Sunday, November 16, 2008

Hillary Rodham Clinton is a "wild wood elf."

TRUFAX (via, once again, the excellent palinpumawatch):

I don’t know. I think [HRC] could get a lot of work done as SOS, should she accept the position. I wouldn’t like her being under his thumb, but she’s a wild wood elf. No one can control her, only the winds and the rains.

All though I worry that it’s just a way for him to have her in his cabinet a couple of years so he can dump her and then ruin her political career.

It’s funny, because the other night I was thinking about Palin’s interview and how if she runs in 2012 and wins, Hillary could be her SOS. I would like THAT.

...It suddenly hits me that I have no words right now: I am rendered momentarily speechless by this...uhmmm...



Anyway, I just wanted to say that this is by way of a sincere apology to Hillary Clinton for any frustrated venting I had made in your general direction during the primaries (and was I think largely colored by the early stirrings of these people, although at that stage I truly had no idea of the depth of...this). I think you'd make a fine Secretary of State--although it'd be really nice if you , along with the entire new administration could drop any residual hawkish-on-Iraq (to say nothing of Iran) posturing and get us the hell out of there, k?

..Or any other position of power, really, much as you, like indeed Obama with whom you shared very similar positions on many issues, are not my idea of the perfect candidate. Because, you know, a) who is, really b) consider some of the alternatives. At least you're smart. And y'know, lucid. Unlike, ummmm, some people.

Please try not to choke laughing at the idea of yourself serving under (gasp, wheeze) President Palin, and, well, as for your new fanclub here...dude, I -am- sorry. Even my worst enemy, I would not wish this kind of following. Probably. Anyway, you were never that, whatever else.

And no, need it be said, I don't think you're a frigging elf. I mean, I really -hope- not.

Although I WILL admit that I have always harbored a suspicion that McCain is, in fact, a particularly irascible species of garden gnome.

ETA: And the twee goes on. Via YesToDemocracy:

Hello mountainsong. I just really like your name. it sounds so fresh and revitalizing. it always reminds me of a cool clear stream flowing down the side of the mountain, spraying its crystal drops of nectar on every lucky blade of grass and all the plants within it’s emcompassing reach. Cool, refreshing, clear–washing away all the grime and dirtiness of this election year.


All is within…as the great Goddess always whispered in our hearts, reminding us that we are women of Earth Wind and Fire-light of the moon and fire of the sun! We are lovers of men, as well, caretakers of our children, our family ties, and beings of multifaceted gifts and talents. Everywhere we go “the Goddess” is…and Dame Hillary, through the travail of this election has carved a legacy of light and fire…indeed!

I...don't know. I just...don't. Look, I like fanfic as much as the next geek, don't get me wrong, but it's like...if you want to go to Ren Faire, then frigging just go to Ren Faire. Trying to go via electoral politics is just a -really- fucking circuitous route, you know? I nearly said "tortuous." I refrained. Just.

Because, okay, making real people into your personal Mary Sue? Particularly someone as blatantly -not- elfin or damsel-y as HRC? Especially in (I take it) the name of -feminism-? Kind of creepy and weird, I mean once past the general ZOMG -boggle- hilarity of it all. Just saying.

And yes, I think the Obama-as-backlit-Messiah shit is cringey and failtastic, also. They're politicians, people. They're SUPPOSED to be wily and tough and self-serving and full of doublespeak and ultimately disappointing ratbastards. That's their JOB. What one is looking for is the one who is going to be a) sufficiently less of an overall ratbastard than the other ratbastard b) -your- ratbastard, at least a majority of the time. Sorry.


Ilyka said...

Hmpf! What have you got against garden gnomes that you would malign them thus?

. . . No, really, I am having one of those got-nothin moments. A wood elf? A WOOD ELF?

Sarah J said...

ok, really, what kind of drugs are they on and where can I get them?

also, I think HRC should be in charge of Homeland Security, but that's just me. ;)

Comrade PhysioProf said...

Hillary Clinton is a "wild wood elf"? HAHAHAHAHAH! Does that mean Barack Obama is this guy?

Trinity said...


Now I see why people were hatin' on Hillary supporters during the primary like they were. JEEBUS.

belledame222 said...

Dude, I never hated on Hillary supporters as such. I did get sick of the Violet Socks contingent pretty fast. I'm sure there's an equally repulsive Obama fanclub somewhere, was, but it was just like: not in the circles I was familiar with, and/or at least not according to my perception, whatever that says. I saw a fair amount of run of the mill lefty boy sexist assholery and partisanship, yeah. I expect that if the primaries had gone the other way and Hillary had one, you -miiiight- have had a group of disgruntled "we was wobbed" Obama people acting just as obnoxious as these people...maybe...but, I think, it wouldn't have read the same way, and for damn sure...well, yeah I guess there probably would be "Obama Democrats" who decided they'd throw their vote to McCain out of spite for HRC, and they would have been just as fucking unbearable.

hopefully at minimum they might've avoided the wood elf speak, though. perhaps. embarrassing superhero worship, I suppose...

and, you know: probably not calling themselves "feminists," see.

but we can all speculate: all I see is what's in front of me, and, well. Whatever happened to Baby Violet? among others.

belledame222 said...

and yeah, no, VS didn't make any of the above comments and I don't expect her to; but it's like, she's now got a "confluence" of this sort of person, pro-life conservative women, radfems like "Sis," and...freeper men (at least one). Really. So...

I mean I am sure my own nominal alliances have often seemed at least as strange, but I'm not plumping for purity here, yanno?

Comrade PhysioProf said...

They're SUPPOSED to be wily and tough and self-serving and full of doublespeak and ultimately disappointing ratbastards. That's their JOB. What one is looking for is the one who is going to be a) sufficiently less of an overall ratbastard than the other ratbastard b) -your- ratbastard, at least a majority of the time. Sorry.

You hit the nail right on the motherfucking head. Endemic failure of American voters to appreciate this is, in my opinion, a major cause of the wild swings in voter sentiment from left to right and back again over short periods of time. If Obama doesn't fix 40 years of right-wing depredation in four years, we'll boot him out on his ass and elect another deranged right-wing asshole.

Tom Nolan said...

and yeah, no, VS didn't make any of the above comments and I don't expect her to; but it's like, she's now got a "confluence" of this sort of person, pro-life conservative women, radfems like "Sis," and...freeper men (at least one)

What Violet has now, and what she didn't have before, is a clear function and a clear identity. Whereas in the past Reclusive Leftist was sometimes radfem, sometimes mainstream, sometimes paid lip-service to all-woman inclusiveness, sometimes went all out against pro-pornstitutes, these days it is the "go to" blog for something highly specific and easily recognizable (though not necessarily easily recognizable as feminism).

Also, I think VS has come to the conclusion that she just doesn't like most of the women who call themselves feminists, especially the younger ones, and has realized that she finds middle-class, middle-aged women of means like herself to be much more congenial company. Most of them are Republican.

Over to you, Mandos.

belledame222 said...

eh, I don't think it's just an American thing, just human, bless our primitive little hearts.

belledame222 said...

Tom: yeah, sounds about right. I'm just kind of bemused here because y'know people called that with her -ages- ago: "radical?" Or even "leftist?" In what alternate universe? Genteel liberal feminism, -maybe-. But she was adamant: old-school radical from the old school! Women first! Fight the power! Okies.

well, hay, if it was good enough for Phyllis Chesler, I suppose. could well be that Dworkin would've ended up that way as well; she was already taking a hardcore pro-Israel line, for instance, which seems to be one key element of this sort of Feminist Ladies' Division of the Neo-Neocons, or whatever it is.

I do note that VS has not (that I've seen skimming anyway) alluded to "godbags" in quite a while...

Trinity said...

BD - I wasn't saying that you hated on Hillary supporters. I'm just saying I saw a whole lot of assumptions about my vote that struck me as very strange from some corners... and that seeing this sort of thing may explain where *some people* were getting their idea that we were, in general, wacko. That nonsense is definitely not why I supported her...

Mandos said...

Really? Dworkin was taking a hardcore pro-Israel line? Cite?

belledame222 said...

yeah, I know, I think there are some who might think so, though. then again they'd have probably long since written me off for voting Obama at all anyway, so meh.

Trinity said...

Thing is, if you were so ZOMG HILLARY IS THE BESTEST EVARZ OMG then uh, why would you *completely ignore* her speech at the DNC and her campaigning for Obama and all? It's... delusional wackiness. That's somehow not real, and yet PALIN is awesome for women? Yeah, um... YIEEE.

belledame222 said...

I may be wrong, thinking of "Scapegoat," looking back over: she's critical of many of Israel's policies and its own tendencies to "scapegoat," and of course sexism therein. But strongly Zionist, let's say, in that she's making a case for a nation-state of women based on the template of Israel. Probably unfair to speculate where she -might- have gone from there, I suppose.

Chesler really kind of went over the edge, though...

belledame222 said...

Up till toward the end of the primaries, I was roughly in flip-a-coin mode. (also I was pretty much completely cynical and hating everyone in the whole process). I went for Obama mainly because:

-(what seemed like) Clinton's increasingly hawkish stance on Iraq and maybe even Iran;

-a general feeling of "eh" based on various disappointments as my Senator

-didn't like the nepotism at this point: 20 years of Clinton or Bush felt like enough, even if I strongly preferred either of the former to either of the latter

-Obama's "it" factor, spirituality, something, I thought it was ultimately more likely to bring the middle around than HRC's sort of very 90ish flavor of centrism, even though I recognized both as centrist policy-wise. I thought he was probably more likely to win the national, short version.

None of it being sufficient for me not to support HRC had she ended up pulling out the nomination. Hell, would've supported Edwards too (and am really glad it didn't come to that considering what a boneheaded sex scandal he then got himself into).

Trinity said...

I didn't like Obama at all at first, and I think that was because of the It factor. See, I think Bush got the support he got for being an It of his own sort and sweeping the Right and just enough of the Left away with "Cowbooooooooooy", and I really didn't want us going for Polident Smile when I knew little about him. HRC I felt like I knew... what she stood for, what I agreed with, what I didn't.

As time went on I thought of Obama as less It Boy and more... yeah, that's someone I could vote for. By the time he got the nomination I had no qualms about voting for him in the big election at ALL.

Trinity said...

So this whole "We stick with the woman!" thing... yeah, makes no sense to me. I mean, was I thrilled at the prospect of a female president? Yes, but I also thought that she was intelligent and capable and connected to an administration that I thought had done pretty well, so I liked her for more than her gender identity, up until she went totally batshit.

belledame222 said...

Oh, you mean like this?

Violet says:

"[Apostate]Violet, has it occurred to you - just for a second - that perhaps we dislike Palin because well, she is a pretty horrendous politician and belongs to the anti-woman party?"

Has it occurred to you that just because Sarah Palin is a Republican, that does not make it okay to demean her with sexist attacks and misogynistic smears, does not make it okay to slander her and spread lies about her record and her beliefs? Does not make it okay to ridicule her in sexist terms and distort her record as a woman and as a politician, and to do all that in the name of feminism?

Feminism isn’t some game where you use the tools of patriarchy to tear down women you don’t like.

You need to figure that out.

As for “infighting” — hardly. I’m embarked on trying to re-start feminism, and one of the problems we need to come to grips with is the utter breakdown of public feminism this year. We need to understand where we are before we can go forward.

Blessums ickle heart. Violet: feminism is/was doing just fine without you. Really. It's just, it's always--*always* been about a lot more than Special Ladies like yourself and your new heroine Sarah. Sorry.

And the "lies about her beliefs" you're referring to, if they're the same ones I'm thinking you're referring to, are ON. THE. FRIGGING. RECORD. I mean, I know reality is harsh sometimes,'s not like the ENTIRE FUCKING WORLD is one big sinister anti-PUMA conspiracy, yanno?

belledame222 said...

...from that same thread:

Sis [aka the erstwhile ever-charming pony] says:

It’s BDSM foreplay. It’s fluffing the boys.

And freeper boy responds:

Yanni Znaio says:
Sis says:

It’s BDSM foreplay. It’s fluffing the boys.

Speaking as a straight male who adores intelligent women:

Y’all deserve better.

We *all* deserve better.


I'm so fucking glad these people are "re-starting feminism," I don't know WHAT we'd all do without them, really...

Seriously, how frigging self-involved do you have to be to think this gallery of assclownery is "re-starting" anything other than, well, a lot of rubbernecking at the assclownery?

Mandos said...

What little I have read from Dworkin suggests that she's been pro-Palestinian. Chesler turned into a neocon wingnut/creep very publicly years ago. It was an epic meltdown/FAIL.

Trinity said...

Fluffing the boys?


Y'know, for people who hate the whole idea of blowjobs, they sure are obsessed.

Mandos said...

I think Tom has some of it, in addition to what I think triggered this...consolidation of her political identity (Anonymous Horde and a few other things). But another thing:

She believes that Obama's candidacy was treated as historic by virtue of his blackness (sure) and that, even though he's as much establishment as Hillary, Hillary's candidacy was not treated as at least as historic. ie, women, particularly white establishment women, don't get the historic treatment that a black establishment man does.

She keeps asking, where's the MLK Day for women?

That's also a part of the resentment that's driving this. And, well, where is the MLK day for women?

One thing she forgets is that few blacks vote for Republican blacks... (See the fate of Steele in MD in 06, 74% AA vote went to an old white guy Cardin(D).)

belledame222 said...

My heart bleeds for her, really. No, really. I don't think anyone's ever suffered that much, poor lamb. No wonder she's snapped.

Y'know what they really especially don't have a special day set aside for? -White- women. White -straight- women. White, straight, American, middle-class, conformist, "nice," -incredibly self-absorbed- women. And they've done so, so, much. Viddy this letter from another very distraught PUMA, someone called "Cindy":

(as captured here)

The following I’ve written as an open “letter” to Americans(from my perspective as a straight, white woman):
We are American women.
We have done eveything society asked of us.
We behaved in school.
We looked as pretty as possible at all times.
We learned to cook.
We learned to sew.
We went to church.
We dated nice boys.
We got married.
We took our husbands’ names.
We gave up our identities.
We took jobs for less pay.
We bore you children.
We lovlingly taught, nursed, guided, and nurtured these children.
We volunteered at our children’s schools.
We baked cookies for community fundraisers.
We volunteered at political campaigns.
We volunteered at nursing homes.
We took care of our elderly parents.
We have been loyal American patriots.
What have we done wrong? Why do you hate us?
Were we not pretty enough for you?
Did we not scream loud enough during childbirth?
Are we not dying at the hands of intimate partners fast enough for you?
Why do you hate us?

Because we're just Big Meanies who hate you for your (non?)freedoms, that's why. Especially the "loyal American patriot" part. You begin to see where the freeper meets the radfem.

meanwhile, Violet says a bit more about where she's coming from:

Violet: That’s interesting, because I grew up with the rule that a man must never hit a woman, ever, under any circumstances. Even if the woman slaps him or throws water in his face, which is her perogative as a female.

It used to be a common trope that a woman could slap a man or throw a drink in his face, and that was her right as a woman (smaller, weaker, not really able to inflict damage). It certainly didn’t give a man the right to respond in kind. Men aren’t supposed to hit women, period.


The world becomes increasingly more dangerous and less Klasseh, is the real problem. Witness the sudden infusion of the "c" and "b" words in public including the media, which, as with everything else, is all the fault of Obama And His Army Of Thugs And Koolaid Sipping Memorex "WINOs" :

I think we cannot dismiss the election’s place in all this. The world watched as Hillary Clinton and Sara Palin were eviscerated by the mainstream media. Calling women C**** was tolerated. Demeaning and disrespecting women was deemed OK. A young potent male was victorious over an older women. It was a symbolic victory on many deep psychological levels. I am afraid last night was just the beginning and that there will be more crimes against women. Times have changed and not for the better. I can smell it in the air.

**women in name only," yes, someone coined that little charmer also.

Lexia: One thing I like - most of those WINOs are women in just one more way than name. They’re breeding age.

belledame222 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
belledame222 said...

And yes, absolutely, more than reproductive rights or civil rights, what REALLY matters is one day out of the year set aside to acknowledge the assassination of a leader.

maybe if we're -really- lucky (whoever "we" is deemed worthy of being), "we" might get one of our very own one of these days, TOO. which, you know, Rejoice.

and which the guy Violet & pals just tried to vote in as a spite/protest vote will probably veto for his state, just like he did repeatedly for...MLK Day.

You know what else isn't fair? No one ever threw Violet a parade, for her sexuality. I mean she remarked on this at one point, wondering why people (in this case she meant BDSM or blowjobs or something, I think; I called her on it at the time noting the -really strong connotations- of what she was saying, and she did apologize, then) "need a parade." Why not just do one's thing in the quiet privacy of one's own bedroom and delicately shudder with distaste every time someone else tries to talk about such things?

always a lady, is our Violet.

belledame222 said...

because, I mean, you know, what -really- matters isn't that here were all these civil rights leaders getting -shot to death by the very fucking racists they were trying to speak out against-, what REALLY matters is that we have a federal holiday remembering one of them.

and, someone getting defeated in a primary election is -just like getting literally assassinated-. And to add insult to injury, the black man won and (so far, knock wood), -no one has actually shot him- (although there have been some attempts, yes). No -wonder- she's so upset. Goddam.

Mandos said...

By the way, re riverdaughter. It is not just Hobbity. It is a Tolkien reference straight-up. At the GOS she was known as Goldberry, who is the daughter of the river in the Tom Bombadil segment of LotR.

I can't criticize her, obviously, because "Námo Mandos" is even more Tolkien-geeky.

belledame222 said...

I mean, for all I know, (I could go and actually do research, yes) someone in Pakistan is attempting to get some sort of public honorarium for Benazir Bhutto right now; and if that hypothetical attempt, whatever it is, is recognized by the Powers That Be, there, then we'll know that -we are the least feministically advanced nation in the entire world-. It's just no damn good until you can have a martyr, a -proper- one who was -killed- and all. I mean, be fair.

Mandos said...

Well, I mean, there's the "young potent male" who defeated the older woman. That *does* fit into something doesn't it? We have a lot of fairy tales like that, do we not?

I mean, sure, fine, it may be over the top to compare to a guy who was shot. But the point still stands. Isn't it seen as less historic when the woman does it? It sure seemed to me that Clinton was treated as the "establishment" candidate, when Obama is pretty much a part of the mainstreamiest establishment.

And weird to see you getting along with a certain person, eh. As a side note. Strange bedfellows?

Mandos said...

I wouldn't care much (as a Pakistani) for a Bhutto memorial myself, but that's another story.

belledame222 said...

yes, I actually knew that wrt Goldberry etc.


...oh shit, I now seem to have this vague recollection of someone--not her, maybe allecto? someone? writing this astonishingly twee ode to Goldberry and a castigation of Tom Bombadil as an oppressive patriarch...

belledame222 said...

mandos: yes, I figured. I'm saying from their POV all that matters is she was a woman leader who was assassinated.

per the other: snort, yeah, well. strange days indeed. I doubt we'll ever be bestest friends or anything, but y'know: we agree on this, 'sall. She buried the hatchet with Renegade over something personal not long ago; that may have something to do with the mutual thawing. anyway can't speak for anyone else, but I only have so much energy, you know?

belledame222 said...

well, for me a big part of the reason Clinton was seen as more mainstream is that in Washington terms at least, she kind of -was-. I mean, she was largely going on name recognition as former First Lady and then Senator (which in turn...), she's been around a while, and frankly I think the idea that she'd effectively be bringing Bill back into the White House was both her strongest selling point and her biggest drawback, depending on who you asked. Obama didn't have that particular baggage.

and you know, per historicity...well, thing is, while female leaders are rare, there HAVE been some. Not the U.S., but it seems to me that Thatcher broke the equivalent barrier long since. HRC would've been new as a -Democratic-/non-right wing female leader, sure, but...and you know, Golda Meir, etc. etc.

someone had noted that the thing with Obama is, not only is he the U.S.' first black president, he's the first leader of color elected by -any- majority-white nation. Ever. So...yeah, in that sense, it -is- a bit more historical.

But, you know...the really amazing part is how some people are so fixated on the need for DOOM ZOMG that they can't notice hey! the fact that it was a competition between a woman and a black guy to begin with, and that one of them won the national, AND that they defeated not only an old white guy but a fairly reactionary old white guy, which also effectively (one hopes) represented a resounding "no" to the past eight years, well, that's all pretty fucking huge, no? No...? Oh, well, fine, then, keep on sulking, you ridiculous assclown. Just take the "Leftist" off your blog sometime, will you?

Mandos said...

That was allecto. Also see allecto's exegesis of the opus of Joss Whedon, particularly Firefly. Very intriguing!

belledame222 said...

also, per g: I don't know as we were actually ever all that far apart on -politics- as such, at least as pertains to y'know electoral politics and broad-stroke shit like this. More...personal. The fact that she's ultimately taking this tune is less surprising to me than that Violet isn't.

belledame222 said...

yes, I've seen that. Those. She is one strange bird.

One other area in which I found myself typing "what g said," in private at least, p.s. (as I recall it was something along the lines of, "What the fuck? What the fucking fuck?!")

Mandos said...

I'm not surprised in the least that Violet is not on that train. Only a bit sad. It was the case that, back in the day, she had an intriguing, quirky, and intelligent cast of characters, and while certainly not being "neutral" in any silly sort of way, she was open to hosting some very interesting discussions. I miss it, but I have a feeling she wouldn't reciprocate.

Mandos said...

Re allecto and Firefly, I kind of actually agree with her take on the black guy in Objects in Space, but it's not a lot different from most TV, so...

belledame222 said...

eh, I don't know. I don't know how interesting I ever found the ambience there really tbh. and in some ways it hasn't really changed: she still has an odd mix (radical feminists, pro-life conservative Palin fans, and "libertarian" freepers, none of whom were probably all that enthused about HRC as such for their own respective reasons), you gotta admit, it's eclecticand by and large her hosting persona hasn't changed all that much (bar the odd outburst)

and no, to be clear, I guess I'm not really surprised that she never came around to Obama. I know a lot of former HRC fans never really did, whether or not they voted for him when it came time, which, fine. I'm just surprised at the Palin mania and, well, the rest of it.

belledame222 said...

oh yeah, she had a few points buried in all that mess. Whedon has always had issues with race, there's no question; and yeah, I think that there are definitely -issues- one could take with his brand of feminism/female characters, though I consider him positive on the whole, and she did hit some of the ones I agree with, kind of.

but then ummmm there was the rest of it, including the business where Whedon probably abuses his wife or whatever it was...and her take on "Our Mrs. Whosis" (the one with Saffron) was pure. crack.

Mandos said...

Well, what I remember is a thread that is apparently still popular in terms of hits about (as succinctly as I can put it) the effect of our mammalian mode of reproduction on the male psyche and the effect of *that* on the form sexism takes.

I had a heck of a lot of fun with that thread, though Violet and I naturally did not fully agree.

Mandos said...

However, I see some of that discussion reflected in her current attitude. Her concern over the effect of the primordial myths that she feels have been invoked by, in particular, the internet segment of Obama's support.

belledame222 said...

yes, and that's what's really ooging me out. it's like: um yeah, there -are- feminists who have that "primordial myth," of entitlement and loss and martyrdom and a rise back to one's rightful place of supremacy, even eliminationiam; you see them running all over the place at the Margins already. Now you want to combine that shit with the "primordial myth" of the rabid "what, us racist?" America-Firsters so as to get more traction? -Thanks-. Yeah, "feminism," the WORLD -really needs that shit, you fuckwit. I mean it's nice that you're letting your own ideological roots all hang out finally, ALL of them, but um. EW.

Mandos said...

Not quite what I meant by "primordial myth", but sure.

belledame222 said...

extra creepy points: I don't see -anyone- (again, I may just not be looking in the right places) who is invoking that shit wrt Obama. I think at -least- 95% of that is, well. Fantasy material like this:

belledame222 said...

yeah, I was wondering if that word meant what you thought it did, but wevs. primal, I think you meant to say, there.

Mandos said...

There's a difference???

belledame222 said...

One's shorter.

belledame222 said...

Thing is, if you were so ZOMG HILLARY IS THE BESTEST EVARZ OMG then uh, why would you *completely ignore* her speech at the DNC and her campaigning for Obama and all?

Because if you knew what to look for, HRC was sending special messages to the contrary.

Many PUMA sites are also posting stories from supposed "Democrats" and PUMA leaders as to why those people are voting for McCain/Palin, (actually in several cases, it should be Palin/McCain.) But the strangest one is this one from PUMA wingbat "Dr. Kate" of "Trojan Candidate" infamy. Basically she's saying she's voting for McCain/Palin because Sen. Clinton wants her to...

"Both Hillary and Bill Clinton guided my decision to start supporting McCain out of reason and trust, and not just out of protest. In the picture above, Hillary is wearing her orange suit of PUMA democratic protest as well as her imprisonment by the Obama wing of the Democratic Party. Remember how she highlighted women, and equal pay, tailoring her remarks to all 50 states and territories, and reminded America of women’s suffrage and our historic role in emancipation. Remember how she said “if you hear the dogs, keep going…if there is shouting after you keep going….if you want a taste of your freedom, keep going”. And remember how she guided “her friend” John McCain in saying, “we can’t have four more years of what we’ve had in the last eight”. And President Bill Clinton, after dropping numerous hints on the eligibility of Barack Obama, told us about candidates X and Y. So my second vote for candidate Y, John McCain, is “the guy who believes in about 50% of your ideas, but you know he can deliver”, becomes both a reasonable and trustworthy vote."

Now it's funny she mentions Sen. Clinton's speech where she said "if you hear the dogs, keep going". Because she must have heard the "HillaryIs44" version that had almost 400 words cut out of it in the PUMAsphere. The same speech where Sen. Clinton said:

"And you haven't worked so hard over the last 18 months, or endured the last eight years, to suffer through more failed leadership.
No way. No how. No McCain.

Barack Obama is my candidate. And he must be our President."

She didn't "guide her friend John McCain", she TOLD THE PEOPLE AT THAT SPEECH NOT TO VOTE FOR MCCAIN!! And the section about "if you hear the dogs, keep going", ended with "But remember, before we can keep going, we have to get going by electing Barack Obama president.".,

This is what Sen. Hillary Clinton asked her supporters to do. She didn't tell her supporters to vote for Sen. John McCain, she told her supporters to vote for Sen. Barack Obama. This is both insanity AND a blatant lie from "Dr. Kate" - and from the PUMAs in general.

But truth has never been their stock in trade.

Trinity said...

Not that I think Firefly was perfectly golden bathed in the light of feminism, but if you're going to take something that awesome and pick THOSE sorts of nits (the thing with "why are the Alliance Faceless Yellow Baddies and why are none of the principal cast Chinese" is not a nit, frex), I have no time for your nonsense...

belledame222 said...

Moar PUMA thinky thoughts on the possibility of HRC as SOS:

Anne Marie: We’re commenting on the word empowerment over at another post, its bad connotations. I know it’s superficial, but I really dislike the word “secretary”. I don’t want Hillary to be a secretary…But if she is, she’ll get people used to seeing her in a national position of influence, and maybe she will run for president again and win this time.

goesh: Secretary to Obama, that’s how I read it, enacting Policy set by Obama and his trusted inner circle, fine, but maybe Patriarchy has a deeper hold than some are willing to admit or realize, that any position of power is better than none regardless of attachments and conditions and principles. Do you really think she will get much lime light? Hardly, the Obama camp had to slam her and cheat her to get the reins of power so why would they push her to the front now? There are no honorable men in politics.

Lizzy in CT: I am saddened - for Hillary - should she accept this position. It seems to me like the final step in surrendering herself. She would be serving at the pleasure of BO. period. She would be following his orders. period. She would lose her voice and become BO’s puppet. She would lose her power to further the issues she has worked so hard to improve.

This bone thrown Hillary’s way does nothing to elevate BO, in my opinion. Should she accept, she will be under his thumb - and silenced. But, of course, that is exactly what his mission has been for the last two years.

For this, she quit the fight?

...oh, and apparently it's finally coming to the fore, there, in the New Agenda Big Tent there:

Anna: Just noticed the caption under the photo at the top of the thread: “our hero, Hillary Clinton.” Was thinking, if this is truly going to be a non-partisan site, perhaps naming Clinton as “our hero” slants things a bit. Most folks I know on the right can’t stand Clinton. (Also, if such a caption must be, perhaps “heroine” would be more appropo.)

and elsewhere, my favorite:

Greenconsciousness says:
But most women following their Dear Leader were only interested in bashing women candidates and supporting opposition to the war, not validating the need for women’s leadership to elevate the status of women in the theocracies.

I am worried that Condi Rice’s efforts and the efforts of the Office of International Women’s Issues to support the liberation of women under the Islamic theologies will be undone by BO’s state Dept. I think women need to mobilize to prevent that from happening. Bush is talking about building coalition with the Taliban as the military did with the Sunnis in Iraq. But the Sunnis accept secularization and the Taliban throw acid at girls when they try to attend school.

So I am both excited and afraid of Hillary’s appointment to Sec of State, replacing Condi Rice.

I think Hillary has been an inspiration to those of us who needed an example of correct movement behavior. But the wisdom of her decisions will not be known for years.

Hillary may be appointed SoS so that BO will have the pleasure of demanding she wear a headscarf when representing the US in the middle east as C Rice refused to do.

BO may force Hillary to preside over the abandonment of women’s rights in Iraq and Afghanistan and dismantle the 17 regional women’s centers and women of courage networks established by Condi Rice out of the Office of International Womens Issues in the State Dept.

Women here will suffer as the usual feminist groups who opposed the war tell us to get over it while we watch Hillary don the headscarf.

These women will tell us there was never any hope for Muslim women, Muslim women do not want equality and the US only made it worse for them by invasion. These “feminists” will say Things are just as bad now as under the Taliban and Hussein. And then BO will make it so with Hillary as a cover. This is how bad it could be. And as it WAS under Madeline Albrecht.

And of course any discussion of rights for Muslim women is met with cries of racism and xenophobia by the well financed Muslim Rights Groups and their academics (mostly male)who populate the think tanks and universities. How can women fight Saudi money? BO holds these people on the male left as his friends and supporters yet he has said that trafficking needs to be a priority and gives lip service to women’s equality and abortion rights.

Or Hillary might be as brave, woman identified in her policies and proud as Condi Rice.

Trinity said...


You are a DIVINING ROD for Interweb crazy. HOW DO YOU DO IT.

belledame222 said...

In this case, mostly cribbing directly off Palin Puma Watch.

Ilyka said...

n this case, mostly cribbing directly off Palin Puma Watch.

Word is that site makes some people very sad, frustrated, and confused, BD. I just thought I should let you know that you may be linking tp a hate site dedicated to DRAMAZ! I am helpful this way.

Ilyka said...

That's pretty terrible typing considering I'm stone sober. I am obviously out of touch with my inner wild wood elf.

belledame222 said...

some people

O who could that be.

dedicated to DRAMAZ

i KNOW!! how fucking out of character for me is THAT, huh???

hate site

au contraire, I see it as a very compassionate site. sometimes, love is expressed with tender pats and consolation, and sometimes it is expressed with a sharp shake and "godDAM, what the HELL is WRONG with you lately?!"

that's just the host and some of the regulars, mind you: me, I'm mainly in it for the rubbernecking.

Anonymous said...

Mandos, I know that Dworkin is just a side-bar to this thread, but here is a link to a brief piece that exposed Dworkin to considerable criticism from Palestinians and their supporters:

The worst feature of Dworkin's position is her complete dismissal of Palestinian women's political consciousness and agency. Most strikingly, Dworkin introduces a lucid quote from a Palestinian woman explaining her opposition to Israeli occupation and racism, only to ignore and dismiss both the position and the speaker.

Chuckie K

Anonymous said...

Sorry, that link appears to been truncated. It should continue

Chuckie K

belledame222 said...

thanks, CK.

Mandos said...

OK, I can see why that might raise eyebrows, but then the denial of agency reads like a fairly standard internet radfem argument.

I'm not willing to accuse her of Cheslerism just yet. She still acknowledges that there *is* a Palestinian side even though she may be condescending to Palestinian women.

belledame222 said...

well, it's kind of moot at this point on account of she's not exactly around to argue back or develop her POV in any direction, so.

Mandos said...

Well, yeah. But that's life. She left this world without becoming a foaming neocon, and I really doubt she ever would have gone down that road no matter how condescending she might have been on this subject, but yeah, hypothetical.

Anonymous said...

I'm not so sure Dworkin acknowledged a Palestinain side there. If I understand her, she believes that there is only one struggle ever, anywhere - against the patriarchy. From that perspective, the 'Palestinian' struggle is somewhere between conceptually irrelevant and a practical detriment to the struggle against the patriarchy. As a result, in this instance, the standard denial of agency denies the possibility of giving priority to the struggle against occupation and racism. In effect, then, the occupation and the racism do not exist, and the Palestinian national struggle should not exist.

But what I really wanted to pint out is that I a myself in fact a domesticated wood elf.

Chuckie K

Tom Nolan said...

Hang on Chucky - in Scapegoat Dworkin compares the plight of women vis-a-vis the Patriarchy with the historical plight of the Jews vis-a-vis a hostile world of gentiles. If she believed that the struggle of women against Patriarchy was the only reality and other conflicts illusory then she would have been obliged to consider her own book perfectly pointless. I don't believe she did though.

And since people are going on about Goldberry, might I blushingly point out that she is a Maia and not an elf?

Tom Nolan said...

Sorry, Chuckie, I didn't mean to call you Chucky.

palinpumawatch said...

More of Dworkin on Israel:

Whose Country Is It Anyway?

Lots to criticize, sure, but she was no Chesler.

Anonymous said...

I could have made myself clearer. I know one piece of Dworkin's writing, that letter I linked. So "if I understand her means if I understand her in this letter."

A public intellectual knows theat they cannot expect that everyone who reads their words will read all their words. A public inteelctual who has a principled, democratic position on Palestine would think twice before using the language of that letter.

Chuckie (Spell it however you want to) K

Mandos said...

Goldberry? She's not clearly a Maia either, and neither is Tom Bombadil. They're elemental beings, as was Ungoliant, as much as it irks me to admit it, being a Vala and all.

belledame222 said...

dudes. I'm a tolerant woman, but there ARE limits...

belledame222 said...

...hey, THAT'S what looks weird. Since when does Blogger allow caps in the commenter pseud lines?

Anonymous said...

Great is killfile! It saves one from the temptation of arguing with dweebs.

I'm tempted to lock Goldberry and Texas Darlin' in a room with Al Giordano (a hardcore Hillary hater) for a week, just to see what happens.