Thu, 09/25/2008 - 11:57am — lambert
Here:
What does it mean to electoral outcomes if what we Democratic women are saying is simply true? That there is too much encouragement of and reliance upon misogyny as a campaign tactic? That our objections to this candidate really are based on rational economic self-interest, and are not due to his race?
Using shame (shame of being female, shame of being racist) rather than offering benefit is a tactic that may intimidate some, and perhaps win some over who would rather be part of the pack that attacks than one who is attacked, but mostly it engenders resentment. It is nothing on which political solidarity can be founded.
Again I ask:
How can a "movement" built on misogyny and false charges of racism be considered "progressive"?
Bookmark/Search this post with:
»
- lambert's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 1+[CSE]+#b94+
Front page
Comments
Apt word:
"engenders"
Lambert, Have You Not Heard The Oh-So Good News?
[snark]Obama forgives all sins, and the end always justifies the means. It was foretold in the burgh of Springfield those many months ago.[/snark]
But, we've always been at war with Eastasia...
Oh you joke...
...but how many Conversos have magically been forgiven of the most heinous charges you could make against a fellow democrat/liberal?
PB 2.0 - Supplement the wonk!
PB 2.0 - Supplement the wonk!
For me?
Not one.
But then, I'm a bitter, paranoid holdout.
[ ] Very tepidly voting for Obama [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.
First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Mahatma Gandhi