"By the way, Osama, do you drink?"
In the wake of the Ted Kennedy endorsement of Barack Obama for president, at least some feminists are howling betrayal. The most notable is Ms. Marcia Pappas, the head of the New York State chapter of NOW (National Organization of Women). Prior to the endorsement, Ms Pappas had written (on January 11) that Hillary Clinton was the victim of a "psychological gang-bang", in effect, being ganged up on by Obama and John Edwards. This, according to Ms Pappas, was "proof that we need a woman in the White House". Ms Pappas' unfortunate choice of language was meant to buttress the image of Hillary as victim-in this case of sexism. Whether that image will benefit Clinton in the long run is dubious since it is doubtful that the majority of Americans want a victim as their president.
But Ms Pappas' reaction to the endorsement of Obama by Kennedy highlights the fixation that liberals have on issues of race and gender. In her letter, Pappas calls Kennedy's endorsement a betrayal and abandonment (of women). Ms Pappas said that Kennedy has joined the list of "white progressives" who can't handle the thought of a woman president-who is Hillary Clinton.
Ms Pappas, I have a question for you:
What does Kennedy's being white have to do with anything? Are you ignoring the fact that Obama is getting the votes of black men- black "progressive" men, if you will?
Ms Pappas also mentioned that "women" have repeatedly forgiven Senator Kennedy for being "late in support of" Title IX, ERA and the Family Leave and Medical Act.
Ms Pappas, another question:
Where were you when Kennedy left a young woman to drown in his car at Chappaquidick? Where were you as Kennedy was gradually destroying the life of his wife, Joan through his numerous affairs? Did you forgive him for those things also? Where were you when the senator was periferally involved in the rape accusation against his nephew, William Smith? Did you ever speak out against the senator on those occasions? Did you demand that he resign? Did you demand that he be investigated and removed from office? Did you? Did NOW?
Further, since you feel so strongly that we need Hillary (and Bill) back in the White House, where were you when Bill was using the White House as a private bordello, while Hillary led the effort to discredit and destroy all the women who claimed to have had affairs with or been sexually assaulted by Bill? Where was your organization during the Clinton White House years? (Yes, I know the NOW website stated that you "condemned" the Lewinsky affair-but that it did not "rise to the level of impeachment". The old "Move On" argument.)
It should be added here that the New York City and national chapters of NOW have issued statements praising Ted Kennedy's work on behalf of women, and that they respect the senator's endorsement. Maybe they should address the above questions as well.
But it is Ms Pappas' above two statements that give the lie to the NOW organization. In reality, their concern is not about "womens' issues", rather liberal politics. Ms Pappas wants to see a woman president, which is her right. Of course, she doesn't want a conservative woman president like, say Condi Rice. It must be a liberal like Hillary Clinton. Some years back, Elizabeth Dole (R-NC) was running in the Republican primaries for the presidential nomination. Do you think Dole got any support from NOW or Marcia Pappas? Of course not.
This issue is just more proof that NOW is about liberal politics. It also reminds us of liberals' fixation on race and gender-two issues that are dividing Democratic voters as we speak. Contrary to what Ms Pappas thinks, I anticipate seeing a woman and/or black president in the near future. I think America is ready for either-but who they are matters. I am prepared to vote for either-as long as they are conservative.
3 comments:
write to president pappas at info@nownys.org.
my message:
President Pappas -
"Speak your mind, even if your voice shakes" -- Maggie Kuhn.
That is a wonderful quote, and quite apt for my situation. If you could hear my voice, and your eardrums didn't give, you would hear it shake...in anger. When you "hushed the fact that he was late in his support of Title IX, the ERA, the Family Leave and Medical Act" perhaps you should have spoken out in opposition to Sen. Kennedy, even if your voice shook. When you "buried their (your) anger that his support for the compromises in No Child Left Behind and the Medicare bogus drug benefit brought us (you) the passage of these flawed bills" perhaps you should have spoken out in opposition to Sen. Kennedy, even if your voice shook.
For your information, while you were busy burying and hushing Sen. Kennedy's record, Barack Obama was, for good reason, rising through the ranks of the Democratic party and inspiring millions of Americans. "The new guy" is actually a thoroughly vetted Senator from Illinois with an outstanding record.
That you mention "progressive white men who can't or won't handle the prospect of a woman president" shows your myopic, anachronistic world view. What sexual, socio-economic, racial and ethnic gymnastics do you have to execute to demonize the rest of the people who support Sen. Obama? Latinas for Obama? Moderate black males for Obama? Dare I say it - white women for Obama? Traitors to their race and their sex? Perish the thought.
And here's something else you might not have considered - Sen. Clinton isn't even a progressive.
Her vote on the bankruptcy bill hurts millions of Americans - men and women.
Two years ago, on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, she said this: "There is no reason why government cannot do more to educate and inform and provide assistance so that the choice guaranteed under our constitution either does not ever have to be exercised or only in very rare circumstances." Wow. Does not ever have to be used. And let's use government to get us there. How progressive. If that's what she wants for American women, I shudder to think what kind of support she might offer to poor women around the world.
Her campaign's tactics are nothing short of reprehensible. Time and again, blatantly and solely for political gain, she has sought to portray Sen. Obama as the "black" candidate.
And how many times is she going to refer to herself as a girl? She is a 61 year old woman who continually says "I'm your girl". American Girl is her theme song. There are still people who refer to secretaries and checkout clerks as girls regardless of their age. It is demeaning and dismissive. But if it helps you win an election, what the hell?
Take her vote for the authorization for the use of military force in Iraq. Hundreds of thousands of us were marching in the streets (I don't know if you have anti-war marches up there in Albany, but it's where a lot of people walk through the streets together snarling traffic and garnering news coverage in an attempt to awaken their slumbering elected officials and avert needless bloodshed) because we knew that a yes vote was a vote for war. But she still maintains that she was duped by the Bush Administration. This alone proves that she either lacks the judgment, or is too politically expedient, to be president.
Speaking of political expediency, had you not possessed this quality (?), you might have spoken out against Sen. Kennedy when you thought it was appropriate, rather than hush it and bury it until you felt compelled to write a ridiculous letter in the heat of your anger. Let us not move forward, you say. Let us vote blindly on the basis of our color or our sex, you say. Let us continue to jam people into the same old boxes, you say. Even though it hurts to be jammed into a box not of our choosing, a box that doesn't fit. It hurts women. It hurts men. It hurts blacks and whites and asians and latinos. And it hurts our democracy.
I hope that at least you will be open minded enough to support and praise President Obama when he succeeds in bringing together a majority to push through initiatives that are important to you, and to all Americans.
Scott Phillpott
San Francisco, CA
Scott,
I think you and I share a revulsion at Ms Pappas' comments, perhaps for some different reasons, but well stated.
Thank you for your comment.
Dear mister Fouse. I am very interested in your work on Papiamentu. I've heard about your article on slavery and papiamentu in the JCL, but it is not available in Holland. My emailaddress is bikkerseiland@hotmail.com. I would love to hear from you! Thanks, greetings, Bart.
Post a Comment