Katie, Hillary and Sexism

I definitely think that Hillary Clinton's campaign was hurt (but not ruined) by sexist media coverage, especially from folks like Chris Matthews. But to have to read Katie saying this " is a tad annoying: "I find myself in the last bastion of male dominance, and realizing what Hillary Clinton might have realized not long ago: that sexism in the American society is more common than racism, and certainly more acceptable or forgivable. In any case, I think my post and Hillary's race are important steps in the right direction."

Katie Couric makes $15 million a year to read the news. I just don't get how she's a victim of sexism. $15 million a year and her ratings suck. And no, her ratings don't suck because of sexism. Her ratings suck because she has no credibility because she spent years acting like a clown on The Today Show, for which she was also paid obscenely.

This somewhat applies to Hillary Clinton as well. She had to put up with some comments that no reasonable contender for the presidency should have had to put up with. But I actually attribute a lot of it to that Washington D.C. rule of the 1990s which says that it's okay to say anything you want about a Clinton. Even so, she was badly treated. But she's no victim. She's a multimillionaire Senator who is on track to achieve any number of great things in the years ahead.

Is it sexism that keeps Katie from being the number one rated anchor? Or Hillary from being President? How can anyone square that with the wealth, power and influence they already have? Oprah Winfrey had a ton of struggles too. But you don't see her going around saying that sexism and racism have kept her a billionaire instread of a multibillionaire.

Oh No, PUMA People!

So there's an online movement calling itself Party Unity My Ass that seeks to... I'm not sure what. It opposes Barack Obama and seems to oppose the Democratic party because "It is no longer the party of FDR and shared responsibility. Now, it is the party of wannabe rich libertarian Democrats."

I wonder what there problem is with libertarian Democrats. All we want is social freedom (the right to do mostly what we want so long as we aren't harming others), reproductive freedom (and in general the right to make private medical decisions) and equal treatment under the law (as with the right to same sex marriges). Why should any of that bother these people?

Given that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton agree generally on the major issues, what are these PUMA people so worked up about?

Voting on Tuesday

My vote was going to go to John Edwards but since he's out...

I'll be voting for Hillary Clinton. Yes, I'm irked by her Iraq war vote but this is the woman who has understood the Republican attack machine from the very beginning. When she was first lady and she called out the "vast right wing conspiracy" she articulated something that's true in contemporary American politics. The Republicans have beaten a lot of our party's best with that machine. But they've never beaten a Clinton. When they tried to impeach Bill he not only stopped them but took down Newt Gingrich even while he was on defense.

Hillary understand that politics is war. Partisanship is not a bad thing. People are supposed to coalesce around the ideas that they think are important. Then people are supposed to disagree, loudly and proudly. I think calls for "unity" tend to lead to compromise solutions that satisfy no one.

I don't believe that Barack Obama has enough fight in him to deal with an angry, out of power, minority party that will have just enough representation to stymie everything. He'll try to reach across the aisle and he'll pull back a stump.

Hillary knows what she's up against. She knows you can't compromise with it, or play nice with it. Hillary's a fighter and I'm voting for a fighter in Tuesday's primary.

I also have to admit that I find Obama a bit... disturbing. His supporters so often seem in thrall. He's Messianic about his own candidacy. For example, he recently argued that if he's nominated he'd easily get the votes of Hillary's supporters but that if she's nominated the reverse isn't true. If that's what Obama's supporters are really like (him or nothing) then I'm a bit weirded out by Obama's supporters.

Let's face it -- the two are identical on policy. When they tried to articulate their differences during the last debate, they really had to stretch. So anyone who supports Obama but won't vote for Hillary has to admit that they're basically making a decision based on Obama's charisma. It's a cult of personality. Because of the issues were at stake here, than either candidate would be able to count on the other's supporters in the general.

Well, there you have it. I'm voting for Hillary. I hope she wins and I think she'll make an excellent president. She's really earned it, too. She's already made history as the first former First Lady to be twice elected to the Senate. She's ready to make history again.

The only difference between her and Obama is that she understands the other side and he doesn't get it. He's just too precious right now. Let's send him back to the Senate and maybe warm him up for 2016.