"Maybe It's a Guy Thing"

[DemBones DemBones]

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20080331_maybe_its_a_guy_thing/

Posted on Mar 31, 2008

By Marie Cocco


WASHINGTON—

"I guess the boys are just being boys again. They’ve failed to dispatch Clinton in the race thus far—remember, they were predicting the fall of the “house of Clinton” in New Hampshire. Then Kennedy magic was supposed to transform Obama into the anointed nominee on Super Tuesday, but star-power appearances in California by the women of Camelot failed to help Obama there, and not even Ted Kennedy could deliver his home state of Massachusetts. Clinton won decisively in the Bay State and took all the big states on Super Tuesday, except Obama’s home state of Illinois and Missouri, where he edged her by a single percentage point."

<snip>

"Since we’re talking boy-talk here, we might as well get right into their rhetorical comfort zone: Obama now is ahead by a field goal in the third quarter. But the fourth quarter has yet to be played and who knows what the score will be at the end of regulation? So here’s their plan, hatched in the locker room: Push Clinton off the field now so that Obama can take his early victory lap."

<snip>

"Now Clinton’s methodical, dogged history of work for the Democratic Party is treated just like the methodical, dogged histories of so many women in the workplace: Having come this far she must not go too far. She must step aside to take the smaller office, with the lesser title and the lower pay to make room for the younger guy with the thinner résumé. And please, would she just go quietly like a good girl?"

<snip>

"Somehow the Obama campaign has come to believe that insulting Clinton is the same as beating her. It isn’t. And insulting her supporters—especially women and, in particular, working-class women, who have clung to her candidacy all these months—isn’t much of a general-election victory strategy. Women were 54 percent of the electorate in the presidential election of 2004. Without their support, Al Gore would not have won the popular vote in 2000 and John Kerry wouldn’t have come so close in 2004. Women voters put Democrats in control of Congress in 2006."

"So, the Obama campaign can continue trying to get its allies in the media and various party pooh-bahs to push Clinton aside early. Or Obama can welcome the fight—and win it like a man."

[kevinmc]

1. MARIE COCCO Sure likes to whine a lot ....

Back here she said Hillary was the Front Runner and it was some old Lady calling Hillary a Bitch that was the problem ....


By MARIE COCCO

November 23, 2007

WASHINGTON -- Now that Hillary Clinton has hushed, for the moment, the chatter about how she can be both a woman and a presidential front-runner whose opponents pile on, can we pay attention to the way the most powerful "gender card" is really going to be played in the 2008 campaign?

Click on YouTube. Go to the video titled "How Do We Beat the B----?" Watch a middle-aged woman lean forward earnestly toward Republican John McCain and ask, with a tone of determination usually reserved for questions about rolling back the terrorist threat, "How do we beat the b----?"

[DemBones DemBones]

15. Not nearly as much as Michelle Obama. I've never heard anybody

whine like that woman.

It was very bad manners for anyone to refer to a presidential candidate as a bitch. Marie Cocco and I and most other women get it that HRC is facing a tremendous amount of sexism and that sexism is still an acceptable prejudice, even among liberals, while many people don't feel comfortable criticizing Obama, afraid they'll be accused of racism.

It would have been equally bad manners for someone to say "How do we beat the nigger?" when referring to Obama, and that would have been national news for weeks. That woman calling Hillary a bitch at the McCain rally was covered but not for long and not as the serious issue it really is, because all the media have gotten their marching orders to hype Obama and slam Clinton.

And in the fall, they will hype McCain and slam our nominee. HRC can take it. Obama is going to have a lot more brought out about his past if he's the nominee and the media will decide they don't like him after all, that McCain is really a neat guy, a war hero, really experienced. You know that's what they'll do, unless this is your first rodeo.

Until Lou Dobbs on CNN started criticizing the pro-Obama bias of the media, only FOX news was discussing it. I'm not sure anyone is really discussing the sexism aimed at Clinton.

[EmilyAnne]

32. Some idiotic John McCain supporter called Hillary Clinton a bitch and it should be national news?

For weeks? Its not surprising to me that a McCain supporter is a sexist moron, but how do you go from this to bashing Michelle Obama, of all people? And on to talking about Obama's past? Wha?? Huh?? His past as what, exactly?

This line is particularly rich..."or Obama can welcome the fight—and win it like a man." He has welcomed the fight. He has praised her campaign countless times and has said she should stay in the race as long as she wants. Never mind the sexism of the winning it like a man. How, exactly, would a man's win differ from a woman's win? Good grief. This article is silly.

Hillary Clinton has been a victim of sexist attacks. Barack Obama has been a victim of racist attacks. Neither should be accepted, especially by Democrats. Period.

[DemBones DemBones]

40. Lots of distortion and false claims there,

pretending not to understand.

[EmilyAnne]

47. I agree. I'm glad you've seen the light.

[RoadRage]

41. It was very bad manners for anyone to refer to a presidential candidate as a bitch.

Unless you're on Saturday Night Live... and scream "Bitch is the new Black".. and laugh and joke about it as Hillary Clinton did. I guess it's OK to be called a bitch if it's in a positive light.. sexism is OK as long as it makes you look "cool".

Conversely, I don't think anyone would think that a SNL skit referring to Obama as a "nigger" would be funny - to him or anyone else.

Which goes to show that society views the term "nigger" and the term "bitch" on two totally seperate levels (AS WE SHOULD).

I've heard many people say "Hillary is sort of a bitch, but that's why I want to vote for her". I have not heard anyone say "Obama is sort of a nigger, but that's why I want to vote for him".

Those two terms are NOT interchangable when discussing these candidates. They have very different connotations.

[JI7]

2. it was Clinton camp which thought it would be over by super tuesday

[still_one]

3. In a previous post you indicated that you would not vote for Obama if he was the nominee

Anyone who won't vote for the Democratic nominee, NO MATTER WHO IT IS, in November, and continues to post on DU, is irrelevent, and that goes to either candidate's supporters

However, if you have a change of heart and will vote for whoever the Democratic nominee is, then I will gladly listen to your point of view

[DemBones DemBones]

11. So get out of my thread if you don't respect my right to vote as I choose.

I guess guys only think women have a right to choose when it's convenient
for guys, like it's cheaper to help pay for an abortion than to help raise a child.

DU rules can't force me to vote for Obama if he's the nominee, or to pretend I'm going to. Unlike Obama, I habitually tell the truth.

The rules only say we can't advocate voting for another candidate once we have a nominee. We don't have a nominee now, and HRC will be our nominee.

[Warren Stupidity]

21. The thread belongs to the owners of the board, not you.

But you are not the first Clinton supporter here recently to take up the 'get out of my thread' line. Last week you all were on a big upset because we weren't responding to your crap, now you are getting upset because we are responding to your crap.

Your non-support for Obama will be terminal here in a few weeks.

[rodeodance]

23. Its bad manners not to stay focused on the OP. Distracting is very Rovian also.

[still_one]

51. Really, not voting for WHOEVER the Democratic nominee is

is a distraction

[Jakes Progress]

69. Notice how

they change the topic when it strikes too close to the truth. So they try to argue something that was not in the OP. That's what you call distracting. You have learned well from Rove.

[DemBones DemBones]

30. Another distraction post! FYI, my "non-support for Obama" will NOT be

"terminal" here. IF he becomes the nominee, I can't support another candidate on the boards but nobody will tell me how to vote. I play by the rules, suggest you do the same, and remember it ain't over 'til it's over.

[still_one]

52. I oppose ANY supporter of any Democratic nominee WHO WON'T vote

for the Democratic Nominee WHOEVER that may be

[still_one]

50. How about the life of the mother? How about terrible birth defects

how about decisions that should only be between a WOMAN AND HER DOCTOR, NOT THE GOVERNMENT

You really do deserve mccain

You can vote or not vote for whoever you want, and as you can start what ever thread you want, I can express my opinion also

Maybe with posts like yours I should behave exactly as you do toward the person who isn't the candidate of my choice

I will say it again, I believe Democrats who don't vote for the Democratic nominee are irrlevent

[kevinmc]

4. Another one from MARIE COCCO

WASHINGTON -- Finally the nation has a presidential candidate with the courage to vanquish the ghost of Bill Clinton's failure and push a radical restructuring of the stressed-out American health insurance system.

The candidate's plan would reallocate the costs and burdens of insurance dramatically. It has at its core the idea that employers, strained by escalating health-insurance premiums, finally should be relieved of the expense. It puts the public on notice that the system of getting health insurance through a job not only is fraying -- but that government policy should help the unraveling.

Not even Hillary could dream up an idea that stretches the imagination so far. And she didn't. The candidate with this plan is George W. Bush....

http://www.staugustine.com/stories/092204/opi_2595078.shtml

[Apollo11]

7. She did not endorse Bush's health insurance proposals

Here's another excerpt from that exact same article:

Now, maybe the president knows a lot of people with low skills and no-benefit jobs who can afford to sock away savings for health care. But before he tries to sell them on the idea, he should at least be honest about these accounts.

They give the greatest benefit to the wealthiest. Why? Because a person in the 40 percent tax bracket saves more per dollar deposited in a health-savings account than a person in the 15 percent bracket.

"Definitely the White House believes health care should be cheaper for rich people than for poor people," said Uwe E. Reinhardt, a Princeton University health-care economist.

[susankh4]

5. Give the South a choice between Ted & Bill anytime...

And it's hands down for WJC. He plays that demographic like a finely tuned fiddle.

"Then Kennedy magic was supposed to transform Obama into the anointed nominee on Super Tuesday"

Well, maybe in the north.

We are heading straight toward the dream ticket! Obama/ Clinton (with the Big Dawg on da back porch.)

:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:

:patriot:

K&R

[Apollo11]

6. I already posted this article here yesterday

Here in DU:P

www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5340257

Also in Editorials

www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x349789

[DemBones DemBones]

8. I did a search and it didn't come up.

Searched for the title with her name and separately. Go figure. :shrug:

[Apollo11]

12. Apology accepted

Not that you offered one! ;-)

[DemBones DemBones]

13. An apology is necessary for posting an article

that you had already posted when I did a search and it didn't show up on the search?

What exactly am I supposed to apologize for? If I'd found your post, I wouldn't have posted this OP.

And aren't we on the same side, supporting Hillary Clinton?

[Apollo11]

14. Don't worry about it

The smiling winky face says it all! ;-)

I am on the side of "Let's respect the process and may the best candidate win".

I am not so much pro-Hillary as I am anti-unfair-smears-and-personal-attacks.

The fact that I posted this article doesn't necessarily mean I agree with all of it.

I just thought other DUers might be interested to see it.

[DemBones DemBones]

18. OK, just checking, being

beat up on by Hillary-haters made me unsure what your smiley really meant.

I appreciate anyone who's anti-unfair smears. There are too few of us around. I can't stand Obama but I'd still defend him against unfair attacks.
Used to be most Dems were like that.

[XanaDUer]

19. Offer an apology for posting an article about politics on

a political board?

[DemBones DemBones]

9. I did a search and it didn't come up.

Searched for the title with her name and separately. Go figure. :shrug:

[MadHound]

10. Wow, talking about rewriting recent history

Wasn't it Hillary who was supposed to knock everybody out by Super Tuesday? Wasn't it Hillary who had all the advantages going into this primary season? Weren't all the other candidates supposed to bow out early because this years was Hillary's turn.

Geez, the whining and moaning of Hillary supporters is bad enough, but now they're rewriting history to accommodate their own personal narrative of how this primary season played out. Sad, sad and pathetic.

[joshcryer]

17. I think you forgot when Hillary placed third, and then second.

Hillary was being written off not only on these forums but in the mass media, too. I know people like to think Hillary was kicking ass before Feb 5th but she was lucky to get as many votes as she did. Lucky.

[rodeodance]

46. :-)

[goldcanyonaz]

16. Thank you for posting this.

:thumbsup:

[DemBones DemBones]

20. Thank you for posting something positive!

This place is like Free Republic now. Very sad to see it go downhill.

[rodeodance]

22. I think it makes BO look to have his surrogrates demanding Hillary drop out!

[rodeodance]

24. K and REC

[1776Forever]

25. I said it before - HRC can play the gender card but Obama has to step back & let her go at it!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5348813&mesg_id=5351157

[DemBones DemBones]

34. Has Hillary Clinton played the gender card? This article is by Marie Cocco,

not Hillary Clinton. Clinton is facing sexist discrimination from men who think they can
intimidate her into dropping out. She's too strong for them to succeed.

But they are absolutely wrong to do it, as are you.

[1776Forever]

43. Did I say I wanted her to drop out or encourage ANYONE to tell her to drop out???

NO - I don't want her too. April 15th is coming. I sure don't want her to drop out! Keep running Hillary - Keep running!!!!

[Butch350]

26. Typical Woman

Don't know when to quit - don't know when to shut-up ! In case you didn't notice your whole rant is sexist!

[rodeodance]

27. Typical man--can't take the heat --has to play cards.

[DemBones DemBones]

36. You should read more carefully, Butch, and

try to comprehend what the writer is saying. It's not a "sexist rant." She's not saying Obama shouldn't be president because he's a man. She's not saying all men are sexists.

She is saying that a lot of men who support Obama are trying to get Hillary Clinton to quit the race before it's over, that those men are guilty of sexism.

"Now Clinton’s methodical, dogged history of work for the Democratic Party is treated just like the methodical, dogged histories of so many women in the workplace: Having come this far she must not go too far. She must step aside to take the smaller office, with the lesser title and the lower pay to make room for the younger guy with the thinner résumé. And please, would she just go quietly like a good girl?"


If that's not clear to you, she is saying that women work their asses off only to see men who are not as well-qualified and are recent hires promoted over them, paid more, and they're supposed to take it, not make waves about it. It happens all the time, despite the EEOC. Women are usually expected to make the coffee, too, and bring food for office parties. All women who have ever been in the workforce know these things

<snip>

"Somehow the Obama campaign has come to believe that insulting Clinton is the same as beating her. It isn’t. And insulting her supporters—especially women and, in particular, working-class women, who have clung to her candidacy all these months—isn’t much of a general-election victory strategy. Women were 54 percent of the electorate in the presidential election of 2004. Without their support, Al Gore would not have won the popular vote in 2000 and John Kerry wouldn’t have come so close in 2004. Women voters put Democrats in control of Congress in 2006."



Did you understand that? The Obama campaign is insulting Clinton and insulting her supporters, especially the
women who support her. And women are the majority of the electorate. Women always have a slight lead in population because males are more likely to die before birth or in infancy than females, and also more likely to be killed in accidents. Women live longer, on average, as well, and tend to be regular voters.

So, to sum up, there are more women voters. Nobody can win without the support of women. And women are angry at the sexism being displayed against Hillary Clinton.

All liberals should be angry at the sexism being used against HRC. I don't like BO, but if people were using racist arguments against him, I'd be angry and I'd defend his civil rights.

Women are seeing that an awful lot of liberals don't care about our civil rights. Interesting lesson with far-reaching ramifications.

[adoraz]

59. Has nothing to do with her being a woman

She can't come back, it is impossible. Doesn't mean ANYTHING that she is a woman. if this was Bill Clinton I would still want him to drop out. Her being in is just hurting the party.

[Orsino]

28. If Clinton is behind by at least three field goals...

...and to complete the analogy we should note that they'll have to be 140-yard field goals.

The analogy fails, though, as Clinton is no longer measuring success by the points on the board. She appears to be counting on a brokered convention rather than for a delegate win.

[rodeodance]

29. and what game is BO playing?--The magic number name?--He will not have either.

[Orsino]

31. Fortunately, he's not playing games.

My point, though, was that neither is Clinton. They are trying to win in the ways that best suit their personalities and current standings in the delegate count.

[DemBones DemBones]

33. Cocco wrote that Obama is ahead by one field goal in the third quarter,

not by three field goals.

I've seen more than one game won in the last few seconds of the fourth quarter.

Chances are that the two candidates will have about the same number of delegates going into the
convention, meaning the superdelegates will have to come into play. Superdelegates are more
concerned about the party winning than about individual candidates winning (Donna Brazile being
a noisy exception) and they know that HRC can beat McCain but Obama can't, so I believe HRC will be the nominee. Obama racked up delegates in caucuses and primaries in red states which he can never carry in a
general election; some states never go Dem in general elections. HRC won blue states that Dems can win
and she will win more. Polls show she can beat McCain in the states that are essential for a Dem to win and
Obama is way behind McCain.

What good does it do to run a candidate who can't win the general election? When the game is close, you
don't let the second string play, you put your best players on the field.

[Orsino]

35. That's what I took issue with.

There are at least three primaries left, necessitating at least three different strategies in those states. In order to catch up in delegates, Clinton needs to win them all by a big, big, margin. If we were to use the failed analogy, those would be touchdowns.

I won't even say that it's impossible. I believe that Clinton would have to reinvent herself as a true progressive, though, to break away from Obama in such a dramatic fashion. I don't think that either of these centrists is up to that job.

I think that Obama's delegate lead is insurmountable, or nearly so. It'll take much more than a field goal.

[DemBones DemBones]

39. They'll be going into the convention with close delegate counts

so the superdelegates will have to get involved and the party insiders (i.e., superdelegates) know what's
possible and what's not possible in November. Obama can't win a lot of the red states he won primaries
or caucuses in and polls show he'd lose some key blue states to McCain, states that Clinton can win.
They're going to vote for the person who can win in November, Hillary Clinton.

[kmsarvis]

54. BULLSHIT!!!!

ANYBODY WHO DOESNT BELIEVE THE SUPERDELEGATES ARE GONNA GO ALONG WITH THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE IS NAIVE.

[anamandujano]

62. THERE IS NO "WILL OF THE PEOPLE" TO GO ALONG WITH YET,

try as you may to keep pushing that crap.

[Jakes Progress]

70. Does this post mean that you think

that the nomination should go to whoever has the popular vote? I mean the votes cast by ballots by people who vote like you do in an election? Does that mean if Hillary has the popular vote by the convention, you will support her?

[izzybeans]

37. Don't you know that rewriting of history goes to the victors?

This makes an interesting point based on a very selective reading of history. Clinton was the inevitable one. Now her supporters have the arrogance to believe it is "her turn". She is being beaten by the underdog on the ground.

[anamandujano]

63. The "underdog" has 3 or 4 times the $$$$ and political insiders

forcing him on the electorate.

Bomba is no underdog by any stretch.

[Mooney]

38. Translation: Hillary is still losing.

She can use all the sports analogies she wants. Hillary is losing. And unless Obama has an aneurysm, that's not going to change.

[anamandujano]

64. Translation: BombaBots are still spinning.

[KittyWampus]

42. Hillary lost and is too fucking ego maniacal to get out of the race. How many times has her campaign

moved the goal posts? Lied? Smeared Obama? Played the race card?

[saltpoint]

44. Lovely little piece from Miss Coco. Cute as a button.

[americanstranger]

45. Wasn't this posted yesterday?

Why are you Clinton people making everyone read everything at least twice?

- as

[polmaven]

55. Did I miss the rule

that says "Everyone MUST read every post, even if it is a duplicate" ??????

OOOPS! And to think of the many posts I have passed by!

[EmilyAnne]

48. AND Obama did win Texas. The writer fails to acknowledge that fact.

[Catherina]

49. Poor Hillary. Those big bad boys are so mean to her. n/t

[Iceburg]

53. Kicking, recommending and not going quietly like a good girl./nt

[Starbucks Anarchist]

56. No, it's a delegate thing.

[Justitia]

57. So Hillary's going to lose because she's a woman?? Nice Victim / Martyr complex going there.

Yeah, using your gender as an excuse for failure is a real feminist train of thought. :sarcasm:

Thanks for reinforcing some of the worst stereotypes (will she cry to get out of a speeding ticket too?), and trying to pit the genders against each other in Our Party and woman against woman (who doesn't support your candidate).

I'm a 40 yr old female Barack Obama supporter because he's the best candidate for the job, no matter what his physical equipment may be.

[adoraz]

58. "Obama now is ahead by a field goal in the third quarter."

obviously this person has no clue how football is played.

Its more like down by 3 touchdowns in the third quarter.

[Rob Gregory Browne]

60. Sorry, Marie, he's ahead by quite a bit more than a field goal. n/t

[Bigleaf]

61. Obama now is ahead by a field goal in the third quarter? What?

He's ahead by 14 points with under 2 minutes left in the game. Oh, and Team Clinton just fumbled and they are out of time-outs. Team Obama just has hang onto the ball and run out the clock.

[anamandujano]

65. "Somehow the Obama campaign has come to believe that insulting Clinton is the same as beating her."

Nicely sums up the Bomba&friendsWpeens strategy, a losing one to be sure.

[riverdeep]

66. Hillary's not losing because she's a woman.

She's losing because she didn't financially plan on having to compete past super Tuesday, she's losing because the recent tone of her campaign is out of line with her statements of harmony expressed in earlier debates (when she was winning), she's losing because she makes up rules as she goes along, she's losing because she acts as if the Presidency is owed her, she's losing because she can't be honest and direct with the American people (driver's license issue is when she started tanking), she's losing because she pads her resume, she's losing because she has high negatives, and finally, like it or not, she's not as charming as Obama. The last isn't particularly important to me, but the American people seem to need charm.

Whatever sexist shenannigins are going on on the sidelines by the 'guys' (including Rachel Maddow?), are overwhelmed by the faulty designs of herself and her campaign staff.

[Deep13]

67. Yup. Pretty much.

What I find surprising is not that men think this way, but that so many women enable it. It seems that women are so competative with each other that they would rather keep another woman from getting into the men's pecking order than see all women advance.

[ensho]

68. kick

it's your thread

thank you

[madrchsod]

71. "Clinton then was supposed to bow out after March 4

if she did not win the crucial states of Texas and Ohio" did`t bill say that? ....well she lost texas.

"win it like a man"..."win it like a woman"?

[mkultra]

72. allow me to summarize

Boys suck!

<snip>

and they are dumb too!

<snip>

Hillary is losing because shes a woman.

<snip>

Obama hates women.








Seems kind of sexist to me.

[Evergreen Emerald]

73. Nice article. I am offended by them attempting to make her quit

I was when Edwards did it too--as if the boys have more right to be there than she does.