SuziRiot, http://suziriot.blogspot.com/ , newest member of Jonestown Superteam, http://fairlane.wordpress.com/ paid me one hell of a compliment. She essentially said that the directness of my blog was part of what kept her blogging when she was having misgivings. In her honor, I am going to keep on in that style but I have to warn the faint of heart ahead of time that this post and its links are not going to win me any friends. I believe by the end of this post I will be thought of as an asshole, a braggart, a racist, a Karl Rove apologist and I can't even imagine what else, but do anything differently and to worry about it would dishonor SuziRiot and her touching remarks.
Much has been made of the Democratic result of the New Hampshire Primary. I am very heartened that the polls and talking heads were all proved wrong and I am very happy that there was a feminist element to all of this, but everything has to be said in advance of South Carolina because things are going to go apeshit there as they always do.
I'll start out softly. You all know by now that I detest Barack Obama and have detested him since his speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, which branded him a "rock star." I would hardly call him that. Mick Jagger is a rock star. Barack Obama is a very lucky junior U.S. senator. I was suspicious from the start but kept an open mind until he proved my first suspicions right -- his choosing Joe Lieberman as his mentor in a direct offense to Dick Durbin, his ducking of the Terry Schiavo vote, etc., etc. I could go on. And have.
Who knows exactly why he chose Lieberman over Durbin? Because "bi-partisanship" was his thing? Because he wanted to maintain his White bona fides, didn't want to be seen as the new Carole Moseley-Braun and was aware that Durbin, though White, was the "Black" Illinois politician of choice? Perhaps, it had something to do with his stinging loss to Bobby Rush and resentment at how he had been treated by "his people" in the race for the House from a Chicago district, after all of Obama's efforts at "community organizing." I doubt this part of Obama's biography very much and even if it were true, there's no way in hell he's 1/100 the "community organizer" Rush is. But before anyone start slinging the word "racist" around here, please remember that it wasn't Kelso who was an African-American Democrat elected to the Senate who refused to join the CBC. I am very fine with the CBC. I agree with CBC on nearly every issue and appreciated their support on my main personal issue, the UIGEA.
I know about the Terry Schiavo thing. It's his whole Fundamentalist Christian thing and probably ties into all the racial stuff above. He wanted to be loved by White people and kind of misread the zeitgeist on Schiavo. Maybe Lieberman advisedf him to duck it. Maybe Obama truly did like President Bush as much as he claimed to in The Audacity Of Hope or his recently-scrubbed website. Whatever. It all added up to a politician whose ideology I could not and cannot abide. Race be damned. But it never and always is in the USA.
Let's return to the CBC for a second. Regular readers will know that one of the young Black congresspeople with trajectory whom I've always liked is Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr., from Chicago. I've always appreciated his erudition, strength and progressive politics. I always felt like he had been jobbed out of Obama's seat by the Daley machine who wanted a more conservative guy in there. I don't mind at all that he's a rich kid. So were all of the Kennedys. I don't mind that he doesn't "inspire." Here is where I part company with most of my fellow Democrats. I don't expect or need any Black Democrat to be Martin Luther King, Jr. Or to "inspire." I expect of him or her the same things I expect of every Democrat. To show up and be progressive. It's not like I'm expecting Russ Feingold to be Simon Wiesenthal. Feingold's a good Senator. So is Wyden. So is Boxer. That isn't the point. The point is that Jesse Jackson, Jr., as National Co-Chair of Obama's campaign in the wake of the New Hampshire loss, said some things that were offensive, sexist and downright silly. You may find the video and lots of Kelso ranting on BAC's site http://yikes101.blogspot.com/
Watch the video for yourself, but as a preview I'll tell you that it's quite something. Jackson blames Obama's loss on Clinton's "tears" but wonders why she didn't "cry" about Hurricane Katrina. Rich, no? Obama via Jackson is being a crybaby while blaming his loss inaccurately on Senator Clinton's "tears," meanwhile Obama shed no tears over Hurricane Katrina, heavens no, that might have offended his White base. And he certainly shed no tears over the Jena, Louisiana mess. Here's where it gets really intresting. I wish I knew the chronology of all of it. Jesse Jackson, Senior, takes Obama to task accurately for not caring about the South's de facto Jim Crow in general and the Jena 6 in particular, suggesting that the reason for the Black community's preference for Clinton over Obama had to do with their belief that she not he had their backs. [I always felt that way about Obama's treatment of the Democratic gay electorate, as well.] Enter Jesse Jackson, Jr., as a top official in Obama's campaign taking Clinton to task for class and race insensitivity! I'd love to know what the deal was.
Here's someone who understood New Hampshire very well. Karl Rove. This WSJ op-ed is very on point and I don't give a shit if Rove wrote it. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119992615845679531.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries
What I knew about the internal polling is all over my blog and in the comments on BAC's site.
I am happy that women are feeling some pride in Hillary Clinton and I like Clinton, too, but for very different reasons. I don't find her particularly inspiring. I find her very professional, experienced, strong, and competant. I even disagree with her on a lot of issues and am far to her left. I'm REALLY far to Obama's left! We gamblers tend to be pragmatists. While even the youngest of us may seem "Old School" in certain ways, we, unlike pretend-feminists do not INFATILIZE professional women by using their first names. There are millions of dollars changing hand on these elections every day and everywhere it's posted, she is listed as "Clinton" or "Senator Clinton" or "H. Clinton" or some variant thereof. We also refer to her that way amongst ourselves. "HRC" is as informal as it gets. It's the same with any female athlete for us gamblers as well: "Ochoa," "Henin," "A Sorenstam," "C Sorenstam," etc. As I wrote on BAC's site, I prefer Peace, Justice, Civil Rights, Civil Liberties and equality to some notion of political correctness. Or identity politics. I'll make an exception on the women/Clinton issue, however, not so much because it's morally right but because I am so furious at having Obama shoved down my throat and being told that he's the "dove" and the "progressive" and the "uniter" in the race.
Kelso's Nuts love you
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
what's your take on gloria steinem's article in the NYT on the day of the NH primary?
http://tiny.cc/steinem
I liked it very much. It was well-reasoned and packed more of a gut-punch than her stuff usually does. I've never been a huge Gloria Steinem fan. She herself has always struck me as too much of an insider and a compromiser who luxuriated in her wealth and power. This was strong brew from her. I hope it augurs more to come. That the overall positive response to it will inspire her to continue to take some chances.
Look, I'm a man and I could have read it and gotten all defensive but her points were strong enough that I had no legit argument.
To quote your favorite musician: "the only person on the scene missing was" John McCain. That he attacked Clinton's daughter and not only was allowed to do it but was CELEBRATED for it and then -- once again -- was CELEBRATED for calling the senator a "bitch" was conspicuous by its absence in the piece.
On the whole, though, a very impressive article and I'm hopeful that the homophobia that has characterized this campaign will be attacked by a thoughtful gay man AND gay woman. I'm not holding my breath waiting for Andrew Sullivan and Camille Paglia to step forward!
I think I've been steadfast in my decrying the sexism, homophobia and -- yes -- racism in this campaign. As a straight, white man, though, my words ipso facto don't carry the same weight.
i liked the steinem piece as well. camille paglia, however, did not:
http://tiny.cc/paglia
"Hillary's disdain for masculinity fits right into the classic feminazi package, which is why Hillary acts on Gloria Steinem like catnip. Steinem's fawning, gaseous New York Times op-ed about her pal Hillary this week speaks volumes about the snobby clubbiness and reactionary sentimentality of the fossilized feminist establishment, which has blessedly fallen off the cultural map in the 21st century. History will judge Steinem and company very severely for their ethically obtuse indifference to the stream of working-class women and female subordinates whom Bill Clinton sexually harassed and abused, enabled by look-the-other-way and trash-the-victims Hillary."
she makes some interesting and valid points in this article. but camille's utter disdain for "mainstream" feminists blinds her. unfortunately, in my opinion at least, her disdain doesn't stem entirely from a philosophical place. it's because they rejected her early on in her career. and she'll never let them off the hook.
i have to admit that i get a certain amount of pleasure out of reading her eviscerating comments on these "snobs." surprise surprise.
ha.
Read Camille Paglia on the subject of college fraternity gang-rape and maybe you won't think so much of her eviscerating the snobs.
Then again, I'm a snob.
Then again, I'm sure I grew up in humbler circumstances than Paglia did.
AXN: Camille Paglia was rejected by big-time academia because she's a BAD SCHOLAR not because of her politics or upbringing. There is plenty of GOOD right-wing womens studies scholarship out there.
Your quotation proves my point. In what way exactly is Clinton disdainful of "masculinity"? Because she plays power politics like a man? I'd say that's Paglia's jealousy coming out again. And would tend to disprove Paglia's point.
I'm actually still feeling bad about that Sister Frigidaire thing of a couple of years ago -- it was out of political frustration, not because of any opinion I had then about her personally -- because as I've come to learn from friends in the horseracing world who raced thoroughgbreds at Oaklawn in the 70s, HRC is ANYTHING but anti-man. I'd love to dish, but there's stuff I just can't say.
Thanks for the link, Kelso. And about Paglia ... what a wanker!
BAC
BAC:
Any time, any time. "Wanker" is a very diplomatic term for what Camille Paglia is. I think Anita's brief citation of her view of Hillary Clinton shows that it is Paglia and not the Senator who hates "masculinity," e.g., her absurd remarks about President Clinton.
Which branch of feminism is it exactly that preaches that it's wrong for men to be sexual? I seem to recall a recent study from a proper university (not that ersatz university she teaches at in Philly) which proved the hypothesis that feminism tends to promote healthy sexuality for both men and women. [I know, I know it disproves the "null" hypothesis....]
I don't believe that Bill Clinton was even guilty of intent to deceive (go back and watch the tape of the deposition before Judge Webber) and he surely was neither arrested, indicted nor convicted of any sexual violence.
As for their marriage, that would be between the two of them, no? If Camille Paglia has been wiretapping their phones and has planted secret cameras in their homes I'd love to know about it, see her proof of her hypotheses and see her in prison for a variety of federal crimes.
I happen to think Camille Paglia is a sexist, an anti-Semite, a racist, a bigot in general, and has severe psychological problems with regard to self-esteem and to whomever were the signifcant male figures in her childhood, as displayed by her own outrageous templates of masculinity, but that's between her and her shrink. Oh right, she hates Jews and psychotherapy...so, never mind.
Wanker, indeed.
Kelso, I left a response comment for you over at my place, which you'll understand why when you read it. Thanks for... well, just thank you for being Kelso.
Post a Comment