Showing posts with label ClintonDerangementSyndromeEbola2016. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ClintonDerangementSyndromeEbola2016. Show all posts

Monday, February 29, 2016

Worker Organizing, Si! Women Organizing, No!

It's fine to organize workers.
It's not fine to organize women.

Which leads to #FauxgressiveFascisti demonizing Madeleine Albright.

How dare she organize women?

How dare she suggest that women support other women?

The nerve!

 Candidate Sanders' [male] privilege asserts the non-existence of [female] un-privilege:

I don't go around, no one has ever heard me say, 'Hey guys, let's stand together, vote for a man.'  I would never do that, never have.

Well, of course not.



     

The Actual Radical Act


Regarding this coalition as somehow inherently "less-than" is reactionary.

Who are these reactionaries?  White males--privileged white males.

Double whammied white males--privileged by whiteness, privileged by maleness.

Oh, make that a triple whammy--privileged by whiteness, maleness, high socio-economic status.
That's who's doing the #eewSheDevil thing.
I'm not even talking about the GOP; I'm talking about supposedly librul lefties.  Limousine liberal males, blogosphere blogger boyz, those people--spewing the nastiest sexist racist crap ever, in a frenzy of Clinton Derangement Syndrome Ebola 2016.2.

Who votes for Hillary?

Indeed, it is a Stone Soup Cauldron filled with lots of less-thans


The Blogger-Boyz (okay, so one of them is a girl) just can't stand it.  

I know this because I listened in the other day, dropped by their smoke-filled rooms.  Plotting, plotting, intent on bringing the #SheDevil down.

"Pimp-slap them uppity bitches!" 
"Bring 'em down!"

No doubt a special place in hell awaits them.












Monday, February 22, 2016

Manichean NeoNaderists w/ BUSH-IS-GORE IraqWarBloodOnHands Plus Climate-Change-Disaster BloodOnHands Yet KISSINGER-WALLSTREET-VAGINA-SHEDEVIL-BUSHISGORE





“The inseparable connection between the social and human position of the woman, and private property in the means of production must be strongly brought out,” Lenin told Clara Zetkin in 1920.

“That will draw a clear and ineradicable line of distinction between our policy and feminism. And it will also supply the basis for regarding the woman question as a part of the social question, of the workers’ problem, and so bind it firmly to the proletarian class struggle and the revolution.”




Lenin said it then, @BernieBros say it now, much louder:


"Sexism" is a silly subset of the TREMENDOUS EARTHSHAKING IMPORTANT SOSHULIST CLASS-WAR FRAME.

Plus, we aren't sexist because we just said so, cunts, are you deaf?
 so shut the fuck up bitches yay revolution kthxbai.--








Saturday, February 06, 2016

Barely News: Sanders Supporters Shouted 'She's a Liar' at Hillary on Caucus Night

Barely News: Sanders Supporters Shouted 'She's a Liar' at Hillary on Caucus Night: Five items found at the Politico filed late Monday or early Tuesday reported that supporters of Bernie Sanders at the Iowa caucuses, while watching a live feed of Hillary Clinton's speech late Monday evening, began chanting 'She's a liar!' The chants grew until they 'took over the room,' and didn't stop until Sanders campaign officials cut off the live feed being shown. This is barely news in the rest of the establishment press, which has obsessed over the Ben Carson-Ted Cruz-CNN controversy, devoting an obviously inordinate amount of time to it and, as Cruz himself has shown, getting it wrong in the process.

Friday, August 22, 2008

Wow! Women Writers CAN Be Total Utter Sexist Pigs! Who Knew?




















It's late. I shouldn't be writing this.

But really, one just CAN'T MISS this here article in Slate by Dahlia Lithwick:


THE DISTURBING RISE OF THE HILLARY HARRIDANS

To which this here blogger, who is clinging to PUMA Obamism by the very very very very slenderest of threads, a thread made only way way more slender-er by reading articles like this, replies with this historic trifecta:

BLUDGEON ME NOT WITH ROE V. WADE.YOU DON'T OWN ME

And the ever-popular: IT'S MY PARTY AND YOU'LL CRY IF I WANT 2 . . .

Why?

Because I've said it all before, and (sigh) I guess I'm saying it all again.



("Yo, Dahlia Lithwick. Harridan here. You talkin' to me? You talkin' to me? You talkin' to me? Then who the hell else are you talkin' to? You talkin' to me? Well, I'm the only one here. Who the fuck do you think you're talking to?")


Don't forget the divine Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy on Obamawin's Law.

Friday, May 23, 2008

It's the Sexism, Stupid! (Part 2 -- or is it 3?)

.Great article by Andrew Stephen at the New Statesman (via Corrente/Talk Left).

I can't really comment now, but it's worth a careful and complete reading. Someone quick send this to Keith Olbermann and Markos and all the rest of them.

HATING HILLARY

by Andrew Stephen

"Gloating, unshackled sexism of the ugliest kind has been shamelessly peddled by the US media, which - sooner rather than later, I fear - will have to account for their sins

History, I suspect, will look back on the past six months as an example of America going through one of its collectively deranged episodes - rather like Prohibition from 1920-33, or McCarthyism some 30 years later. This time it is gloating, unshackled sexism of the ugliest kind. It has been shamelessly peddled by the US media, which - sooner rather than later, I fear - will have to account for their sins. The chief victim has been Senator Hillary Clinton, but the ramifications could be hugely harmful for America and the world.

I am no particular fan of Clinton. Nor, I think, would friends and colleagues accuse me of being racist. But it is quite inconceivable that any leading male presidential candidate would be treated with such hatred and scorn as Clinton has been. What other senator and serious White House contender would be likened by National Public Radio's political editor, Ken Rudin, to the demoniac, knife-wielding stalker played by Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction? Or described as "a fucking whore" by Randi Rhodes, one of the foremost personalities of the supposedly liberal Air America? Would Carl Bernstein (of Woodward and Bernstein fame) ever publicly declare his disgust about a male candidate's "thick ankles"? Could anybody have envisaged that a website set up specifically to oppose any other candidate would be called Citizens United Not Timid? (We do not need an acronym for that.)

I will come to the reasons why I fear such unabashed misogyny in the US media could lead, ironically, to dreadful racial unrest. "All men are created equal," Thomas Jefferson famously proclaimed in 1776. That equality, though, was not extended to women, who did not even get the vote until 1920, two years after (some) British women. The US still has less gender equality in politics than Britain, too. Just 16 of America's 100 US senators are women and the ratio in the House (71 out of 435) is much the same. It is nonetheless pointless to argue whether sexism or racism is the greater evil: America has a peculiarly wicked record of racist subjugation, which has resulted in its racism being driven deep underground. It festers there, ready to explode again in some unpredictable way.

To compensate meantime, I suspect, sexism has been allowed to take its place as a form of discrimination that is now openly acceptable. "How do we beat the bitch?" a woman asked Senator John McCain, this year's Republican presidential nominee, at a Republican rally last November. To his shame, McCain did not rebuke the questioner but joined in the laughter. Had his supporter asked "How do we beat the nigger?" and McCain reacted in the same way, however, his presidential hopes would deservedly have gone up in smoke. "Iron my shirt," is considered amusing heckling of Clinton. "Shine my shoes," rightly, would be hideously unacceptable if yelled at Obama."

Evidence to the contrary notwithstanding, American men like to delude themselves that they are the most macho in the world. It is simply unthinkable, therefore, for most of them to face the prospect of having a woman as their leader. The massed ranks of male pundits gleefully pronounced that Clinton had lost the battle with Obama immediately after the North Carolina and Indiana primaries, despite past precedents that strong second-place candidates (like Ronald Reagan in his first, ultimately unsuccessful campaign in 1976; like Ted Kennedy, Gary Hart, Jesse Jackson and Jerry Brown) continue their campaigns until the end of the primary season and, in most cases, all the way to the party convention.

None of these male candidates had a premature political obituary written in the way that Hillary Clinton's has been, or was subjected to such righteous outrage over refusing to quiesce and withdraw obediently from what, in this case, has always been a knife-edge race. Nor was any of them anything like as close to his rivals as Clinton now is to Obama.

The media, of course, are just reflecting America's would-be macho culture. I cannot think of any television network or major newspaper that is not guilty of blatant sexism - the British media, naturally, reflexively follow their American counterparts - but probably the worst offender is the NBC/MSNBC network, which has what one prominent Clinton activist describes as "its nightly horror shows". Tim Russert, the network's chief political sage, was dancing on Clinton's political grave before the votes in North Carolina and Indiana had even been fully counted - let alone those of the six contests to come, the undeclared super-delegates, or the disputed states of Florida and Michigan.

The unashamed sexism of this giant network alone is stupendous. Its superstar commentator Chris Matthews referred to Clinton as a "she-devil". His colleague Tucker Carlson casually observed that Clinton "feels castrating, overbearing and scary . . . When she comes on television, I involuntarily cross my legs." This and similar abuse, I need hardly point out, says far more about the men involved than their target . . .
Read on gentle readers, read on. Up to the part where we wind up with a weak candidate against McCain, who gets elected.

Yeah. What he said.

Thursday, May 15, 2008

On Wearing The Scarlet 'Hillary' [from 5.2008]



So much anti-Hillary hysteria.  Intra-party rancor. It makes me want to throw up. (Not to mention that I don't deal well with rancor in general, which I won't mention.)

All this name-calling and intra-party partisan hysteria, in addition to making me want to throw up, makes me want to call up Tony Benn, my social democrat hero, and ask if I may please, please throw myself onto his lap, sobbing, while he pats my hair paternally and reassures me that, sooner or later, everything's going to be alright.

Which may or may not be the case. And may or may not be what he would say. It's, you know, a fantasy.

Meanwhile, besides work, I try to amuse myself making green curry of duck, endless steaming pots of chicken soup, and digging in the garden, and indulge in aimless streams of thought: "Windy today, by the way. I like that poem by Czeslaw Milosz. I don't think anybody read it. People don't like poetry. Well, Americans don't like poetry much, certainly. South Americans do. In my experience, everrrybody in South America can quote Neruda. Here it's such an egghead thing. Why do Americans hate eggheads? Why do they hate intelligence? Why did they elect Bush? Why do they hate Hillary?"

My political head hurts.

Using Cheney's adjective: "Big-time."

Ok, then, why do they hate Hillary Clinton so? In particular, why does the so-called left wing of the Democratic party hate Hillary Clinton? Why are they aligned with Karl Rove? Beats the crap out of me.

Not in RL, but in blogtopia and SL, I belong to a shockingly despised minority because of this.

It's been very unsettling. I am one of the many commenters at Kos who fled after the Great Anti-Hillaryist First Purge.

Seeing my dendrobium send out a pre-bloom shoot this morning, I was reminded of John Aravosis, fellow orchid-fancier, whose blog I regularly visited, commented at, and really enjoyed until his Great Anti-Hillaryist First Purge. (Now John's written a charming post entitled "Go Away You Horrible Human Being," and he's NOT talking about Dick Cheney.)

Ditto Democratic Underground and BuzzFlash and HuffPo and on and on. Oh, and now we have John Edwards and NARAL throwing Hillary under the bus. Way to offend people you really don't want to keep on offending, people. (Or should I say, "sweetie"?)

In SL, though friend avs remain friendly (I think), once I'm in a larger political social grouping, the slightest show of Hillarysupport from me results in an automatic "INCOMING!"

I've toyed with the notion of making a little sign above my avatar saying "Pariah Clintonista," just to get it over with.

I think it's important to be supportive of whoever one's supporting, but there's an edge of virulent hysteria here with which I'm both suspicious and uncomfortable. Now it's starting to spread over into virulent anti-Obamania, and I just can't go there, either. Not at all.

So, Tony, dear -- you once called yourself a "biological Buddhist."

Where is the Middle Way?



---

Arthur Silber needs money. Send him some if you have some.

Sunday, May 11, 2008

Shakesville: Hillary Sexism Watch Number NINETY

Come on, people.

You can't be progressive and do shit like this.

You just can't.

Tuesday, May 06, 2008

Who Will Rid Me of These Booger-Chomping, Testosterone-Deprived Sniggering Fratboy Dickheads?

The Sniggering Fratboy Posse is hanging out at Slate these days, big-time. Like "Little Mickey" Kaus, and his homies. Timothy Noah. Chadwick Matlin. All the Hillary Deathwatch Boyz.

They're sniggering and hanging loose elsewhere, too.

MSNBC. CNN. Faux. NYT. Evv-rywhere.

Grabbing their metaphoric public crotches, which are either openly empty or stuffed with smelly socks.

Want another gender-slur from Keith "Ladies First" Olberman?

Earth to Keith -- if you want to disparage Clinton, disparage her policies, not her gender. Would you tell Obama he should "go to the back of the bus"? Of course not. But "Ladies First"? That's okay.

Then there's yesterday's New York Times coverage of Clinton, which manages to name-call her repeatedly while leaving out any evidence that would suggest the gender-slur name-calling is in any way merited by facts: two headline featuring the attribute "Ruthlessness," and flinging this unsourced mud from "critics": "divisive," "a dirty fighter," "willing to do anything to win." It criticized her for having "baggage that makes Mrs. Clinton [not Senator Clinton] such a provocative political figure" while continuing to create that baggage right on the front page.

(The next day's Times featured an article that prominently feautured descriptions of her coiffure and makeup. I looked over the rest of the paper, and you know, I just couldn't find any other person whose hair and makeup was mentioned. Oh my. Hmm.)

Like an intentional fart in a closed car, the sniggering sexist fratboy fetor pervades the whole US media whore media, contaminating the culture at large.

Some of them sexist niggerers claim to be female. Most of them claim to be male.

But they're all all wet. They're all limp and pathetic.


They're all, you know -- dickheads. Inexcusable dickheads.



(& by this this metaphor I mean no insult to dicks.)

Hat tip to Tennessee Guerilla Women.