Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Hillary never rejected or denounced the "gang bang" statement either

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-11-08 09:13 PM
Original message
Hillary never rejected or denounced the "gang bang" statement either

Marcia Pappas, Kennedy-Basher, Heads to Ohio for Clinton

by Azi Paybarah | February 22, 2008

Marcia Pappas, the outspoken activist who called Ted Kennedy’s endorsement of Barack Obama a “betrayal" to women, is heading to Ohio Wednesday to campaign for Hillary Clinton.

Pappas, the president of the National Organization for Women-New York State, said her past comments won’t be an issue.

She told me this morning, “Certainly what I said drew attention temporarily, but I don’t think that it takes away from Hillary Clinton’s campaign. What we try to do is bring attention to the issues that affect women and via Hilary being the sacrificial lamb at this point in history, we certainly have been able to talk about sexism in a way that we have not been able to talk about it before. And it’s been brought out to the forefront due to the fact that I spoke out so vehemently against Kennedy’s endorsement of Obama.”

Pappas also disputed the notion that Clinton would end her campaign anytime soon.

“I have not heard any call for her to drop out. In fact, I’ve heard calls from people that I know for her to stay in and fight till the end.”

more


Pappas' full statement:

Psychological Gang Bang of Hillary is Proof We Need a Woman President

January 11, 2008

by Marcia Pappas, President NOW - New York State

We've all witnessed scenarios where, on the playground little girls are being taunted by little boys while both girls and boys stand idle, afraid to speak up or even cheering. Or, in the workplace males tease young and older female co-workers; make obscene gestures, inappropriate comments, laughing and expecting (often correctly) that everyone will join in. Then there was that movie where Jodie Foster portrayed the true story of woman who was ganged raped in a bar while others looked on and encouraged the realization. Still others pretended the rape didn't happen. In short, gang raping of women is commonplace in our culture both physically and metaphorically.

This past week, we witnessed just such a phenomenon involving men who are afraid of a powerful woman. Hillary Clinton, in her quest for her Presidential nomination, has in fact endured infantile taunting and wildly inappropriate commentary. Indeed we have witnessed almost comical attacks by John Edwards who in turn sided with Barak Obama as both snickered at Clinton's "breakdown," which consisted of a very short dewy-eyed moment. Now John Kerry, who should certainly know better after his own "swiftboating," has joined the playground gang.

But here's the news. Every woman knows how it feels! There are those who will dismiss, defend or even shame those around them into believing that we progressives are making a mountain out of a mole hill. But that’s the game plan of the patriarchal system that has persisted for millennia. Because they can't frighten Hillary they've decided to control her with the time-old trick of patriarchal ridicule. Women, you know what I mean!

Pundits want to know what happened in New Hampshire. Why didn't the polls see it coming? How could they have gotten it so wrong? Well, aside from the thousands of women and progressive men who made calls from their homes, dropped literature, and held house parties for undecided voters, the truth of the matter is…women get it! That’s why, when women in New Hampshire could vote in private, they came out in droves for Hillary. They'd seen more Hillary bashing than had Iowa's women, and the polls stopped too early to measure their collective reaction. What happened is that women stood up and said "We're fed up and we're not going to take it anymore! We won't sit idly by and watch, while you gang bang one of us." One woman told me she didn't even want to vote for Hillary because she feared that her campaign would be the most dreadful blood bath in the history of politics. I asked her “if Hillary is willing to stick her neck out for us, should we not be brave enough to stand strong behind her?” She agreed and said of course she would vote for Hillary.

We have waited a long time to see our first truly viable women presidential candidate. And what we see now during the debates is what women and girls have experienced from time immemorial. But it seems John's recent alliance with Barak sent a clear message to women everywhere. The message is that if a woman gets too powerful, she can count on the good ole boys ganging up on her. Hillary is a powerful, strong and intelligent woman and she deserves our support. Let us remember what we as women's rights supporters, are charged to do: SUPPORT WOMEN!

And I, your writer,certainly speak from the belly of the beast. I was in Iowa for ten days with other feminist leaders, donating our personal time and money to help with Hillary's campaign. And in spite of our shortfall in Iowa, we did make a difference. Our efforts gave Hillary second place in the precinct we walked. Let me tell you why.

Our job on caucus night was to transport eight women from a nursing home to their caucus site. These were eighty-to-ninety-year-old women who came out in the cold weather and climbed into our vans to stand for Hillary. As we talked with glee about the possibility of our first women president, we were overjoyed to hear stories of their dedication to making it happen. One woman said "I never thought I would live long enough to see a woman president." Another woman said "It's about time; we need to have a woman as our President." These were women who were born around the time that women won the right to vote. They'd heard first-hand stories of that struggle from their mothers and grandmothers. They fought long and hard to see a day when they could have their own credit cards, own their own homes and be in control of their own bodies. They remember all too well when it was legal for a man to beat and/or rape his wife because she was HIS property. They remember when “rape” was ignored by people in the community and law enforcement officials. “She must have done something to deserve it” was common language in those days. Today we still see variations on this same behavior, more subtle perhaps, through success of our efforts, but nonetheless still abusive.

Now those senior citizens we transported stood tall for Hillary, and want us all to know that to have a woman president is to send a clear message to little girls everywhere: "Yes, you can do great things and even become President of the United States." Those senior citizens really get it!

So let's not let young women and little girls down, whether it's on the playground, in the workplace, or in the political arena. Young women need role models. They need to know they can be powerful and control their own lives. By putting Hillary in the Oval Office we send that message loud and clear for all to hear. Little girls everywhere need to know that to be important they don't have to emulate Brittany Spears or other similarly-exploited women. We can do it!

Think about the legacy we'll leave behind when we support Hillary Clinton for President of the United States. Let’s put a stop to the psychological “gang banging” of women and girls. Let's stand up and be counted by way of the hard-won votes we can now cast!

Marcia A. Pappas, President, NOW New York State


Ferraro continues the gender and race baiting:

Ferraro vigorously defends remarks

Posted: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 6:25 PM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: 2008, Clinton, Obama

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
Geraldine Ferraro defended her remarks and went even further in another interview with the Daily Breeze, where Ferraro's original comments appeared. This time SHE claimed to be the victim of racism and said, "Sexism is a bigger problem." ...

"But far from backing off from her initial remark, Ferraro defended it and elaborated on it.

" 'Any time anybody does anything that in any way pulls this campaign down and says let's address reality and the problems we're facing in this world, you're accused of being racist, so you have to shut up,' Ferraro said. 'Racism works in two different directions. I really think they're attacking me because I'm white. How's that?'...

"Ferraro said she was simply stating an obvious truth, as seen in exit polls that show Obama taking as much as 80 percent of the black vote in the Democratic primaries.

" 'In all honesty, do you think that if he were a white male, there would be a reason for the black community to get excited for a historic first?' Ferraro said. 'Am I pointing out something that doesn't exist?' ...

"She also said she is familiar with Axelrod from his work for minority candidates in New York.

" 'He knows damn well that the best thing to do in a situation like this is to come back and hit with race,' Ferraro said, adding that the response is a sign that the Obama campaign is 'worried' about the first-term senator's lack of experience.
Ferraro said she was not trying to diminish Obama's candidacy, and acknowledged up front that she would not have been the vice presidential nominee in 1984 if she had been a man.

"But she also echoed remarks of feminist leaders like Gloria Steinem, who argued in the New York Times that Obama would not have succeeded if he were a woman because gender is 'the most restricting force in American life.'

" 'Sexism is a bigger problem,' Ferraro argued. 'It's OK to be sexist in some people's minds. It's not OK to be racist.'"


The Clinton Tax Returns: What's the Holdup?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-11-08 09:26 PM
Response to Original message
1. Some folks pretend there's no sexism, or that a 90/10 AA split is not part racial and helping O- sad
TPM http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/182937.php is wrong IMO when claiming that Obama's race in the Democratic party primary is a disadvantage as it appears obvious to me that the proportional structure and demography of the primary/caucus contests does favor the person who can get a massive majority of the African American vote. It is the 90/10 split (tonight 91/9) that in turn is a result of more than ethnic pride that has allowed a thin resume but great speech giver to run ahead on delegates despite getting 1/3rd or less of the non-AA vote.

The general election does not have the same demography - and the media will not be in 24/7 sexist mode but will return to 24/7 GOP cheerleader mode in the fall. Plus the decrease in the Obama vote in Ohio in the final days has put to rest the idea that the more he campaigns the more people love him. The result of pretending this process picks the strongest general election candidate is to decieve ourselves about how hard it will be for Obama to defeat McCain in the fall.

TPM is right that not being tall, male, northern European, white and monied is not having having all the US biases in your favor - but for the Democratic Party proportional allocation primary tall, male, privileged background persons can indeed have the advantage in primaries "because they are black" if they can make a racist race of the contest in AA areas while having a media that lets them appear above race to at least a reasonable percentage of non-AA's.

To dismiss the obvious demographic truth is to be dishonest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Usrename Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-11-08 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. So, you think Hillary's supporters are racist?
Is that what you're getting at?

'Cause I know for sure that Hillary will never win a general election now, not after this.

Her negatives were at near 50% before she started this shit. She didn't just lose black voters, she lost just as many nose-holders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enfield collector Donating Member (821 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-11-08 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. you got that right, her win at any cost strategy is losing her
any independants she might have courted
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-11-08 09:38 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. "To dismiss the obvious demographic truth is to be dishonest." What nonsense!
In many of the states Obama has won, if he wins 25% of the white vote (and he will win some of the white vote that when to Hillary in the primary) and can turn out the black vote, he could swing some states that were not even in play.

The fact that blacks and others are voting for Obama is because they are sick of Hillary's politics.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AZBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-11-08 09:38 PM
Response to Original message
4. Wow...how did I miss that?
I'm seriously going to have to reconsider my NOW support. Not because she supports Clinton - she can support whoever she wants. But because of her insipid comments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SwampG8r Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-11-08 10:02 PM
Response to Original message
6. well
i dont think gangbang is the term you mean
you mean gang rape
in a gangbang the woman is a willing participant
while distasteful the distinction is true
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-11-08 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Huh? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jillian Donating Member (577 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-11-08 10:18 PM
Response to Original message
7. And Obama never dismissed the comments of McClurkin either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-11-08 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. He absolutely did! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EmilyAnne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-12-08 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. Yes he did.
Edited on Wed Mar-12-08 02:22 PM by EmilyAnne
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-12-08 12:48 PM
Response to Original message
10. Commentary: Clinton mixes messages on Obama

Commentary: Clinton mixes messages on Obama

By Ruben Navarrette Jr.
Special to CNN

SAN DIEGO, California -- Harvard professor Samantha Powers, a former foreign policy adviser to Barack Obama, abruptly resigned last week after she was quoted in a Scottish newspaper calling Hillary Clinton a monster.

Powers got it wrong. Hillary isn't the monster. Her campaign is the monster. And it's the two-headed kind.

Just look at the mixed messages it sends. Recent examples involve talk of a Dream Ticket and what some Democrats consider the nightmare of the Ken Starr investigation in the 1990s.

One minute, Clinton blasts her opponent, Barack Obama, as so wet behind the ears that he wouldn't be able to handle a 3 a.m. phone call as president, and implies that he is trying to mask his inexperience with speeches and "rhetorical flourishes."

The next minute, she suggests that a joint ticket between herself and Obama "may be where this is headed." Just days ago, former President Bill Clinton called a joint ticket "almost unstoppable" and suggested that Clinton is "very open to" of pairing up with Obama.

So after arguing that Obama can't be trusted with the presidency, the Clintons would trust him to be a heartbeat away from the presidency?

Obama himself seized upon the contradiction Monday while campaigning in Columbus, Mississippi. "I don't understand," Obama said. "If I am not ready, why do you think I would be such a great vice president?" Obama asked the crowd, which gave him a standing ovation.

more


Ruben Navarrette Jr. is a member of the editorial board of the San Diego Union-Tribune and a nationally syndicated columnist.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sniffa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-12-08 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
11. Nor the, "running a train" comment
CHOO CHOO
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-12-08 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
12. Is that right... I guess I can't say I'm surprised. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-12-08 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Talk about double standards! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bunnies Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-12-08 02:27 PM
Response to Original message
15. And dont forget the Hip Imaginary Black Friend comment
dont remember that being denounced either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 08:25 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC