Elton John Bashes Misogynists For Not Supporting Clinton

[dudalb]

Wait. I don't understand. How is Elton John a Democrat? He isn't even a US citizen, is he?

Uh, considering the Non US citizens on this forum who are basically campaigning for Obama, I would not go there ....

 

[T.A.M.]

dudalb:

besides Oliver, is there any other non US Citizen on this site CAMPAIGNING for Obama? Curious cause I must have missed it. It is an honest question.

Wanting the guy to be the US President, and arguing to that effect, IMO is not campaigning.

TAM

 

[Pardalis]

So people should vote for her because she's a woman?

Isn't that worse?

 

[T.A.M.]

yes it is the same ridiculousness...

If you do not vote for Hillary, YOU ARE SEXIST.

If you do not vote for Obama, YOU ARE RACIST.

If you do not vote for McCain, YOU ARE SMART.

TAM

 

[brodski]

Wait. I don't understand. How is Elton John a Democrat?

well, given the royalties he gets from the theme tune to the death of Princess Diana, he's no republican.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

From my point of view, there has been more misogyny than racism affecting this campaign. Maybe it's because of the individuals, maybe it's because of actual sexism, but claiming it isn't there is pretty naive.

It is very clear in particular among many of the newscasters and of all places, the liberal talk show hosts. Like I said, it may be hard to sort out what is misogyny and what is dislike of Clinton, but the bashing and double standard is very visible.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

yes it is the same ridiculousness...

If you do not vote for Hillary, YOU ARE SEXIST.

If you do not vote for Obama, YOU ARE RACIST.

If you do not vote for McCain, YOU ARE SMART.

TAM

But there is more to it than that. If Clinton disses Obama, it's attack politics. If Obama disses Clinton, it's campaigning on the issues. If Obama says Clinton is old politics like all the other politicians it goes unnoticed as a negative message. If Clinton says Obama is inexperienced, it becomes negative campaigning. And on it goes.

 

[Fitter]

Elton John totally copied REO Speedwagon. They thought America was misogynistic decades ago.





Sorry. Had to be done.

Don't be sorry, I opened this thread specifically to see how many posts there were before an REO reference. Thanks for not letting me down.

 

[Pardalis]

From my point of view, there has been more misogyny than racism affecting this campaign. Maybe it's because of the individuals, maybe it's because of actual sexism

... or maybe you're just being paranoid.

 

[T.A.M.]

But there is more to it than that. If Clinton disses Obama, it's attack politics. If Obama disses Clinton, it's campaigning on the issues. If Obama says Clinton is old politics like all the other politicians it goes unnoticed as a negative message. If Clinton says Obama is inexperienced, it becomes negative campaigning. And on it goes.

1. I think that is merely your perspective. I see it happening quite differently. I see Hillary and her surrogates initiating most of the negative comments/attacks, and Obama when needed, rebutting them.

2. If you feel so strongly that your points are correct, then prove it. Bring a list of the negative attacks that the Obama campaign has unleashed on Clinton without provocation. I submit that an unprovoked list of Clinton attacks on Obama would likely be longer, and much harsher.

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

... or maybe you're just being paranoid.

or maybe it is simply a skewed perspective.

TAM

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

... or maybe you're just being paranoid.

You and TAM are clearly both men. I am not being paranoid, I noted specifics and can list many more.

The fact you don't see it doesn't surprise me.

 

[Shadowdweller]

It is very clear in particular among many of the newscasters and of all places, the liberal talk show hosts. Like I said, it may be hard to sort out what is misogyny and what is dislike of Clinton, but the bashing and double standard is very visible.

And are Clinton's high disapproval ratings amongst the prominent female liberal pundits equally signs of misogyny? Pundits like say...Arianna Huffington, Rachael Maddow, and even...*gasp* Randi Rhodes.

Never mind, of course, that Hillary has repeatedly offended the progressive wing from which is drawn a high percentage of said pundits....

 

[Bob Blaylock]

There's a reason a wise man once said, "The eleventh commandment is, 'Thou shalt speak no ill of a fellow Republican.'"
·
·
·
That wise Republican, BTW, was Ronald Reagan, who knew a little bit about winning elections. Somewhere, today, he's smiling.

I vaguely remember a political cartoon, which must've during the 1984 election season. It showed the two Democratic candidates (Walter “Fritz” Mondale and Gary Hart?) in an old western setting, about to enter into a gunfight against each other, and Reagan, as the undertaker, standing to the side smiling because he knew that either way, he was going to win.

Seems that someone should dust off this old cartoon, and redraw it with Clinton & Obama as the gunfighters, and McCain as the undertaker.

 

[BPSCG]

You and TAM are clearly both men.

(...snip...)

The fact you don't see it doesn't surprise me.

Wow. Talk about sexism. Skeptigirl, heal thyself.

If a man says something in the forest, and there's no woman around to hear it, is he still wrong?

 

[T.A.M.]

You and TAM are clearly both men. I am not being paranoid, I noted specifics and can list many more.

The fact you don't see it doesn't surprise me.

I am real surprised by the above response



TAM

 

[Lurker]

2. If you feel so strongly that your points are correct, then prove it. Bring a list of the negative attacks that the Obama campaign has unleashed on Clinton without provocation. I submit that an unprovoked list of Clinton attacks on Obama would likely be longer, and much harsher.

TAM

I would say that Obama doesn't really need to initiate attacks against Hillary when the media is already doing it for him.

Her comment about King/Johnson civil rights is a prime example of silliness. The comment she made was completely innocent and only by reading more into it could it be construed as anti-King. That didn't stop the media and pundits from acting as if she denigrated King.

The media pretty much hates the Clintons. They savaged Gore back in 2000 with lies about him because of his being part of the Clintons.

 

[Pardalis]

You and TAM are clearly both men. I am not being paranoid, I noted specifics and can list many more.

The fact you don't see it doesn't surprise me.

I hope you're not implying that women have some sixth sense about "those things", or that men aren't sensitive enough.

 

[ZouPrime]

You know, I think feminists should seriously reconsider their support of Hillary and their willingness to paint her as a victim of mysogynism. I don't think this is a smart strategy at all.

I'm a son for feminism. My mother had a very fullfilling career as a government official where she worked for and supported feminist causes. From very early age I lived in an environment where my parents were equal and respectful of each other. I consider myself lucky to have grew up in such a progressive household.

But when I see Hillary and her feminist supporters play the sexism card over and over and over again since the begining of the primaries, I see people playing with fire and risking losing the sympathy of people like me and like millions of progressive, liberal north americans. Women have made incredible progresses in the past decades; a few years ago, it would have been unthinkable for someone like Hillary to be considered a serious candidate for US presidency. By itself, Hillary candidacy is historic and will remains so whatever the primaries results are. But these uncalled accusations of sexism aren't helping at all. In fact, they are destroying Hillary legitimacy as a serious candidate and painting her more and more as an opportunist who is using the fight of a generation of women for her own political gains. It sickens me to see this happening, and it sicken me to see intelligent women falling into this trap.

Hillary isn't rejected because she's a woman. She's being rejected because she's a calculating, manipulative person and had a overall bad campaign against an opponent who have a very clear and very obvious popular appeal. There's nothing else to add. When feminists paint her as a victim of the latest sex wars, they implicitly acknowledge that people should vote for her simply because she's a women and not because of her actual leadership qualities. For the rest of us, watching the primaries from afar, it's a cold and sad reminder that feminists, even if they are right in their revendications, are flawed humans like everybody else and can be victims of their own prejudices. Instead of taking the high road, they are more than ready to stomp on the same level as the men they criticised so much in the past. That's not good for the cause at all. It's more or less the same situation as when the african-american community supported OJ Simpsons because he was black, even if for the rest of the world, he was very obviously guilty of murder.

 

[Tailgater]

You and TAM are clearly both men.


The fact you don't see it doesn't surprise me.

There really needs to be a jref quote of the week.

I put this in the "quote that defines a poster" category.