Steinem on Palin

Last night I learned why republicans savor war - they revel in making enemies out of people and countries.

Can't wait to see Ms. Mooseburger loose in the wild.
This just in from Gloria Steinem:

Selecting Sarah Palin, who was touted all summer by Rush Limbaugh, is no way to attract most women, including die-hard Clinton supporters. Palin shares nothing but a chromosome with Clinton. Her down-home, divisive and deceptive speech did nothing to cosmeticize a Republican convention that has more than twice as many male delegates as female, a presidential candidate who is owned and operated by the right wing and a platform that opposes pretty much everything Clinton's candidacy stood for -- and that Barack Obama's still does. To vote in protest for McCain/Palin would be like saying, "Somebody stole my shoes, so I'll amputate my legs."

This is not to beat up on Palin. I defend her right to be wrong, even on issues that matter most to me. I regret that people say she can't do the job because she has children in need of care, especially if they wouldn't say the same about a father. I get no pleasure from imagining her in the spotlight on national and foreign policy issues about which she has zero background, with one month to learn to compete with Sen. Joe Biden's 37 years' experience.

 

Steinem is wrong on the childcare charge.

Wondering how she's going to take care of a stage full of kids isn't sexist. Caring for children in America is primarily women's responsibility and republicans have made sure of that. But here's the answer: Todd, Mr. Fisherman Dude, apparently is a stay at home dad.
Here's more:

So let's be clear: The culprit is John McCain. He may have chosen Palin out of change-envy, or a belief that women can't tell the difference between form and content, but the main motive was to please right-wing ideologues; the same ones who nixed anyone who is now or ever has been a supporter of reproductive freedom. If that were not the case, McCain could have chosen a woman who knows what a vice president does and who has thought about Iraq; someone like Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison or Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine. McCain could have taken a baby step away from right-wing patriarchs who determine his actions, right down to opposing the Violence Against Women Act.

Hillary Says Her Supporters Need Catharsis

They always NEED one more thing. Can we just have one more moment, they plead? We need closure, catharsis. 

What a bunch of bull and talk about setting back women. These diehard supporters have acted like this is a love affair as opposed to a political election. 

The only thing Hillary wants to prove is that she was this close to winning the election. She and her husband are trying to hold on to power. This is not about the country. I hope the Obama camp shuts them down or gives them a room to party in. Alone. That way they can feel all the catharsis they want. Of course, Obama won't do that. 

His camp will come up with some sort of compromise but don't think that this will lead to "catharsis" or the backing of Obama. 

These folks have made it clear, they're never voting for Obama. Most of Hillary's supporters already support Obama. Even Gloria Steinem has moved on. She moved on by June.  It's just a vocal minority who just can't let go. Hillary has only egged them on by talking out of both sides of her mouth. This isn't about sexism. 

Want a sampling of who these people are? Visit this link and click on some of the websites. You'll see plenty of anti-Obama sites. despicable ones. Hillary should've denounced these folks, not coddle them. I suppose it's a much needed ego stroke, though.

If Obama wins this election, it will be a truly remarkable feat, giving that he has to negotiate with the Clintons and placate the democrats, while battling McCain and the republicans. A two-front assault. 

Here's Obama's response to catharsis: 

AP Obama told reporters Thursday he thought the negotiations with Clinton aides had gone "seamlessly," but he also rejected the notion that there might be a need for emotional release on the part of some Democrats.
"I don't think we're looking for catharsis," said Obama. "I think what we're looking for is energy and excitement."

PUMAs still think they're "18 million voices." Here's the PUMA leader, who says he still sees a path to victory for Hillary.

Why Aren't Feminists Defending Michelle Obama

Good question. Maybe because she's black.

Maybe because the feminists already gave their hearts to Hillary and their hearts are so small, they have no more to give to Michelle.

Maybe because they consider Michelle too traditional --parenthood is her first priority. As far as I know, putting your children first is a good thing.

I think there are plenty of women defending Michelle. I being one. But where are the heavy hitters? Columnist Mary Curtis asks: Where the hell is Gloria Steinem? Why didn't she whip out her pen and write that referring to a woman as a "baby mama" is wrong. Oh, but that's a black issue. 

Gloria and her lot are a bunch of phonies if you ask me. They're brand of feminism is outdated. 

Real feminists respect and stick up for the rights of all people. The feminists ran a wicked campaign against Obama and like Mary, I'm tired of hearing their whining. We need a new feminism in this country. The old feminists have sold us out.

Wash Post: Michelle Obama is being demonized for things she allegedly said on tapes that are rumored to exist. She is a victim of sexism and racial stereotypes.

Just as the Rutgers women's basketball team was miscast by Don Imus, Obama is being labeled something she clearly is not. Her achievements are being dismissed.

But in America, there's seldom a cost for disrespecting black women.

I'm waiting for feminists who speak of second-class citizenship and being pushed to the back of the bus to remember the civil rights movement that gave birth to those words. After all, it was a black woman, Rosa Parks, who took her seat up front and pulled others there, too.

I'm not holding my breath, though.

As a journalist, I have stayed neutral about political candidates. But as an American, I would have been excited about the historic first had Hillary Clinton emerged victorious from the Democratic primary battle. Yet when an African American made a different kind of history, it seems that feminists can't share in the triumph.

They don't have to vote for the husband to defend the wife.

Okay, I get it: Your candidate lost. You're angry.

But frankly, I'm getting a little peeved myself.

Know Your Obama

Gloria Steinem Now Supports Obama

The original feminist was a vocal supporter of Hillary and said that misogyny damaged Hillary in the primary, but now, unlike some of Hillary's supporters, she backs Obama. Just like that.
I agree with Steinem that America is a better place with Nancy Pelosi as speaker, Hillary in the senate (or anywhere but veep). It would also be cool to have more blacks, Asians, Native Americans, Hispanics... in government.

boston herald:
The feminist icon whose writings inspired thousands of American women to a passionate support of Hillary Clinton said yesterday she was not at all crushed by Hillary’s loss and believes her race has “absolutely” been good for women. But she now not only supports Democratic nominee Barack Obama, she’ll volunteer for him, too.

“I think she changed forever our understanding of the possibilities of leadership,” Gloria Steinem said of Hillary in a Herald interview after a morning appearance here. “She showed such courage in the face of a media that was trying constantly to get her out of the race and all the misogyny . . . She put up with that with grace. She enlarged my vision.”

Steinem also said she’d be happy in an America where Nancy Pelosi remains speaker of the House, Hillary runs the Senate and Barack Obama is president.