Archive of ‘Eelections’ category

If you endorse Obama, you are a sexist

This is beautiful. The Head of the NY chapter of NOW is attacking Teddy Kennedy for endorsing Obama, calling it a Betrayal. Here is the text:

“And now the greatest betrayal! We are repaid with his abandonment!
He’s picked the new guy over us. He’s joined the list of progressive
white men who can’t or won’t handle the prospect of a woman president
who is Hillary Clinton (they will of course say they support a woman
president, just not “this” one). ‘They’ are Howard Dean and Jim Dean
(Yup! That’s Howard’s brother) who run DFA (that’s the group and list
from the Dean campaign that we women helped start and grow). They are
Alternet, Progressive Democrats of America,, Kucinich
lovers and all the other groups that take women’s money, say they’ll do
feminist and women’s rights issues one of these days, and conveniently
forget to mention women and children when they talk about poverty or
human needs or America’s future or whatever.

“This latest move by Kennedy, is so telling about the status of and
respect for women’s rights, women’s voices, women’s equality, women’s
authority and our ability – indeed, our obligation – to promote and
earn and deserve and elect, unabashedly, a President that is the first
woman after centuries of men who ‘know what’s best for us.’”

Holy Shit. Thankfully I am not the only one who would like this Lady to chill the fuck out. Emily Bazelon from Slate chimes in:

So, that's it—an endorsement of any candidate but Hillary is a betrayal
of the feminist cause? I suppose the more sophisticated version is that
interest groups expect the politicians they support to support them
blindly in their time of need. This is their time of need, the NY NOW
chapter argues, ergo, Kennedy should be with them. But that assumes
that the feminist time of need equates with electing Hillary. Would
most women, or even most feminists, agree with that? I just can't.

Yay for common sense!