…who won’t be voting for Barack Obama. One of the big questions of this campaign is how many others there are out there like her:
Obama is a brand just like any other brand. Obama the Brand has a logo, a tag line, and a song. But Obama the man is not the same as Obama the Brand. Obama the Brand talks about new style politics, while Obama the man used Chicago style politics in every election. Obama the brand is for women’s rights while Obama the man pays the women in his office 77 cents on the dollar compared to men. And Joe Biden pays women 73 cents on the dollar. Obama the brand is pro-Israel, Obama the man is not. Obama the brand touts leadership while Obama the man voted present 130 times in the US Senate. Obama the Brand claims change, while Obama the man picks a Washington Insider as his running mate. Obama the Brand is a post-racial candidate while Obama the man plays the race card at every turn, listens for 20 years to the racial teachings of Rev. Wright, and makes contributions exclusively to Trinity United Church of Christ, the NAACP and Care Africa. Obama the man and Obama the brand are not one in the same.
Too bad more Democrat women can’t see through him like this.
I talked to a liberal academic with such views (who even dabs in lesbian studies, natch). She voted Hillary in her state (California), and swore to vote McCain because of ugly mysognistic outburts from Obama’s campaign. At the time, I thought she’d fall into ranks and pull the lever for Obama like all good liberals should, but now I’m not so sure. Some people carry grudge for a long time. Isn’t the secret voting wonderful? The question is indeed how many women were offended. Most probably tune out the bad news.
I can confirm a similar experience. A woman I know very well, never voted Republican in her life, supported Mondale, Dukakis, Gore and Kerry, total social policy squish, loathes the Iraq War — but she can’t stand Obama, won’t even listen to him talk on the tube, grits her teeth at the way the Democrats treated Hillary Clinton, and is going to pull the switch for John McCain.
It’s weird, and I dunno if I can really understand it.
I think I understand it but it doesn’t matter; I’m just grateful and thankful for their existence.
Very good writing but I’m curious as to why they should settle for Hillary when they’ve obviously (to me) have got better candidates amongst themselves (in my not so humble foreign opinion).
‘Cause they didn’t know about Sarah Palin yet, HH.
Watch the gender gap between now and 2012. Should be interesting. I think one big mistake the Democrats made was in drinking their own Kool-Aid, thinking the Republicans really were a bunch of country-clubbing Tahoe-weekending Monopoly-clown guys with beer guts, and that it was never going to be possible for a Grrl Power movement to arise from within their ranks.
Or maybe they really are a bunch of sexist pigs, and thought that women would always be dependent on them for handouts in the form of affirmative action, special deals, and sex identity politics. They may not have realized that once women reached general equality, they would start to insist on the same liberty and equality of opportunity as men, and be just as generally disapproving of a central government whacking out 40% of their hard-earned cash to spend on its pet schemes.
That was a great article! Its amazing to me the sheer arrogance of Obama and his camp. I wonder if all Liberial Illuminati Elitists behave in the same manner towards the average Joe.
I do think that Palin and Hillary have opened the polictical door for more women.
Mike – “I wonder if all Liberial Illuminati Elitists behave in the same manner towards the average Joe.”
Ask the one who carries a plunger (or a hammer, piece of chalk, a gun, or a religious text…). Being taken for granted is not an aphrodesiac, apparently. Who knew?
Carl yes that must be a habit for many of them and with some effort considering the existence of Baroness Thatcher and many like her both in the world at large and in the US (one of the great things over here in .no is that this issue is completely and utterly dead since both the parties on the right have female leaders).
And looking at the actions of an awful lot of male Democrats there sure seems to be an over-representation of sleazebags.
About the “better candidates amongst themselves” I wasn’t thinking about Palin (although she is an example of a better candidate) but the author and others like her; they should do just the same as Palin. Not that I don’t disagree (and a lot) with many of the author’s opinions but there’s a lot to be said for having good opponents.
“Or maybe the[ Democrats] really are a bunch of sexist pigs, and thought that women would always be dependent on them for handouts in the form of affirmative action, special deals, and sex identity politics.”
Well, that strategy seems to have worked for them pretty well with respect to blacks for the last few decades…