Here’s a clip of an interview with Hillary Clinton that the Washington Post released today. I sent this letter in response:
Let’s get this straight.
Hillary Clinton now complains that she’s a victim of sexism ("Sen.
Clinton Discusses ‘Sexist’ Treatment," video at Washingtonpost.com, May
20). Forget that she graduated from Wellesley and Yale – that she
handily won two terms to the U.S. Senate – that she earned millions of
dollars during her adult lifetime – and, most relevantly in this case, that she gathered many more
Democratic primary votes than did John Edwards, Joe Biden, and other
middle-aged white guys running for this year’s Democratic nomination.
Instead,
focus on this fact: If Mrs. Clinton’s failure to win her party’s
nomination is due to sexism, surely her claim that she’s the strongest
candidate to run against John McCain is mistaken on its face – unless
it’s the case that Democrats are more sexist than are American voters overall.
Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Share
{ 13 comments }
I'm almost starting to feel sorry for her. Almost.
It's especially amusing since there is no question that she is cleaning up in Appalachia with the ignorant racist vote.
Did she actually say that LOL
Very clever! lol!
Logic is not politicians' strong point.
And here is a dissenting view on Clinton's stance, by none other than Jon Chait: http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-chait21-2008may21,0,2243133.story
I couldn't discern much racism or sexism in the mainstream media. But whereas Obama has consciously refused to run as a "black" candidate and has not self-victimized himself, Clinton has taken the opposite position: to vote her *because* she is a woman. In fact, in the interview she states that "Oppression of women is universal" and "treatment of women is the single biggest problem we have, politically and socially, in the world". It's an interesting statement.
One of my friends is closely acquainted with Hillary's campaign manager (or some such big wig in her campaign). We were put on notice by this woman that we women were to vote for Hillary because she is a woman. Or else….what?
This fascist coercion of women (and the rest of humanity) to conform to the singular standards set by a small group of whining feminazis is what's truly sexist, anti-feminist and revolting in every way. If a less qualified woman is refused a position, we are to believe it's because she is a woman and not because she is less qualified. If these unsuccessful women were as hard-working, qualified and entrepreneurial as they claim, they would be running their own successful companies, like Murial Siebert, and wouldn't have time to whine.
"treatment of women is the single biggest problem we have, politically and socially, in the world"
Bullshit.
Bravo! Methinhks, Bravo!
Welcome back, Methinks!
Methinks:
It's amazing what clarity comes to the mind with a few 140-hour work weeks of running your own show. All notions of overtime and equality go straight out the window. Nothing annoys me more than some idiot taking my tax money and spending it on advertising of some nonsensical political message — I didn't go into debt up to my eyeballs and risk my children's future so that someone could whine that their wasteful campaign spending didn't result in a win.
I think they should turn campaign contributions into personal loans — due the moment the election is over, regardless of outcome. That should bring some clarity.
check this website out. Personally my favorite is the 8th picture down. Goosestepping her way to the White House.
http://www.damnfunnypictures.com/html/Scary-Hillary-Clinton.html
Methinks: "This fascist coercion of women"
??
Who's coercing women to vote for Hillary? I know women who aren't, and the FBI isn't exactly knocking at their doors.
Other women, Brian.