On Demand
18 Million Cracks
Monday, June 09, 2008
Slate's Dahlia Lithwick, Nation magazine columnist and Columbia law professor Patricia Williams and Katha Pollitt, Nation magazine columnist and author of Learning to Drive: And Other Life Stories (Random House, 2007 talk about Hillary Clinton's Saturday speech and her campaign's impact on women and the feminist movement.
- About the Brian Lehrer Show »
- Staff Bios »
- Contact Us »
- Tapes and Transcripts »
- Latest Episode »
- Show Archive »
Features & Series
Podcast
Stay up to date.
Subscribe to the Podcast
YOU PRODUCE The Brian Lehrer Show
Be a listener-producer with facts, questions and people you'd like to hear on the air.
More
The Brian Lehrer Show Scrapbook
Visit the scrapbook for daily photos and miscellany from The Brian Lehrer Show.
More
Shop at Amazon!
The Brian Lehrer Show picks
Start your Amazon shopping on WNYC.org and a portion of your total purchase goes to WNYC.
More
Comments
Refresh
WHAT- has being 'female'... got to do with being an effective presidential administrator?!
WHAT- has being a 'non-Caucasian'... got to do with being an effective presidential administrator?!
This is just MORE of the 'reasons' made up by the Democrat National Party to obscure the fact that BOTH of their potential nominees are just nonsensical pieces of 'fluff'!
What a shame. . .
I'm a 54 year old white woman who supported Obama.
However, if Hillary had been the nominee I would have whole heartedly supported her. Her campaign made me realize that we will have a woman president in my lifetime -- I just didn't believe she was the right woman.
Given that, I listened to her speech with my 16 year old son on Saturday with tears in my eyes.
I was so proud of her and so proud of our country.
I told my son he was living at a great time --
How far we have come!!
Jesse C
To answer your question: absolutely nothing.
I submit that there is mostly fluff on both sides of the aisle.
Can we blast a 51st woman into space? (just kidding, I think hillary is great when she is not being a politician at least)
Jesse and mc you must be young enough not to remember earlier times when power (incl respect) was kept from all but white males and usually you could add protestant to that - and of English or German ancestry. And I agree there are probably a good many hacks on both sides of the aisle but there are also sincere and qualified legislators. Do the hacks get there because we don't pay enough attention?
'Isn't that special...' to paraphrase the SNL's 'Church Lady'!
2½-minutes too long...
I think this is not about the feminism of Hillary Clinton but more about us. It is easy to be not racist/sexist when confronted by someone who is attractive, not so easy when the individual rubs us the wrong way. Our distaste is magnified by the person's gender/race and our discussions stray into that nasty territory.
Just as Obama did not want to be the "Black" candidate, Hillary did not want to be the "woman" candidate. They needed to establish themselves as candidates to be President, without any ethnic or gender identity.
Now that it is over, it makes sense for her to play this up; just as it made sense to play it down during the campaign.
#1
Wow..you really missed the point, didn't you?
Hillary couldn't have spoken so directly about equality for women during her campaign because, sadly, it would have alienated too many people and caused controversy. I believe she had to wait until her final speech to make a statement like this.
I’m a huge Obama supporter and understand a lot of people think he should not choose Hillary for VP. He is “new politics,” Hillary is "old politics". She also went negative on him during the campaign which cost a lot of money and setbacks.
My position on this is different I think picking someone with differing views (reaching out) on things is actually NEW politics. I think it's moving foward.
chestinee #5 Yes they get there because we don't pay enough attention.
I agree with Jesse...the DNC and sadly many Democrats feel that identity politics trump experience and competence.
One of the charges I have heard is that she was not the "right" woman to be the first. What does that mean?
Women have to be the "right" women.
Blacks have the same dilemma. Wright was not toeing the party line and thus was the "wrong" black man.
I suppose most people think Condeleezza is the "wrong" woman.
I do not think this is why she lost. He won fair and square.
This is the first I’ve heard Senator Clinton’s speech, and, at best, I find it repugnant.
The “18million cracks” comment implies that anyone who was not one of the 18 million was voting against a woman, not voting against the widely disliked former first lady of a president the right dislikes who is now the Senator of the third most populous state.
I think Senator Clinton (whom I deliberately call Senator Clinton, and not Hillary (the woman) as all of her campaign literature says) misses the point that a large number of people who could potentially support her (Democrats) chose someone else. I’ve heard very little opposition to her as a woman amongst middle class Democratic Americans. The Senator, her surrogates, and her advocates are the ones that made her race one based on gender.
Making Senator Obama’s win out to be a win for misogamy is deplorable.
Viable woman is the wrong term. Shirley Chisolm was viable, even Carol Moseley Braun was viable. It is that the country is now changed enough that the question of whether a woman can be viable candidate is now embarrassingly trite.
a.I am and was a Hillary Clinton Supporter. People just didn't like her for what-ever reason. But it is time to move on to support Barack Obama. It is now time for the sports community to discuss the winner of the horse race, not the Brown Beauty. The same in tennis, the discussion is about the man who didn't win!
b.People, including many woman, have bashed Hillary for so long it is boring now. She is a wonderful smart person who cares more about the world than she does about fashion (ETC), yet even feminists have bashed Hillary...
thanks, Jane
Once again, Hillary was pandering to the audience. Notice that her "hick-speak" from two weeks ago was gone?
Correction:
Randi Rhodes did not get fired from Air America for calling Hillary a whore. She left because of contract negotiations.
Hillary certainly didn't lose big here, she moved mountains. Obama however moved a continent.
For all her shortcomings as a presidential candidate, her feminist credentials were undermined by the unalterable fact that her professional and political careers were the result of her marriage to Bill Clinton.
If Mr. O-Ba-Ma selects 'Billary' for his running mate- he had better hire a food-taster- maybe two!
And if that happens- 'Billary' should NEVER go into a ladies restroom when Ms. O-Ba-Ma is there!
At last 'Catty-ness' comes to American Politics!!
I am sure that Hillary's run will have a large impact on future politics.
I agree "unbelievably childish fratboy sexist media"
I am still not sure about Obama, do feel HRC is the more qualified.
Arianna Huffington has a fortune she inherited from a man and id not a big supporter of women.
Don't you think teh media had to do with polarization of women vs blacks
Defining the accomplishments of the campaign for women is great. However, Hilary was verging on promoting a "cult of personality" in which she put herself too front-and-center probably in the service of personal political power heading toward the convention.
Shirley Chisholm also said repeatedly that she faced more obstacles because she was a woman than because she was black.
Would Don Imus hve been fired if he had just said "ho's" and not "nappy headed?"
What?? The media WAS/IS sloppy!!!!!!! Hillary lost this election in February and the media fueled by Clinton tenacity kept this thing running for way too long.
If this were the CBC the FACTS would have cleared this up the day she really lost. Nothing angers me more than the media defending itself for shameful "news."
Leigh in Brooklyn states: "Hillary couldn't have spoken so directly about equality for women during her campaign because, sadly, it would have alienated too many people and caused controversy. I believe she had to wait until her final speech to make a statement like this."
Hopefully, she did not speak directly about this during her campaign because it wasn't the reason she was running, which is the impression she would have made if she spoke about it.
I was more than a little surprised to hear one of your guests lament the fact that Clinton chose to run an oppositional campaign against Obama. As a non-American who has lived here for 7 years, one of the most mysterious things (and there are many!) about this country is its political process; specifically, the way that same-party candidates are forced to bash each other prior to the nomination, only to miraculously pledge their full support in order to fight the candidate from the other party. How could she NOT be oppositional? And how does this system leave people with any confidence at all as to what the candidates REALLY believe and value??
I supported Obama through this primary, but at the same time, I think she's done a great thing for women. I think she's enabled a woman President in another election cycle or two (depending on who wins this election in November).
While I would agree that there has definitely been childishness and anti-woman comments made in the media, I would not say it "DOMINATED" the media to quote one guest. Was it far too frequent? Absolutely. But I wouldn't say that it dominated the coverage.
I do think all candidates need to spend more time addressing women's issues. The majority of the world's poor are women. Women are treated deplorably around the world, and women are treated unfairly even in those countries where they have legal equal rights.
I think Barack, in order to partly bridge the gap with Clinton's supporters, needs to take on some of these issues.
In her book "Feminism is for Everybody," Bell Hooks wrote, "Simply put, feminism is a movement to end sexism, sexist exploitation and oppression."
This is the definition that we should all keep in mind when discussing feminism.
I would say the problem Hillary had with the feminist issue was the conflation of how people acted towards or treated this one woman, with ALL women. As a die hard feminist I was angered to be told that not liking this one woman made me a sexist.
I am a 59 year old white woman. I have been a Hillary supporter since her first days on the national scene. I respected and was excited by her smart, outspokeness. She always lived her life as a PERSON who could accomplish whatever she wanted. I think in the 21st century "feminism" is a very 60's concept and we should be pushing ahead based on ability not sex or color. Hopefully now we can move into that phase of history.
It was disappointing that Hillary ran such a disappointing campaign. That more than anything raises my concerns about her.
I don't believe that your producers did not ask the first question Brian asked and therefore selected three Obama supporters to discuss Hillary Clinton. Is that balanced?
Thank you, Sandy
Jesse, there are no hyphens in his name. What buttons are you trying to push spelling it that way and why?
#26
I have to say I agree, she essentially lost in february. The media fueled this bs "battle"
Why has no one commented on the arrogant, hubristic display of Hilary's "The Exit Spectacular"? This over-wrought, media-honed event should be an embarrassment to any feminist as she left hundreds to stand in exhaustive heat for 40 minutes while the diva took her time to show up. Even the Queen of England arrives on time.
Cynthia Mckinney was not "profiled". She walked past the metal detector without wearing her indentifying lapel pin. When she was confronted by the security officer, she struck him in the chest.
to mc- I can't believe you don't understand what it means that she wasn't the right woman. To many women wanted her just because she is a woman and the fact is she hasn't demonstrated a whold lot of character. Personally I find it insulting how embarassing the way she played roles and pandered. Like when she was belting brewskis with the boys in Pa or when she was running as senator in New York and suddenly was wearing a Yankees cap. I had no problem with her being a carpet bagger I just felt she was insulting my intelligence with her transparent attempts to be all things to all people in her craven pursuit of power. ANd then there was the blatant distortion of her landing in Bosnia. So that's why she is the wrong woman. And yes I do think that Condolezza Rice would also be the wrong woman. remeber she was asleep at the wheel when it was suggested tht the WTC might be a target for terrorists. I find it discomforting that women ignore the character flaws just to achieve the aim of having a woman make it to the White House.
The speaker misspoke to the point of distortion. Cynthia McKinney wasnot 'profiled' during her 'kurfuffle'. She failed to wear the badge identifying her as a member of congress when she attempted to walk past security without in any way identifying herself. These are the kinds of distortions that only provide talking points for the oppostion.
Too bad for women who are invested in this that the first viable female candidate was Hillary. Her own blinmding, personal ambition trumped everything. And don't reply by saying that this would not trump a man. It would. The public has little use for politicians on the national stage who are only "in it" for themselves.
There is too much of Lady Macbeth in Lady Clinton and people see that.
Obama doesn't speak of himself as the "black candidate" because he wants to be elected for much broader reasons.
In the end, Hillary disclosed her own sense of entitlement.
The desire to create a story and "construct" an image of hero, underdog or foil in an era where tabloid journalism has been mainstreamed is a reason that I've shunned most domestic political coverage of this election. As an African American woman, I have recoiled upon the divisiveness that has unfurled primarily through media spin within the last six months of this campaign.
Call me optimistic to hope that an intelligent and civil debate of issues that does not debase and continue to create hostility emerges through a clearly self-interested American media.
OK- so what 'FIRSTs' are left (no disrespect to 'the left'-)
Let's see:
The First Gay President-
(So then do we get the 'Second Man' or the Second Woman')
And then, how about the First Trans-sexual President-
And then- how about the First Bi-sexual President-
and how about the First Midget. . . er- I mean 'Little Person' President-
And let's not leave out the First Autistic and Downs Syndrome' President. . .
Oh Yes- 'FIRSTs' definitely have their place in American Politics. . .
Well- so much for the important significance of 'FIRSTs' !!
None of this conversation changes the fact that Obama is a novice!
The case can be made that Obama's win is more of a breakthrough than Clinton's would have been.
Many countries, developed and not, have had women leaders by now, the UK, Germany, Indonesia, Pakistan, Israel, some Latin American ... many countries.
But no other "First World" developed rich country has yet had anything like the son of an African immigrant or any person of non-European minority ethnicity elected to President or Prime Minister.
Obama's win is groundbreaking in a way that is unique.
Sandy would you have preferred to deny all the following primary states' voters their chane to say something? And you're right, teh CBC would have presented facts - and the facts are that she brought in voters the Dems cannot afford to sniff at!
Poulo #29,
I agree completely. I really do not think that she lost because of this. I do think that the Democratic Party has lost something because they and their supporters in the media spoke out when racisim came into the campaign but they just stood by or shrugged when sexism came out. Additionally the calls for her to drop out which came as early as Feb. really hit a lot of people the wrong way. They were very tone deaf on that. I don't think that Obama has the main responsibility here, I think the Dem Party does. I do not feel very good about the party anymore. He needs to address it in order to bring marginalized feeling women on board; this does NOT mean he has to have Hillary anywhere in his administration. But I am listening for him to reach out in that way, and I will support him in the fall. Meanwhile the Dems have really blown this one.
What has gone largely overlooked in this discussion here and in the media at large is the spouse issue. Listing or implying that "being the wife of..." is a qualification is the complete opposite of feminism! Can you imagine President Laura Bush? Vice President Nancy Reagan?
Except for ducking occasional sniper fire in Bosnia, the responsibilities of a first lady are minimal. She had no security clearance. Her major policy issue was health care. The failure of that viable plan was largely due to the hubris and arrogance that later doomed her presidential campaign.
Otherwise what she brought to the primary starting line was HER HUSBAND'S fund raising network and HER HUSBAND'S name recognition.
I don't think that a feminist candidate need make women's issues(choice, work place discrimination, etc.) a primary part of her platform. And had Hillary not run such a poor campaign and actually won, we wouldn't see her play the feminism card even now.
Thanks for addressing this issue. I think your guest who was speaking about the intersection of racism and sexism is so important. It has been something that has been so divisive in the history of feminism since it has become a movement in the US. Women who have in the 1970s and advocated for this position have turned around and made it about who is the worst victim (ie Robin Morgan). how does this help anyone? or get us anywhere? as a younger feminist i think this attitude has always been very damaging to the movement, and has certainly made it difficult for some to identify as feminist.
Mike, I don't know the answer to this but it becomes profiling IF the security routinely let others go by without a hassle.
Please the first American female to be president is Janet Jagan in Guyana South America.
Why does Obama say so little to or about women? he speaks about his daughters, but that is about it.
This conversation is crazy! Now we're blaming Hillary for not representive anything related to women. The first thing she had to do was prove that she could be "commander in chief" not everyone's Mommy. Her failing seems to be that she crafted her campaign to run against white men -- and wasn't able to re shape her message and tactics when an equally ground-breaking candidate became her main opponent. With a better organization -- that must be said. But if she'd focused on her representing women -- the media would have chewed her out for that as well.
An insightful observation by the guest, I thought, about Michelle Obama re. the deluge of petty and undue criticism about her. Where, I ask, is the feminist outcry about that, the way Michelle O. is being treated by pundits and the press? Ain't she a woman?
MichaelB on the UWS opines: "Too bad for women who are invested in this that the first viable female candidate was Hillary. Her own blinmding, personal ambition trumped everything. And don't reply by saying that this would not trump a man. It would. The public has little use for politicians on the national stage who are only "in it" for themselves."
Exactly what was Hillary getting out of this? Certainly not the monetary gains Republicans sought which embroiled so many of them in scandal. If you attribute an interanl desire to be in charge to her, on what basis? She could have a more financially reqarding career elsewhere. You might not agree with her politics, but to simply say that she's 'power hungry' is only to avoid aguing against her points of view and perhaps to project your own motives on to her.
AB, do you just come into these forums to criticize others?
Great segment: thoughtful and interesting. It's wonderful to hear Patricia Williams--I'm a huge fan--and I'm grateful to hear her articulate the missed opportunity of linking HRC's first wave feminism with broader feminist issues faced by women across race and class.
Perhaps Obama will pick this up? I hope that we and others pressure him there.
Thank you.
It's easier in our society to dismiss a feminist than a mixed-gender minority.
Feminism has been around a long time and too many people think that the conversation is over or that it is getting "old". We hear from both genders phrases like "THAT feminist" in dismissing a woman who wants equal rights.
But don't try to dis- a civil rights advocate. The memory of radical racism is still quite fresh in our minds, and racism is still alive today — whether the object be black, gay, latino, oriental, or whatever.
To 2nd the last comments - yes, let's start talking about this again -- for weeks and months.
I applaud Hillary's campaign and I was truly impressed with her concession speech on Saturday. However, I continue to be shocked and amazed at the notion that some of her supporters will actually vote for McCain in November. It staggers the mind on issue after issue to think that in a fit of umbrage women, supposedly progressive women would vote for a candidate who is quietly in the process of selling out to the religious right on a whole range of issues - supreme courts appointments to name just one. Should such women be responsible for McCain capturing the White House, they should truly hang their hangs in eternal shame.
mc #46: I also agree. People definitely took the calls for her to get out in the wrong way. It was framed as the Boys' Club trying to push out the woman, but I think it would've been just as true if Obama had been lagging behind in delegates and she'd been ahead. I mean, considering that two months earlier Hillary's nomination was considered inevitable and was even described as a "coronation" it should seem fairly clear that she was not always the underdog.
If McCain had faced a longer nominating process (for whatever reason) then perhaps the calls for the Democratic race to end probably wouldn't have been so strong.
And I do think you're right that the Dems didn't call out the media on their sexism when it happened. Both sides should've done it in the same way that both sides should've called out the instances of racism. I think that in such a race, both candidates have a vested interest in defending the other from unfair, bigoted attacks. Neither of them really did this to my satisfaction.
You're a feminist. I'm a masculinist. Pish posh. The same fate is waiting for all of us.
WE WILL NEVER BE EQUAL WITH MEN UNTIL WE KNOW HOW TO BE EQUAL AMONG OURSELVES!!! sEE THE INNEQUALITY BETWEEN MARRIED AND UNMARRIED WOMEN, YOUNG AND ONL, WITH CHILDREN ANS WITHOUT CHILDREN.... UNTIL WE LEARN HOW TO BE EQUAL AMONG OURSELVES... NO EQUALITY OF QUALITY WOULD BE IN EFFECT.
Listening to these "experts" is very frustrating b/c they are contradictory. In one breath they are saying that Hillary didn't bring up the feminist point but then they criticize her for being too "old school" feminist. Then they go on to say "life is really complicated." When was life not complicated? Jesus. Give me a break.
The way I see it, is simply this. How many female leaders can you name versus how many black leaders? I think people (especially our generation) can relate to Obama b/c he is like a brand, an icon, a memory of what they grew up on to become the progressives they are (Malcolm X, Che, MLK, etc.). I can't think of any major feminist or women leaders (mostly secondary--Angela Davis, Haydee Santamaria?) that were pivotal to my political awakening.
I believe in short, it is "cooler" to vote for a man who happens to bring us hope for a "new" beginning than an older white woman. People are not that sophisticated here. Sad.
I don't think we should support a candidate simply based on gender or race, but I do think we need to stand up. The argument that young women don't experience sexism is wrong. Yeah, I can get a job in a law firm as a young woman, but that doesn't make "iron my shirt" any less offensive to me. I think there needed to be more outrage in the media about that comment and others. I think we can still be outraged by some of Hillary's treatment and support women without necessarily voting for one.
think of the funny, beautiful and talented Nelly Mckay's lyrics:
"feminists don't have a sense of humor..."
#42
"well so much fir the important significance of FIRST's"
So much for...? You think you present such a convincing cogent argument that your statement deserves that statement. It comes off as juvenile...at best.
So much for firsts? Well there are a whole lot of women and african-americans and quite frankly others who don't fit those two groups for whom those firsts mean something..so so much for your "so much for"
and by the way, it isn't an either or situation. The idea that if it means something to someone that say Hillary or Obama could have been the first woman or african-american president doesn't somehow automatically mean that they are only voting for them on that basis. What an idiotic thought. Both can be true. The suggestion otherwise is just right-wing mainstream media bs.
A novice, maybe, but so-far-so-good, right? He ran an historic campaign ... historic not least for its beating Clinton's historic (but for different reasons) campaign. Where did experience get her? (I see, it's the media's fault.) Where has experience gotten the country? Voters are siding with change, vision, honesty, and intelligence, and the real task, which is necessary no matter who's in office, is to assemble an administration that sees the executive's ideas through. That's the process that counts. You assemble experience around you. I haven't seen anything to suggest he's bound to be less successful at that than Clinton would have been. Indeed, if their respective campaigns forecast the kind of politics they'd play in office I say enough of "experience."
I’m a 39-year old feminist, and I was struck by my complete lack of emotion as I watched Clinton’s speech on Saturday. Her class and race privilege seemed to be her guide--her womanhood an afterthought only brought forth after others had defined her in ways that women rightly saw as offensive and unacceptable.
I think Hillary lost for one simple reason: Senator Obama is an incredible charismatic person.
That she came so close to him is a testament to her hard work and probably (very sadly) racism.
(Check our Bob Kerry's letter to the NY Times in the editorial section addressing this.)
kevin #38,
You are missing my point. I have not problem with the idea that she was the wrong candidate. A case can be made against either of them. Also Condi. What I am saying is that when someone is predisposed not to prefer a candidate or any public figure, that the rhetoric often goes into the racist/misogynist territory. I am not accusing you of this; I am not accusing Obama supporters in general of this. I just think it bears examination.
#55
No, only those who make idiotic comments.
Do you?
“Let Bartlet be Bartlet”
Clinton’s speech reminded of this turning point in “The West Wing.” Not only was her speech clear about equal rights and privileges for women, but she said the words “gay rights” and “union organizing --- twice each!!!
Could Hillary have won if she became overtly feminist earlier?
This must be the worst political analysis I have ever heard. One of the core bases of her support were white, blue-collar working men and women. They were in Appalachia and mid-west Scranton. Do you really think these blocs would have voted so heavily for Clinton if she had done more of the “I am no Tammie Wynette baking cookies routine,” that she did in the beginning of the 1992 campaign. It is precisely because she toned down the feminist rhetoric that helped her reach the 17 million votes mark. Let’s not forget Obama lost the white working-class is because of obvious racism
I am only 36, and a progressive-- and I support(ed) Hillary. I am actually very disappointed in the women of my generation for not being more fired up as feminists. The glass ceilings at the top of the business and political remain, and I'm saddened that younger women seem to think that we've come far enough.
I also don't see why it's considered fair game in public and the media (blogs etc), to be so very hateful toward her. We would never tolerate this kind of speach against a black man, for example. Women just chuckle and take the lumps.
Gee, maybe Obama is just more charismatic than Hillary. These attempts to reason it out much further sound very weak.
As to the generation gap - I'm a 56-year-old woman. I don't have the time left to see a women in the White House, that a 23 - 30-yr-old does. Many of us felt this was a kind of "last chance" in our political lives to see our dreams realized. I attended the NOW conference at which Geraldine Ferraro spoke as the first woman VP candidate and remember the intense (and unrealistic) sense of hope and power that shook that room. I despair of ever feeling that optimistic again.
It is tragic that so many people in the media diverted the attention of the public from relevant issues to divisive sound bites.
If the emphasis had been more on selecting the best candidates than on character assassinations, then perhaps there might been more constructive responses to contemporary challenges.
The "President's Initiative On Race"
when on June 14, 1997, President Clinton announced "One America in the 21st Century" with details at
http://clinton5.nara.gov/Initiatives/OneAmerica/america_onrace.html
is an overlooked example.
NPR should be saluted for media responsibility.
Thank you.
I think it is outrageous that you put on three women Obama supporters to "discuss" Hillary's historic campaign. The last comment from one of the Obama supporters that women who support Hillary are not of the "progressive" wing of the party is ridiculous. I consider myself a liberal Democrat and I support Hillary and other progressive women for public office. Wait until these so-called young women come up against the discrimination they will face when their sexual appeal is not as evident. Shame on you, Brian, for using Obama surrogates to dissect Hillary and her supporters. What makes you different from the rest of the male media?
One reason HC lost the youth vote: Chelsea Clinton works for a hedge fund. She's not doing community work or non-profit work. She's not a progressive. Their family now reeks of money making.
I think it's kind of insulting for the guest to say that our generation buys into obama because of the marketing. I know of Obama's stance on many issues and support him in them. I really take offense to that comment.
I'm a little offended by the talk of the "branding" of Obama and the younger generation reacting to his "product." I think that he appeals to us because we came of age during the reign of W, and he seems to represent transparency, honesty, and hope where we're used to secrecy, lies, and despair.
Bravo Max. We always have to teach them.
Paulo states: "People definitely took the calls for her to get out in the wrong way. It was framed as the Boys' Club trying to push out the woman, but I think it would've been just as true if Obama had been lagging behind in delegates and she'd been ahead. I mean, considering that two months earlier Hillary's nomination was considered inevitable and was even described as a "coronation" it should seem fairly clear that she was not always the underdog."
Paulo: At the time that the nomination was described as Hillary's coronation, would anyone who disagreed with calls for Obama to drop out have been "taking it the wrong way?" Even at this point, Obama only has enough delegates to win when counting super delegates any of whom can change their minds at any time before the convention in Denver is over. Arguably, Clinton has still not lost.
What a depressing thought that this just came down to stuff and merchandising.
I can't get over how even Hilary supporters can't help but criticize her.
She has made history.
She has raised the bar for women. Period.
She ran an incredible campaign and she deserves praise, not amiable criticism, from all of us so-called non-sexist supporters.
Calvin Tomkins
Bronx, NY
Can Patricia Williams and your other guests unpack the Obama girl video? What do they think of that?
WHEN- Oh WHEN--> is American going to elect the FIRST non-caucasian, female Lacrosse Player!?
So what does the American Right Wing have against LACROSSE- huh?!
Why is there all this talk about what Obama, or any of the other candidates represent? I think it's more important to figure out what the candidates will actually take a concrete position on, rather than what they "represent" to people. Candidate image and marketing all all about fluff. Make them take real positions instead of feeding us spin.
Rachel agrees with Nick in Austin, who states: "I think it's kind of insulting for the guest to say that our generation buys into obama because of the marketing. I know of Obama's stance on many issues and support him in them. I really take offense to that comment."
Bravo to you Nick, but other than some vague 'we have to move beyond racism' mantra, many (most?) young people could not detail Obama's positions on any issues. This is not entirely their fault; on many issues he has still not taken any concrete position and many of the positions he has have only been taken fairly recently, meaning before most of the votes for him were cast.
Poulo,
It is interesting to try to imagine how it would have been if the race had turned out the other way. Would there have been the same calls to drop out or would they not have dared? Would the media have gotten away with more racism than they did when he looked like a winner? It all seems unknowable. I was dismayed by the pile on of Wright as though he should have been a part of the campaign. Sure, he is irritating and unpleasant but I think the pious Anderson Cooper types are fooling themselves when they congratulate themselves for the way they treat Obama while being very careless about their language vis a vis someone like Wright.
I will be watching very carefully how Michelle O is treated. I have seen and heard some really bad things already.
Mike #82: That language was being used before the primaries have even started, so yes, I'm going to go ahead and say that people should've been insulted by calls of everyone but Hillary dropping out in December.
That said, while I WANTED her to drop out in February or March, I'm not saying she absolutely should've. Nor am I saying that her supporters should've just accepted that.
What I AM saying is that framing it as a sexist issue is disengenuous I think. If the numbers were completely reversed, people would've been telling Obama that it was over and he should drop out. And accusing those people of racism would've been just as unfair. It's just that simple. It wasn't because she was a woman. It was because people were anxious about the idea of the Republicans getting four to five additional months to make McCain look Presidential while the Dems battled to death.
Was that fear justified? Well, I think Obama and Clinton have gotten a lot more press than McCain, which is good. But it gives them less time to tack to the right ahead of the general election.
As usual i agree with Patricia Williams about almost everything i've heard her say.
that said, i don't necessarily fault clinton for not being the "feminist" candidate anymore than i fault obama for not being the "black" candidate. as a early edwards supporter, who moved to obama after iowa (like lots of other black people), i fault clinton and credit obama for being the "change" candidate. he embodies change even beyond his rhetoric and she refused to do so, even though her body could have signaled change as easily as his (pantsuits notwithstanding). she clung to the establishment: the DLC, the clinton machine, her husband. could she have disavowed all that? probably not, but obama never completely disavowed it either. what he didn't do was "wed" himself to it.
I think if we get over our disappointment and emotional investment in our respective candidates, we'll come to a realization. Barack Obama beat Hillary Clinton by running a better campaign. Hillary Clinton had a huge network inherited from her husband's time as president. She had a huge fund raising advantage. She had more money and a bigger mailing list to begin. She had a 22 point lead in the polls...
Then Barack Obama built an organization from the bottom up. He raised more money. He had more people on the ground. He dug himself out of a tremendous deficit with a targeted strategic plan and that's why he won. The complaints that "Hillary came close even though Obama had more money" are absurd. It's as if the implication was that Hillary was feeding the homeless with her money and Barack was doing frivolous things with his like running political ads. One thing that every single person ELECTED to the presidency(the Bush nomination by the SC aside) has in common is that they won their party's primary. The way that Obama won this primary speaks eloquently for his chances in the general election and also lend valuable insights into how he will govern.
To add to #88, I am an Obama supporter, only because of his vague promise to talk to our 'enemies' whereas Clinton seems to blindly support whatever actions the current Israeli government decides to take. (These actions may not even be in Israel's best long-term interests, just the result of fear-driven politics in Israel.) Isn't it a shame how we don't really know what we're getting before we vote?
See #67, confirms my point. Not emotional enough. Others say too emotional. There is no way for her to win because the definition of a "right" woman is so narrow.
Mike: I totally agree, not to get into politics beyond Hillary and Obama - he hasn't taken many concrete stances but as with all candidates - flexible promises are key once you get in the white house (eg "no new taxes") ... but even Obama promised no new taxes for middle class (HA!) So you take what you can get I guess!
mc
i think BHO got the 'internet thing.' his campaign was the first 21st campaign
that won. dean tried it but BHO was the first to get the nomination. we'll see what happens in November
Wow! What a pile on. I didn't expect to hear yet another round of Hillary bashing from the BL Show. Maybe you could "accidently" put together a panel of Clinton supporters to talk about her exit speech.
This was the first time I have heard the generally unquestioned assumption that the category "women" belonged to Clinton analyzed and unpacked.
As an older white working woman, an activist, reader of Nation, and listener to this show (often at 1am), I found among the women in my family, friends, aquaintances and colleagues about a 7 - 3 preference for Obama. Perhaps this says more about the circles I move in than any objective measure, but I found the comments of Patricia Williams and Katha Politt refreshinglly speaking for the missing elements in the reporting (both from sides of the divide).
Thank you for a fair and revelatory segment.
Paulo [#90]: Thank you for taking the time to more fully articulate your position.
Leave a Comment
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
1 | 2 | Next | Back to EpisodeEmail addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. Names are displayed with all comments. WNYC reserves the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the WNYC.org Comment Guidelines before posting.