« Paying respects to Kennedy | Main | DON'T POSTPONE SMOKING BAN! »

Tuesday, 20 May 2008

Hillary talks about how beastly media men have been to her

Here's an audio clip of Hillary Clinton talking to a Washington Post reporter about the misogynistic treatment she has supposedly received as a candidate, and how "surprised" she was by it.

Mind you, in Hillary's defense -- if I may be so chivalrous without giving offense -- the reporter is really pressing this line of discussion on her, urging her to talk about this treatment that has "really pissed off a lot of women." So it's not like she brought it up. They refer to a column over the weekend by the Post's Marie Cocco detailing men's sins against Hillary, which I gotta tell you I had to go read, because I was really wondering what these two ladies were going on about... Ms. Cocco wrote that when this is all over, she "won't miss" all this misogyny. After reading the list of sins (ranging from Andrew Sullivan down to some unnamed sleazeballs selling tasteless novelty items), I must confess that I did miss them, mostly (I think I did hear the one about "everyone's first wife," secondhand). But then I wasn't looking for them. And I don't watch TV "news."

But given the opportunity, she complains that sexism has been way more of a problem than racism. That lucky duck Obama, huh? You would apparently have known all about this, but we men in the media have been covering it up.

Anyway, if you don't want to follow the link, here's a transcript:

Q. One of the stories that has been well documented over and over again is basically how you've been treated by the media. Can you talk about that a little bit, because I get the idea that it's really pissed off a lot of women.
 
A. "I think it has. I think it's been deeply offensive to millions of women. ... I believe this campaign has been a ground breaker in lots of ways, but it certainly has been challenging given some of the attitudes that have been forthcoming in the press, and I regret that because I think it's been really not worthy of the seriousness of this campaign and the historical nature of the two candidacies that we have here. But I don't really stop to worry about it because there's nothing I can do about it."
 
Q. Are women going to be upset if you don't get the nomination?
 
A. I have more voters now than my opponent. I have more popular vote, more people voting for me.
 
Q. Counting Michigan and Florida?
 
A. According to ABC, and I think it's a fair way to total it up because my name was on the ballot they voted for me. But in any event, it's one of the closest races we've ever had and I think that a lot of people are deeply invested in their candidates, so there will probably be disappointment no matter which of us gets the nomination. And then it will be up to us to unify the party and make sure we are victorious in November against McCain.
 
Q. What's the scenario by which you could still win the nomination?
 
A. If people start asking themselves who's the strongest candidate against John McCain, because I believe I am.
 
Q. Do you think he can win?
 
A. Sure. I think he can win--I think I will win.
 
Q. But short of a scandal on his part do you see people coming to that conclusion?
 
A. I don't know, that's why we're not going to quit. We're going forward. We're going to give the people in the remaining elections the chance to vote, which I think is absolutely fair. And we're going to resolve Michigan and Florida, which has to be done sooner instead of later. And then we'll see where we stand.
 
Q. Do you think this has been a particularly racist campaign?
 
A. I do not. I think this has been a positive, civil campaign. I think that both gender and race have been obviously a part of it because of who we are and every poll I've seen show more people would be reluctant to vote for a woman to vote for an African American, which rarely gets reported on either. The manifestation of some of the sexism that has gone on in this campaign is somehow more respectable or at least more accepted. And I think there should be equal rejection of the sexism and the racism when and if it ever raises its ugly head. But it does seem as though the press at least is not as bothered by the incredible vitriol that has been engendered by comments and reactions of people who are nothing but misogynists.
 
Q. Isn't that how it's always been though.
 
A. Oppression of women and discrimination against women is universal. You can go to places in the world where there are no racial distinctions except everyone is joined together in their oppression of women. The treatment of women is the single biggest problem we have politically and socially in the world. If you look at the extremism and the fundamentalism, it is all about controlling women, at it's base. The idea that we would have a presidential campaign in which so much of what has occurred that has been very sexist would be just shrugged off I think is a very unfortunate commentary about the lack of seriousness that should be applied to any kind of discrimination or prejudice. I have spent my entire life trying to stand up for civil rights and women's rights and human rights and I abhor wherever it is discrimination is present.

Posted by Brad Warthen at 05:54 PM in 2008 Presidential, Democrats, Elections, Hillary Clinton, Media, Women
Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4ea353ef00e552629f2a8834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Hillary talks about how beastly media men have been to her:

» Side effects from lipitor. from Lipitor.
Lipitor. [Read More]

Tracked on Sep 21, 2009 1:56:40 PM

» Soma addiction and lying. from Soma without prescription.
Drug soma. Soma radio. [Read More]

Tracked on Sep 22, 2009 7:53:07 AM

Comments

Maybe they have, but I haven't heard much of it. I've heard her husband, and her, playing the 'race card'. But maybe I'm not aware of everything.

Posted by: Karen McLeod | May 20, 2008 8:25:15 PM

Fox is apparently the only fair channel according to FOX...

Posted by: free bet | May 20, 2008 8:59:20 PM

Like Frankenstein's monster, the media created Hillary, and now the media can destroy Hillary, now that they have created a new monster, Obama.

It's all about victimhood. Boohoo.

Posted by: Lee Muller | May 20, 2008 9:22:24 PM

Hillary has been the Queen of identity politics, when it has suited her purposes, and Obama has been the King, so it's hard for me to feel sorry for either one. We seemingly have reached the sorry place in american politics now at which gender and skin color are primary qualifiers for the highest public office. And the MSM has really made it so ~ Hillary and Obama have simply been shameless in using it to their advantage.

We're about to fool around in this country and elect a president based on melatonin or estrogen and we're gonna be eternally sorry for it. Not that McCain is any more attractive or qualified than these other two clowns, and certainly he's played the POW identity politics card a time or two himself.

I swear, I closely and faithfully watched it happen over the last eight months, and I still don't really understand how we got where we are right now. All three of these beauty queens are wrong for the country. I keep hoping for a ninth inning miracle, but there isn't going to be one. And I'm dreading it. David

Posted by: David | May 20, 2008 10:32:05 PM

POW identity politics?

Posted by: Brad Warthen | May 20, 2008 10:48:40 PM

David, as the spot light begins to shine on McCain we are seeing a great increase in criticism from different sources. Check out what Chuck Hagel,
Obama's Joe Lieberman, has to say about McCain.

Posted by: Randy E | May 21, 2008 12:36:30 AM

Hillary has been completely trashed by the media. Every positive she has is played like she is an accidental blip on obama's parade.

Check all the news media portrayals of her gains with obama annointed, always second to last.

Hillary kicked his butt and now he is wimp toast, madison avenue milque toast.

The obamaoid is not an American, no way jose. He has kenyan half brothers, indonesian sister, raised by whites, claims to be black, like oppressed by affirmative action quotas one drops negros, decides to be a chicago south side civil rights activist after his hawaai elite education.

And dumps his black theology marxist hbcu graduate race card. What tripe, a mullett.

Not an American by a long shot.

Posted by: Citizen | May 21, 2008 1:20:31 AM

I meant melanin...I think melatonin has to do with brain chemicals and sleep. Melanin is skin pigment. My excellent and piercing point stands however.

Brad, your point is a good one: McCain hasn't engaged directly in identity politics where his POW status is concerned, but he's routinely wrapped himself in the flag as a vet. And whenever anyone thinks about him as a vet, naturally McCain is remembered as a POW. So the effect is the same. David

Posted by: David | May 21, 2008 8:09:54 AM

He has kenyan half brothers, indonesian sister, raised by whites, claims to be black, like oppressed by affirmative action quotas one drops negros, decides to be a chicago south side civil rights activist after his hawaai elite education.
-Citizen

Let's re-package this just a bit:

He has Kenyan half brothers, Indonesian sister, raised by whites, without forgetting his black DNA, took advantage of the unique opportunity offered by affirmative action to secure a fantastic education, but did not forget his African-American heritage so he became a civil rights activist working tirelessly for the betterment of disadvanged Americans of color. But he was fortunate to have the opportunity to take advantage of the high quality American education system while living in Hawaii.

Sounds like a true American to me, one that I'm going to proud to vote for in November. Barack Obama serves as an inspiration to Americans of all races, creeds and cultures.

Posted by: bud | May 21, 2008 8:37:13 AM

You know, bud, you could teach a course in how to be an obvious Democrat partisan, if you're aware of how you do what you do.

Your Obama conversion points up the lemming-like nature of Democrat partisanship.

Hillary didn't change, but you abandoned her, and now your praise for Obama goes just as much over the top as your praise for her once did.

Any ship in a storm for a Democrat, I guess.


Posted by: penultimo mcfarland | May 21, 2008 9:59:19 AM

Citizen, let's evaluate your statements.

Hillary has been completely trashed by the media. Every positive she has is played like she is an accidental blip on obama's parade.

Who else could have lost 11 states in a row, fall millions into debt, encouraged race baiting supporters (primarily Lord William) and been allowed to continue the race? The media was highly deferential to her for a very long time. As she began to manipulate and distort truth, abuse the media (e.g. phone calls threatening reporters), and accuse the media of sexism the media took her to task and rightly so.

Hillary kicked her butt? Using which metric? The Clintons have offered several versions; Delegates? Supers? Popular vote? Contests won that are not caucuses nor in states contiguous to Illinois?

The obamaoid is not an American He was born in the United States. So American citizenship is a subjective quality to be determined by some capricious set of criteria determined by the likes of you? McCain was not born in the U.S. so can I use my own set of criteria to deem him a foreigner?

Posted by: Randy E | May 21, 2008 10:12:50 AM

I didn't abandon Hillary. She would make a fantastic Vice President or Supreme Court Justice. But Obama is going to win the nomination. And I'm willing to support him for president because he's a man of conviction, intelligence and energy. He will address the needs of Americans by focusing on what makes us great, not by using the fear tactics so ruthlessly employed by the GOP. The world will understand the compassion of the United States while respecting this great nation for it's strength and resiliance.

Hillary should be a part of that future but she will not be president. As a pragmatist I understand the world of reality. It's only in the tiny minds of the neo-con fear-mongers that could conclude that the praise of one candidate represents the abandonment of someone who has obviously lost. That type of thinking gets us nowhere. It's time to look forward to a great future led by a magnificent and gifted leader. And I make no appologies for saying so.

Posted by: bud | May 21, 2008 10:16:56 AM

Hillary and Obama are both totally unqualified for the offices they now hold, much less for President or VP.

They are charlatans, fakes.
But in the end, Democrats only care about riding back into power over the taxpayers, not the nag they ride.

That's why we have impeachment and the 2nd Amendment to protect ourselves from such scum.

Posted by: Lee Muller | May 21, 2008 10:38:01 AM

...sure hope the Secret Service doesn't monitor these blogs...

Posted by: Phillip | May 21, 2008 11:19:02 AM

Oil Prices Soar Above $132 As US Supplies Plunge

Weekly data from the U.S. government showed stocks of crude had fallen by 5.4 million barrels. Gasoline inventories slipped by 800,000 barrels and distillate stocks, which include heating oil and diesel, rose by 700,000 barrels, less than analyst expectations for a 1.3 million barrel increase.
-theoildrum.com

I know this isn't the right place to post this but it's of such extreme importance it needs mentioning. $132/barrel???!!! That is simply shocking. Why is our government doing so little?

Barack Obama mentioned the importance of conservation and the right-wing echo chamber just went nuts. Keven Cowen simply went ballistic on his radio show Tuesday over Obama's comments. He suggested that since he works his tail off he's entitled to keep his home at 72 degrees and burn as much gasoline as he wants. That is the attitude that is causing this astonishing rise in oil prices. We simply MUST conserve. Why is this so hard to understand?


Posted by: bud | May 21, 2008 11:58:40 AM

The Secret Service is sworn to protect the US Constitution, which includes the 2nd Amendment and impeachment.

You didn't see them move in to prevent the trial of President Clinton, and they won't intefere with the trial of Obama, which there will surely be if he is elected and tries to implement his socialist agenda.

Obama voted for the $307 Farm Bill last week, which was laden with pork for ethanol subsidies.

Obama and Clinton voted against Bush's legistlation rewarding conservation and funding research in solar, geothermal, and wind power.

Posted by: Lee Muller | May 21, 2008 12:10:04 PM

Anyone who believes this country can "conserve" its way out of our energy crisis is an idiot.

Plain and simple. It is inarguable. David

Posted by: David | May 21, 2008 1:03:39 PM

This "idiot" believes conservation is crucial to solving the energy problem. We need wind, solar and other alternatives plus an effort to move away from gasoline powered cars. Drilling is a very minor and perhaps even counterproductive part of the solution. Let's save our beautiful natural resources and get on with a cleaner, oil-free future.

Posted by: bud | May 21, 2008 1:09:01 PM

Lee, I'm only trying to help you out here, and you know darn well it wasn't the "impeachment" part of your comment to which I was referring. If you mention Obama and Hillary, then say, we need the right to arm ourselves "to protect ourselves from such scum," then depending on how you define "protect"...well you see how somebody could interpret this.

Posted by: Phillip | May 21, 2008 1:29:37 PM

You apparently don't understand that the 2nd Amendment is to allow "the people" the means of resisting the force of tyranny with force of "arms" that they "keep and bear". Defense of self and country is the law of the land.

That's why juries every year find citizens NOT GUILTY when they shoot rogue police in self defense.

That's why socialistic Democrats seek to disarm the people. No leader with honest intentions would fear the citizens.

Posted by: Lee Muller | May 21, 2008 1:52:32 PM

Democrats in Congress are demanding that OPEC increase production of oil in order to reduce prices.

Democrats in Congress are preventing US oil companies from increasing production, by putting ANWR and shale oil deposits off limits to drilling.

Democrats have blocked increased research into solar, wind and geothermal energy.

Hillary and Obama support ethanol subsidies which create artificially low fuel prices and discourage conservation.

Posted by: Lee Muller | May 21, 2008 1:55:44 PM

Maybe Brad doesn't find Hagee, McCain's pastor buddy, to be "interesting" but when Hagee says in a sermon
God sent Hitler, it is VERY "interesting".

I can't wait to see the Double Talk Express U-turn out of this one.

Posted by: Randy E | May 21, 2008 2:14:35 PM

I'm starting to have second thoughts about drilling in the ANWR. Generally my thought has been that it would be a good idea (to drill) that would add a bit of time to the crucial process of moving away from fossil fuel usage. Now, given the completely irrational tantrums the right keeps pitching about how conservation is somehow unpatriotic, it seems as though drilling will only spoil the environment without helping the energy situation. ANWR drilling will only bring in a few barrels of oil in about 10+ years. By then we will be well on our path to developing alternative energy sources. If we hold out the naive hope that drilling in the ANWR will save the day then many folks on the right will block development of alternative sources of energy. That would only postpone the day of reckoning.

Given the certainty that drilling will only create an environmental calamity it seems best that we just skip this and move quickly to alternatives.

Posted by: bud | May 21, 2008 2:21:12 PM

If conservation doesn't matter, why don't we get rid of the federal CAFE mileage standards, and those silly hybrid cars?

Posted by: Lee Muller | May 21, 2008 8:46:04 PM

bud, let's not let the Energy Party coalition fall apart at this point.

The only chance we have to become reasonably energy-independent is to do it all. Neither conservation alone nor drilling alone nor alternative fuels alone will get us where we need to be. And the only way to make it is to do it all, respecting nobody's ideological sacred cows. We've got to get pragmatic in this country for once in our lives, and act like we're serious.

Let me assure you that NEITHER ideological side will EVER get its way enough to solve the problem. The left will never get that much conservation; the right will never get that much production. We've got to pull everybody together on this, and the last thing in the world we need is for anybody who understands this to retreat into one ideological corner or the other.

Posted by: Brad Warthen | May 21, 2008 10:25:08 PM

Post a comment






 
About TheState.com | About the McClatchy Company | Terms of Use & Privacy Statement |Copyright