Be Gracious
I often tell my middle schoolers to be good sports – about losing and about winning.
I get it, Obama supporters, you’re happy; you think Obama is something great. However, it’s barely past midnight and I’ve already had my share of unwanted Obama-rama; from G-chat and Facebook statuses, to audacious questions from tactless friends, “Have you seen the news?” No, Dipshit, I’ve been sleeping under a media-free rock tonight –Did we find Osama bin Laden? Is the war in Iraq over? Did Nancy Kerrigan get clubbed in the shins again? Oh, wait, you mean did I see that Obama’s about to secure the nomination – yeah, I saw it.
Anyway, Obama fans, please be gracious. Tonight surely marks the first time I’ve ever cried (okay, semi-sobbed) through a non-concession speech; and while my fanaticism may be unmatched by most, I am surely not the only Clinton supporter who is dazed and disappointed, unsure of where to go from here. Remember that HRC’s campaign meant a lot of different things to a lot of people. Sure, Obama won over the “higher-educated,” the young, the liberal, the wealthy. On the other hand, Clinton was/is an undeniably strong advocate for the working class; a proactive supporter of children’s rights; a woman that many American women never thought they would see; and, yes, a keen and brilliant politician. All I’m saying is that, chances are, your Clinton-supporting friends already know you’re ready to BARACK THE VOTE, so you probably don’t need to remind them today.
The light at the end of the tunnel? Maybe I can rekindle my six-year-old dreams of becoming the first woman president, and this time we won't even have to worry about changing the tradition of having a First Lady. Maybe America can handle that.
33 comments:
Ok, this has to be the funniest thing I've read all week.
i'm not sure why this post is funny, mr. jones. but i just wanted to second stephanie on this. my distaste for barack and his candidacy is based on a number of factors. i'm gonna vote for the dude, though. (i'll vote for him twice if hills is his VP.) but i have grown to despise many of barack's supporters. the casual sexism, the overt mocking of older voters and of the blue collar voters who came out in droves for hillary in states like PA and OH. and then there's the arrogance. this will take some time to get over.
I'm often amused by posts like this that call out other peoples behavior, while exhibiting the similar behavior.
IE: responding poorly to a situation.
Oh well.
point taken. i dont think stephanie said anything ungracious. i did and i admit it. i'm not ready to be gracious towards the obama people yet for all the reasons i layed out in my previous comment. they won. they'll win in november. i'll vote with them. congrats. but screw them. i don't care for how they won.
I'm with Parker and Steph. We'll get on board, of course, but...sigh.
She being derogatory to the people that are happy Obama has what he needs to get the nomination for his party. The tone is all over her post.
She gets it, you think Obama is something great. Those are her words. She continues in that manner. Even calling names, like Dipshit. Maybe you did have a media free night. Maybe you decided to read a book that night, and figured you would find out in the morning how things went.
Basically, it reads as she's pissed Hillary probably isn't going to get the nomination, and is doesn't like hearing about it, and in fact, her responses to those expressing their happiness, is her being a bad loser, not them being a bad winner.
Hiding behind anonymity apparently gives you license to be more personally derogatory than the original poster ever was. Seems like you're more substantiating her point than anything.
I think there was plenty of negativity coming from both sides. Hillary's supporters can't point the finger at Obama's when they were just as guilty. Casual sexism was easily balanced by the deliberate stirring up of latent racial resentment, a sense of entitlement to the nomination or accusations that Obama won unfairly.
The fighting is over now though and it's time to kick grandpa's ass.
i never accused obama himself or his campaign of sexism. the media and obama supporters have been sexist throughout with the references to hillary's appearence, the crying, calling her a castrating bitch, obsessing over her spouse and what he's up to more than they ever did for any male candidate. there are plenty of people out there who have said racially derogatory things about obama, but none of them to my knowledge have been affiliated with the clinton campaign. don't accuse them of that without prrof.
and as for the entitlement issue, what presidential candidate doesn't feel entitled to the office? i guess saint obama doesn't really want it and is taking on this tremendous burden because america needs him? get off it.
Stephanie,
What's your take on her "non-concession concession speech?"
Obama did win last night, so for the good of the party, I'm kind of put off that she would leave things hanging as she did. Also, if she is indeed angling for the VP nomination, her behavior doesn't exactly say "I'm easy to work with and I'm ready to join the team." To me, it says "I'm going to force you to make me VP or bring you, the party, and myself down while trying."
Just curious if you, as a Hillary supporter, can provide us with a different perspective on this.
what behavior are you talking about ben? her listing her accomplishments and giving a speech to her supporters after congratulating obama on his win? i have never seen a candidate concede a race like this 20 minutes or so after losing. she has spent years running this race. she'll concede this week. deal with it. all of this hand wringing and frustration over "what she did" last night is, in my view, more of the sexist "hillary is a crazy bitch" nonsense we have heard from the beginning. that is what makes me as a hillary supporter less than gracious today.
I'm not a member of the "Hillary is a crazy bitch" contingent. I felt the heartstrings too last night when she mentioned old women and how they came out to support her because they can remember a time when they didn't have the right to vote. There's no doubt she is a strong and historic candidate. I'm simply pointing out that her aggressive attempts to secure the VP nomination (and lets be honest, that's what she's been after for weeks...does anyone really believe she thought she could win the presidency with the odds against her?) imply force as opposed to grace. Nobody likes to be forced to do anything, Obama included.
i'm going to ignore the dude who is upset because stephanie called her friend who was an obama supporter a dipshit . . .
ben - i think we may have different takes on what hillary has been doing in recent weeks. of course she knew the odds were stacked against her. but i think (and she clearly though) that she owed it to everyone who has voted for her and contributed to her in what has been the closest presidential nominating process in history to stay in until the end and collect all of the delegates that she could. collecting all of those delegates is not about obama. it's about giving the people out there like me who think obama was not the best democratic candidate the right to have her say. yes, it also positions her to be VP or even to be the nominee if the convention delegates for some reason decide that obama is a loon (for the record, i do not think he is.)
and as for forcing obama to pick hillary, the convention delegates CAN technically do that and i hope they do if he is not inclined to do it himself.
I'm pleased to see that readers are keeping an eye out for the "straw man argument," but I'm not sure it applies in this case.
I suggest everyone close their eyes and visualize Obama and Clinton making out. Feel the love. Now picture them both taking away grandpa's drivers licence due to reckless endangerment of the country.
"and as for forcing obama to pick hillary, the convention delegates CAN technically do that and i hope they do if he is not inclined to do it himself."
Is there precedent for that? I wonder how that would play out among the electorate.
it used to happen all the time.
Parker:
Similarly, I don't think anyone from the actual Obama campaign ever made or used any sexist remarks or tactics. The campaigns don't have any control over what every whacko supporter says or does.
However, her spouse was a former president, so of course he's gonna get more attention than most. The only point I'm making is that there was plenty of nonsense to go around and it came from both sides.
As for your other question, I can think of 2 rationale reasons to vote for McCain:
1) To see him bite someone's head off when he gets pissed. That would be kind of fun.
2) To see Cindy McCain melt when exposed to direct sunlight as I am convinced she is a vampire. That would be kind of fun too and probably scare the terrorists as well.
I hope he's allowed to pick his own running mate, and I hope he picks someone who can help him fucking WIN.
God, I hope we win this time.
As for me and the straw man, I could hardly be less anonymous.
- Jenny Miller
jennymiller.com
jennymiller@thenewgay.com
I understand both sides needing to be gracious, but keep in mind that Obama's campaign now needs Hillary supporters' votes and money...not the other way around. She's lost the nomination and won't be on the top of the November ballot. So while both sides need to cool the rhetoric, I agree with Jenny that the Obama folks need to try not rubbing their victory in our noses too hard if they expect us to not be bitter and work our heart out for him in this campaign. You have your moment - you won - now act like grownups and show the 18 million of us who voted for Hillary a little respect.
I am a Hillary supporter. I think she's a brilliant politician and an inspiring woman. I've got many reasons for suuporting her that I wont go into. Im disappointed and sad but I'll vote for Obama in November. Hell, I might even campaign for him if the going gets tough. I honestly never had a problem with Obama, with the exception of a quibble with his healthcare plan. It's some of his supporters that piss me off. Like shaking with rage, holding in tears, nearly throttling someone, piss me off. (Please note that I said some, I also know many Obama supporters who are very respectful)
Look, for us Hillary supporters, it's been months and months of not only the disgusting, overt sexism of media commentators like Chris Matthews, but the arrogant, gleeful disrespect of Hillary on the part of some of Obama's young, progressive supporters. Disrespect of a woman who has dedicated her life to public service, weathered the worst of attack politics and been a strong, effective advocate for a variety of progressive issues in Congress. Rebecca Traister wrote a wonderful piece on this for Salon back in April.
So we are feeling a little raw now that Obama has won and, frankly, my tolerance for gloating is nil. Which is what I think this post is probably about.
I think that the US should have pulled a DC and had the presidential election between the two democrats. That's clearly what this was all about anyway! Show me a place in the Constitution where that says it's impossible, and I'll show you a brilliant place where dreams are made.
Maybe Hillary should pull a Lieberman and run for prez as an independent? (*ducks from flying rotten fruit, bricks and other heavy-yet-hurlable objects heaved in his direction*)
Jenny miller, putting your address out there doesn't change it.
This what I said: Calling people a dipshit isn't being a good loser, which is what this post is about. Stephanie wants the Obama people to be good winners, when she is being a sore loser at the same time. So do as she says, but not as she does.
You come in and say that because i'm anon, I'm essentially doing what she is complaining about.
Your argument that being anon is the same thing, and there for it's wrong.
No, it's not the same thing. That is why you have a straw man argument.
NOW to sink to your level.
Should I have expected any less? Of course not, you're so typical.
There now I gave you what you really wanted, so you can point it out and feel better about yourself.
anon dude, you're acting like an ass. or, in my experience, like an obama fan. i know nothing about stephanie but when i read her post and the use of the word dipshit i didn't sense any malice. stop being so self righteous. it's not called for in this situation. stephanie, jenny and i all said we would vote for your savior. we've all discussed any number of rational defenses for hillary's speech. let's move on.
Im not sure I understand where all of Anon's anger is coming from or why you felt the need to attack Jenny. I do on the other hand understand where Jenny would be irratated. Being attacked on a blog like this seems a little unfair while the attacker is hiding behind the veil of anonymous. At least Jenny is taking ownership of her statements rather than placing blame on the wide open void.
*I am a different anonymous poster*
First, I'll disclose that I am and have since last year been a big Obama supporter. I became an Obama supporter mostly because, given the similarities in policy among the major contenders for the nomination, I was excited by the symbolic progress that Obama's candidacy represented. I am not merely referencing his race when I say that, though I think all Americans should really be proud that we are the first western democracy to have a black candidate come this close to the presidency. I also think Obama has a unique opportunity to move beyond the Vietnam-era culture wars we've been fighting for 40 years in this country. Whether you think Hillary is 100% victim of unfair attacks, and has done nothing in her public career to stoke up those attacks, it remains very difficult to argue that her candidacy would not result in a rehashing of all of the baggage, scandals, and old arguments of the 1990s. And Bill is a dominating personality that brought a lot of bad along with a lot of good during his tenure. We can hardly fault the media for covering him more than they covered Michelle Obama.
I also have been passionately against the war since before it was waged, and it matters a lot to me that Obama was the only candidate with a chance to win that could say with a straight face that he never favored the war. I know that's the past and we have focus on how to get out of Iraq responsibly now, but it is symbolically important to me that I can cast my vote for an anti-war candidate this time around. For me, and for many Obama supporters, I was very disappointed in Hillary's hawkish posture on Iraq, which didn't change until the war became unpopular. That's not a personal attack on her; it's a legitimate deal-breaker for me. And not open a huge can of worms, but I feel betrayed by the Clinton efforts to deny gays civil rights with the passing of DOMA and his touting of his anti-gay bonafides on the basis of DOMA when he campaigned for Southern candidates in 1998. I know that was Bill, not Hillary, but Hillary has refused to fully repeal DOMA if she were president. I wonder how constrained she would be by not wanting to contradict her husband's legacy on a wide range of issues if she can't even bring herself to concede that DOMA was an egregious mistake. In contrast, I am inspired by Obama's willingness to defend gays in speeches in black churches, where we all know (or should know) that homophobia is quite prevalent. It matters to me that one candidate defends gay rights only when speaking before rich gay audiences, whereas the other defends gay rights to unfriendly audiences that could cost him support.
Anyway, the reason why I want to lay out these reasons for my support for Obama and opposition to Hillary is that I am dismayed by some of the comments here that seem to equate opposition to Hillary with sexism. It implies that there are not legitimate reasons for not supporting her. For instance, Parker seems to imply that the widespread disappointment on the part of many (including Clinton supporters; see Charlie Rangel's comments today; see Hillary Rosen's comments today) with Hillary's speech is just another sexist attack. I just don't understand how we can leap to that conclusion. Maybe that's not what Parker meant to say, but it sure read that way.
I also think that it's not at all a bad thing for us to have a discussion about Hillary supporters' disappointment and trying to work through that as we face the specter of a McCain presidency. A lot of reasonable people feel that Hillary has been attacked in sexist and disrespectful ways. I sympathize with that sentiment, and as an Obama supporter, I actually felt the same outrage when people like Geraldine Ferraro tried to cry reverse racism as an explanation for Obama's success, as if having black skin has ever been an asset in winning elected office in this country. Ferraro was affiliated with Clinton's campaign, and she did make those racially insensitive comments. Now I confess that I can;t think of a similar example of someone affiliated with the Obama campaign making such equally sexist statements about Hillary, but I'm sure a Hillary supporter has 10 examples at the tp of their tongue. The point is, both sides have legitimate gripes, both candidates made historic, trailblazing runs, and one of them had to lose. Let's not get too blinded by our own side's perceived slights that we forget that there was plenty of outrageous commentary to go around.
I also think it's unfair to paint Obama supporters with a broad brush when it comes to the feeling that his victory is being rubbed in. You may have had personal interactions with Obama supporters that are not gracious, and that's unfortunate. But don't attribute these personal anecdotes to the rest of the Obama campaign, and certainly not to Obama himself. He praised Hillary effusively in his speech in St. Paul. I suspect that she will play an integral role in healthcare reform in his administration. Please don't let the ungracious words of a few Obama supporters in your social network color your opinion of all Obama supporters or of the candidate himself. Frankly, I think it's childish to make a blanket statement that one "despises" Obama supporters. Shouldn't you save such feelings for people who actually disagree with you on policy? There is a much bigger picture here, and we need to focus on it. Tossing out juvenile insults that someone is acting like a typical Obama supporter (let's stereotype millions and millions of people) is counterproductive and does nothing to unify the two sides.
Hillary's coalition has undeniably been held together by women, older voters, and the white working class. She has become a champion of these constituencies. She has been tireless in her advocacy for children and for healthcare. I ask Hillary supporters to take a step back after the sting of today's disappointment dissipates, and think about whether McCain or Obama is a better champion for those interests and constituencies. I know that Hillary supporters on this thread have indicated that they intend to vote for Obama, and I am relieved to hear that. But I also think it's unfair to suggest that Obama supporters are somehow more obnoxious than Hillary supporters, or that sexism is somehow worse than racism. We need to move past these arguments in the near future if we are to be successful against John McCain.
Of course sexism played a role in this campaign. When Hillary went on the attack with TV ads and mailers, she was criticized by the press (and Obama campaign) as unfairly attacking Obama. I guess when a woman is tough and points out differences on policy, she's considered a bitch. Yet when Obama also ran attack ads and mailed out direct mail attacking Hillary's position on NAFTA and other issues, I don't recall the press ever criticizing him for unfairly attacking her.
So a woman goes negative and she's unfair. A man goes negative and he's considered a strong leader. If that's not a double standard, I don't know what is. Sexism is alive and well in this country, even in the Democratic Party.
Has anyone said that sexism played no role in this campaign?
Here's my brief response to some of the commenting:
- One could take my tone as ungracious, but it was a response to the responses of Obama supporters that I had already suffered the insensitivy of - it was not a response to Obama securing the nomination. I wanted to warn people that maybe they shouldn't do what many of my friends had already done to me; that's why I purposely posted it early in the morning.
- I think Rebecca explicated my sentiments well.
- What, exactly, is Jenny so typical of? (At the expense of sounding snarky, I'll admit that I laughed out loud when i read that.) Is she a typical gay? blogger? Hillary supporter? IDK!
This whole intra-party argument makes me laugh wholeheartedly. Do sheeple not realize this whole campaign was scripted from the beginning, with the major players predetermined? After all, if people wanted REAL change, they would have brought a Gravel or Kucinich out of the pack. Instead, they predictably fell for media favoritism and a "horse race" scenario. Sad.
That having been said, two things truly upset me during this race, and have caused me to rescind any allegiance to the democratic party.
1) Barack Obama is not the messiah, despite people's addiction to this cult of personality. He's a blue-state Bush, and the prospect of a BO presidency has me truly worried. Should we settle for shifting around the seats on the Titanic, or rather attempt to utilize the liferafts? Clearly he's in favor of the former, as he is in reality just another shill for the "system" as is.
2) Not to leave Hillary out, she's no angel. However, the character assassination of Geraldine Ferraro (someone whom I consider to rank among the greatest of modern-day american heroes) by BO's camp was startling. I shot Hilldawg a few bucks after that load of horseshit, and subsequently called the local dems to recall my registration as a dem.
Stephanie, your post starts out with how people need to be good losers and winners. How is calling anyone a dipshit an example of being a good loser?
And how is jenny being typical, she is blinding defending someone on the internet, because the person choose to be anon, and then use that as why the person is wrong.
Jen likes Steph, anyone that says anything against Steph, no matter what, is wrong, and since Jen doesn't know who anon is, will really get into it.
Typical. There is a reason people go anon, and Jen is why.
Thanks SZM, how perfect of you.
Love your posters The New Gay!
Post a Comment