White Woman Privilege

First off, I really want to know what kind of a hand-off Hillary Clinton promised to Ferraro if she became the nominee and eventual President of the United States. The woman has gone beyond the deep end with her one-woman Oppression Olympics. She is so determined to prove that the Democratic party is littered with women haters that she's hoodwinked some rich women to pay for a "study" that'll prove her point :

In response, a group of women - from corporate executives to academics to members of the media - have requested that the Shorenstein Center at Harvard University and others conduct a study, which we will pay for if necessary, to determine three things.

First, whether either the Clinton or Obama campaign engaged in sexism and racism; second, whether the media treated Clinton fairly or unfairly; and third whether certain members of the media crossed an ethical line when they changed the definition of journalist from reporter and commentator to strategist and promoter of a candidate. And if they did to suggest ethical guidelines which the industry might adopt.

First off, even though I don't agree with her some of her itemizations, Melissa McEwan has the sexism in the media covered. Yet I think it was either Gallup, Rassmussen or Pew who did already studies about whether the candidates have been treated fairly by the media. Guess who actually gets more passes by the media than other candidates? Racism? Oh lord, just go to Baratunde's wiki, please. And last, what a fucking straw man. Hello, let's page Jay Rosen, so he can school you in one or two things about journalism, especially what journalists are really all about.

Here's what I want to know from Geraldine Ferraro, who was in Clinton's finance committe : Where did most of the $100 million go?

On the issue of privilege vs. fear, b-serious knocks it out of the park over at Jack and Jill Politics. Here's a taste of a very long yet lucid post :

“Shame on you Barack Obama”?!?!?! Who the hell is she to talk to him like he’s some 4 year old? This ain’t pre-school and her condescending attitude is getting real tired, real fast.

Senator Obama is a grown a*s man. He’s just as accomplished as she is, yet she wants to go around the country and call him some naive rookie??? She dismisses his supporters and ignores the impact that he has had.

It’s never good enough. He can win 11 straight states by an average of 33%, but it’s still NEVER GOOD ENOUGH! He can expand the Democratic party by bringing in Independents, cross-over Republicans and first-time voters, but it’s NEVER GOOD ENOUGH! He can draw crowds of 20,000 but it’s NEVER GOOD ENOUGH! He can win more states (24 to 11), have a commanding lead in Pledged delegates, have a strong lead in the popular vote . . . but it’s still NEVER GOOD ENOUGH!

No. We still have to hear the media talk about a Clinton comeback, even when the MATH says it’s highly unlikely.

She needs to stop making excuses. She needs to recognize that (beleive it or not) this brotha is just doing a better job at reaching the voters than she is. Plain and simple.

Her stunts are going to backfire on her. It has nothing to do with being a man or woman. Democratic primary voters don’t like negative politics . . . it’s as simple as that.

You know, I’d love to see the press give Obama as much room to be a stereotypical black man as they give Clinton to be a stereotypical woman. I’d love to see Obama get the opportunity to go straight up gangsta and show his a*s! But we all know that would never happen. The second he shows ANY aggression whatsoever, is the moment people see him as the “angry black man.”

This goes to show that there are differences in how the media treats race and gender. I’m not saying that they’re better or worse, just different. I’m just gonna say it. This country has an instinct to protect white women. It can be a burden at times (i.e., Cult of True Womanhood) but it's still there. Hillary gets her feelings hurt and voters rush to her aide. She throws a fit and we make excuses because, after all, we can’t forget those double standards, right?

Yet, at the same time, we have an instinct to FEAR black men.

Tell me, what would happen if Obama went on a tirade against Hillary, like she’s done over the weekend??? What would happen if he (gasp) raised his voice to this white woman? What would happen if he spent all of his time talking about the “white man,” the way Hillary talks about the “boys club?”

Rick Lazio, a white man, found out when he “invaded her personal space.” If he took the fall, you can imagine what would happen to Obama’s black a*s the second he steps out of line.

Go read the whole thing, NOW.

Totally ganked from Nezua's blog

New York Newsday published an interesting article about Hillary Clinton this past weekend. In An early look at how Clinton deals with crisis Glenn Thrush points to what seems to be the Senator "formative" experience as a defense lawyer or, as she likes to describe herself, a fighter.

In her 2003 autobiography "Living History," Clinton writes that she initially balked at the assignment, but eventually secured a lenient plea deal for Taylor after a New York-based forensics expert she hired "cast doubt on the evidentiary value of semen and blood samples collected by the sheriff's office."

However, that account leaves out a significant aspect of her defense strategy - attempting to impugn the credibility of the victim, according to a Newsday examination of court and investigative files and interviews with witnesses, law enforcement officials and the victim.

Rodham, records show, questioned the sixth grader's honesty and claimed she had made false accusations in the past. She implied that the girl often fantasized and sought out "older men" like Taylor, according to a July 1975 affidavit signed "Hillary D. Rodham" in compact cursive.

Yes. Hillary Clinton's first experience as a defense attorney was to represent a 41 year-old man who was accused of raping a 12-year old girl with the aid of her 15 year-old boyfriend. The way she went about winning a reduced sentence for her client was to question not only the reliability of the victim's testimony. Nope. The article suggests she may have even fabricated allegations against the 12 year-old victim (that she wanted to have sex with older men) in order to do shatter the victim's credibility.

This article is important for one reason. After a whole weekend in which the Senator went on a tirade questioning the credibility of Barack Obama it is clear now that the Senator is hell bent in doing exactly what the did 30 years ago to the 12 year-old rape victim : To destroy the credibility of Obama at all cost, especially before tonight's debate.

The New York Times claims is part of a 5 point strategy that has been laid out to kill Obama's momentum :

1. This past weekend she went on an angry yet media seeking "Shame on you" tirade against Obama for flyers that appeared in Ohio highlighting her support for NAFTA and the economic flaws of her health care plan.

2. She then proceeded to mock and ridicule Obama's theme of "Change" as something that would only appeal to delusional people.

3. She incredibly goes on to compare Obama with Bush.

4. Then there was the infamous non-denial from the campaign about their involvement with a photograph of Barack Obama in traditional Somali garb used to fan the fires of his crypto-islamism.

5. All this to 'hammer in' that Hillary is the most experience, most reliable, most electable.