you've got this exactly right: This was very funny, very spot-on political satire, with a lot of truth to it, but shouldn't really be taken as an explicit political endorsement.

by davisb 2008-02-24 10:40AM | 0 recs

Awesome segment.  Tina Fey is hilarious.

by proudliberaldem 2008-02-24 10:47AM | 0 recs
I love Tina Fey right now!

Tina Fey pretty much spelled out everything I've been saying for months.  I am sick and tired of the media saying that Hillary has lost the election when its far from over for her and she may still win this thing.  Besides, these analysts are always wrong.  

I for one am sick and tired of the Obamaniac cultists making small-minded, infalmatory remarks about Hillary.  Hey Obamaniacs, get your facts together before you make false accusations!  And I am sick of Obama's empty words of change cause I've never actually heard what those changes are!

I would love it if I could get my hands on a "Bitches get things Done, Vote Hillary '08" bumper sticker. I would totally stick it proudly on my car.

Bitches get things done,
Hillary all the way!

by cooldude286 2008-02-24 11:26AM | 0 recs
Obama Smeared Unfairly?

Yesterday on a radio station (1150am) in southern Ca they had a story ob Obama doing rock cocaine and recieving oral sex from a guy 9 years ago. Supposedly the guy is taking a lie detector test.

I have not seen it here or heard about it in the mainstream media. Has anyone heard anything about that?

here is the link

http://radicalfilms.co.uk/2008/02/05/bar ack-obama-crack-cocainegay-sex-allegatio n/

by mmorang 2008-02-24 11:34AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Smeared Unfairly?

"Yesterday on a radio station (1150am) in southern Ca they had a story ob Obama doing rock cocaine and recieving oral sex from a guy 9 years ago. "

Obama will be swift boated by the right the same way Hillary Clinton has been for 20 years. It will get much worse, and it is frightening to behold. They will stop at nothing. So much for "unity" and post-racial and post-gender politics. I believe it will be hideous, what they will do to him.

The Republicans need to protect themselves against being held accountable for all the many criminal offenses and abuses of our national government and budget they have been enjoying for the past 8 years. They will do anything to defeat Obama, should he win the nomination. They must protect themselves from prosecution, and they will fight to the end to save themselves.

While I detest Obama's politics and tactics, I would put my own life on the line to protect him from unfair attacks and slime. I will always do the same for Hillary Clinton. When Obama supporters slime her it particularly rankles me, to see them act as shills for the right.

I think many of the Obama supporters are still very young and inexperienced, and do not realize the right wing slime she has been subjected to, and they have bought the line that she is "polarizing" because she has been slimed by the right for so long. Someday it will be Obama in that position, with people saying, "Where there is smoke there must be fire, at least some of the slime must be true." That's how swift boating works. They will stop at nothing, and nothing is too low for them to stoop to. They will manufacture witnesses and events too ugly to think about.

It takes both parties to want "unity" and cooperation, you cannot achieve it with only one side participating, and it is forgone that the right will go after Obama like sharks. People who haven't lived through the demolition of character they are capable of may be stunned to watch it. Perhaps only then will some of them understand how unfair their attacks on Hillary Clinton have been, when it happens to their candidate.

This post saddens me.

by 07rescue 2008-02-24 02:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Smeared Unfairly?

I'm a Clinton supporter and agree with everything you said. I'll support Obama but it is hard given the raw deal I think both Clintons have received.

I do not think the story has any legs as the man showed deception in his lie detector test.

by mmorang 2008-02-25 03:52PM | 0 recs
'B*tches get stuff done' t-shirts

http://www.cafepress.com/gigglechick/490 1961

by del 2008-02-24 01:01PM | 0 recs
Another T-shirt
If Hillary is smart, she'll embrace this. I thought this was so funny, I even made my own "Bitch is the new Black" t-shirt. Enjoy!
by Jumptees 2008-02-24 01:31PM | 0 recs
Thanks -

Excitement is going through the roof.

by sepulvedaj3 2008-02-24 04:38PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads