An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

« SOTU in 60 seconds

Do As I Say, Not As I Do: Europe’s Minority Policy »

Hot Flash: N.Y. NOW Disses Ted Kennedy

Posted by SHAUN MULLEN, TMV Columnist in At TMV.
Jan 29th, 2008 | Comments

In a press release that so perfectly plays to negative feminist stereotypes that I first thought it was a fake, the New York State chapter of the National Organization for Women excoriates Senator Ted Kennedy for endorsing Barack Obama.

An excerpt:

“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.”

Click here for the full statement.

To their credit, the feminist bloggers whom I regularly read are as mindblown by NOW-New York’s hissy fit as I am.

Ann’s reaction at Feministing is typical:

“Wow. This is completely unhinged, and frankly, mind-boggling. . . . All I can say is, NOW-NY does not speak for me. And it does not speak for all feminists.”

Why am I left with the impression that these sob sisters would back Lucrezia Borgia if she was running instead of Hillary just because . . . well, you know, she’s not a man?

Ads by Project Wonderful! Your ad here, right now: $0

DLS

Steinem came out with a piece of nonsense prior to Clinton's win in New Hampshire. As soon as dislike of her was becoming obvious news, someone else engaged in the tired old fake charges of "sexism" [sic]. The worst have yet to speak -- they will say that where no such thing obviously exists, that actually it does exist, and that people who don't display any such thing are speaking or acting in "code" [sic]. They are, in other words, "crypto-sexists." We see the same type of lie like this all the time with fake charges of racism, both individual and systemic or societal. It's simply a leftist Big Lie.

As to the group, they're a joke and groups like them are much worse as well as much more ludicrous as claimants of "the keepers of right and wrong" than any Dobson on the Religious Right.

Spoiled little special interest group -- waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh

daveinboca

You can be against HRC without being "sexist" or whatever. These creatures are sports of nature and I find your use of "not a man" most illuminating and instructive.

Camille & Tammy should have a few choice things to say. The entitlement nuttiness of certain marginal groups defies description [I don't mean "women," I mean the specimens inhabiting NOW].

cosmoetica

Moon, ascendancy, blood, tide, monthly....

Just randomly stringing together a narrative.

nicrivera

How disheartening that NOW, instead of making this election about who would make a better president, instead chooses to make this election about gender.

Consider the utter idiocy of NOW's argument. By choosing to endorse Barack Obama instead of Hillary Clinton, Senator Kennedy has betrayed ALL women. Why, because Hillary Clinton is a woman, and therefore, not supporting her must be a rebuke to all women.

Yet, using NOW's tortured logic, one might argue that by refusing to endorse Barack Obama, NOW has betrayed African-Americans.

I certainly hope that whoever made this unfortunate statement does not speak for the entire NOW organization, because it's not only idiotic. It's insulting. The idea that we should vote for a candidate based upon his/her gender . . . is this the type of "progressive" thought that NOW is encouraging nowadays?

On a side note, what's so good about garnering Senator Kennedy's endorsement anyway? I mean, I realize that he's a powerful person in the Democratic Party, but he's a partisan, divisive figure, and his endorsement is not likely to help the Democratic nominee in the general election.

blog comments powered by Disqus