Blog

Primary election time

Tuesday is SuperDuper Tuesday, where a bunch of states vote in primaries. One of those states is my own, Massachusetts. For a while, I was, ironically, supporting Edwards. Mostly because I really, really don't like Hillary, and I felt like Obama is young, could use more seasoning before being president, and Edwards would have made a great president. (Actually, my dream ticket was Edwards/Obama - 16 years of bliss.) Anyway, now that Edwards has dropped out, I'm going to support Obama wholeheartedly. One thing, though. It appears that some people feel that you can't really be a feminist and be against Hillary. The New York chapter of NOW (National Organization for Women) had this to say about the Kennedy endorsement of Obama:
... 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). ... 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.
Huh? I see, so Kennedy is not endorsing what he feels is the best candidate. No, no, he's betraying women! Puleeze! Would they even think of saying such a thing if Elizabeth Dole were running? Hillary Clinton believes in "coercive diplomacy" (if there ever was a contradiction, that is one.) She voted to give the president the authority to go to war in Iraq. She has been completely bought out by the health care industry, and basically no longer believes in universal, single-payer health coverage. She voted for the 700 mile fence along the Mexican border. She voted for the Patriot Act. Twice. I can't, in good conscience, vote for her in the primary. NY NOW's unfortunate perspective (feminist=must be for Clinton) is problematic on its face.  And the truth is, this election isn't about either gender or race. It is a historic occasion that the Democratic party will nominate someone who will be the first in history. That is significant enough. NY NOW's stance (National NOW has been conciliatory) is divisive, at a time that divisiveness is destructive. We are in deep, deep shit as a country, and we need to find a way out of it. If you think Clinton is best (and not just because she has a vagina) then great. And if you think Obama is best (not just because he has dark skin) that's great too. Do we need to add identity politics to an already challenging time?
Blog Category: 

Comments

It's interesting that there are huge implications to picking either candidate, purely on the basis of their demographic features. I'm glad that most people seem to be looking past this -- including the candidates themselves. But it's sad to hear that NOW doesn't get it.

Agreed! I am sick to death of being accused of lack of support for women because I do not like/support Hillary. Obama is my candidate. It isn't bad enough that we expect stereotyping from the right -- it hurts to get it from the left as well. (Not that NY NOW is a sterling example of the left.)

Leave a comment