![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
...for a bit about politics. Posting here instead of on ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
uppityliberal because it's that important (and also because it pertains in part to my journalistic ethics sensibilities.)
By now, I'm sure most folks have been hearing the whispers about race-baiting coming from the Clinton campaign. While it's true that some Clinton supporters and one staffer have said unfortunate (if unintentionally so) things, neither Hillary nor Bill has said word one that's actually in any way, shape or form racist or even just clueless. Instead, what's happening is that there's this big game of telephone, where a couple of people think they heard something racist, they tell other people, and then the morons at the NYT print it as if it's a fact.
When it is, actually, nothing of the sort.
Don't believe me? ( Here's what was actually said )
As for the other two comments--the MLK and Nelson Mandela ones?
In the MLK bit, Hillary was stressing the importance of being in a position to actually do something instead of just talking about it. And she's dead right. None of MLK's passionate and laudable activism would have gotten anywhere had it not been for people with actual power--aka elected officials--who could pass the laws necessary. (This is, FYI, the same reason why it's so darned important to vote: You can march and sign petitions and holler at city hall all you want to, but when you squander your vote--the one bit of political power you really have--your efforts fall short.)
And the Nelson Mandela thing: Bill was talking TO Nelson, who asked him a question to the effect of "what one person would you want with you if the world was going to hell?" Well, duh. Bill's going to pick his wife, instead of saying, "Gosh, Nelson, I really love Hillary and all, but y'know, I think I'd rather spend Armageddon next to you!"
I have no idea who it is that's pushing this racist nonsense (and it wouldn't surprise me if it was someone from the GOP, trying to sow discord among the two Dem frontrunners), but it's really quite irksome. And I'm not even a Hillary fan. (I'm voting Edwards; his economic policies are far more worker-friendly than those of the other two.)
Obviously, race and gender are going to come up in this election. It would be impossible for them not to. It's a historic moment here, and the biological states of these two candidates are newsworthy. And there will, of course, always be people who actually are racist and sexist who want nothing more than to vent their spleens about the ability of these two people to lead the country. In fact, I sincerely believe that there are enough of these bastards to make a difference in the general, and I am a tad nervous about that (although really, most of the actual bigots are voting for Paul or Huckabee anyway.)
But this is just petty bullshit, and anyone who keeps perpetuating it is either stirring up shit for the sake of doing so, or so far out of touch with reality that it's a wonder why they're not just voting a straight Mordor ticket.
uppityliberal because it's that important (and also because it pertains in part to my journalistic ethics sensibilities.)By now, I'm sure most folks have been hearing the whispers about race-baiting coming from the Clinton campaign. While it's true that some Clinton supporters and one staffer have said unfortunate (if unintentionally so) things, neither Hillary nor Bill has said word one that's actually in any way, shape or form racist or even just clueless. Instead, what's happening is that there's this big game of telephone, where a couple of people think they heard something racist, they tell other people, and then the morons at the NYT print it as if it's a fact.
When it is, actually, nothing of the sort.
Don't believe me? ( Here's what was actually said )
As for the other two comments--the MLK and Nelson Mandela ones?
In the MLK bit, Hillary was stressing the importance of being in a position to actually do something instead of just talking about it. And she's dead right. None of MLK's passionate and laudable activism would have gotten anywhere had it not been for people with actual power--aka elected officials--who could pass the laws necessary. (This is, FYI, the same reason why it's so darned important to vote: You can march and sign petitions and holler at city hall all you want to, but when you squander your vote--the one bit of political power you really have--your efforts fall short.)
And the Nelson Mandela thing: Bill was talking TO Nelson, who asked him a question to the effect of "what one person would you want with you if the world was going to hell?" Well, duh. Bill's going to pick his wife, instead of saying, "Gosh, Nelson, I really love Hillary and all, but y'know, I think I'd rather spend Armageddon next to you!"
I have no idea who it is that's pushing this racist nonsense (and it wouldn't surprise me if it was someone from the GOP, trying to sow discord among the two Dem frontrunners), but it's really quite irksome. And I'm not even a Hillary fan. (I'm voting Edwards; his economic policies are far more worker-friendly than those of the other two.)
Obviously, race and gender are going to come up in this election. It would be impossible for them not to. It's a historic moment here, and the biological states of these two candidates are newsworthy. And there will, of course, always be people who actually are racist and sexist who want nothing more than to vent their spleens about the ability of these two people to lead the country. In fact, I sincerely believe that there are enough of these bastards to make a difference in the general, and I am a tad nervous about that (although really, most of the actual bigots are voting for Paul or Huckabee anyway.)
But this is just petty bullshit, and anyone who keeps perpetuating it is either stirring up shit for the sake of doing so, or so far out of touch with reality that it's a wonder why they're not just voting a straight Mordor ticket.
Tags: