It wasn’t about Hillary

Via Cannonfire:

Hillary 2012 Robocall Campaign Begins

The PUMAs are back.

A group of vocal Hillary Clinton supporters whose mantra during the 2008 election was “Party Unity My Ass” morphed into time into diehards who wanted the Secretary of State to either be elevated to vice president or consider another run for the White House.


I was there at the beginning. I know what PUMA was about.

It was not about Hillary.

It’s about Barack Obama. We don’t think he is qualified to be President. We don’t like the tactics he used in this campaign. We don’t like the way he “won,” And we especially don’t like his supporters.

When you consider that we are almost all Democrats over the age of 30, then you must realize that we have experienced losing elections before. We are not merely sore losers. If Hillary had lost to another qualified candidate, we would be disappointed but we would still support the winner. But Barack Obama is not qualified to be President. He simply does not have the necessary experience. He is just now completing his fourth year in the US Senate. Prior to that he was a part-time legislator in Illinois.

His legislative accomplishments, both in the Senate and in Illinois, are unremarkable and there is evidence they were largely unearned. His voting record in Illinois is troubling for the number of times he voted “present” or mistakenly voted the wrong way.

Senator Obama has argued that in place of experience he has superior judgment. He offers as evidence a little noticed speech he gave against the war in Iraq back in 2002, but his statements and votes since then contradict the speech. His recent statements and policy flip-flops call into question his judgment, but not nearly as much as his association with people like William Ayers, Tony Rezko, Rev. Wright, Father Phleger and others.

His supporters argue that he is an inspiring public speaker, but he has been shown to have trouble speaking without a Teleprompter, and there are questions as to whose words he uses in his speeches.

As discussed above, PUMA’s are offended by the tactics used by Senator Obama in this campaign, particularly the race-baiting. This nation bears deep scars because of racism, and we are not yet fulled healed. Falsely accusing others of racism in order to win elections is an impermissible tactic, and doing so disqualifies the offender from holding office. Period.

PUMA’s are outraged at the way the Democratic National Committee and certain Democratic party leaders manipulated the rules in order to give the nomination to Senator Obama. The Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting on May 31st was especially galling, because they took delegates away from Hillary and gave them to Senator Obama. Donna Brazile in particular will always be infamous to PUMA’s.

We are also upset at the nomination system. The patchwork of primaries and caucuses (and sometimes both) all with different rules was bad enough. But the DNC rules gave too much influence to caucuses in small “red” states. Add to that evidence that Obama supporters gamed the caucuses to skew the results, and the legitimacy of the outcome is at best questionable.

Which brings us to the Obama supporters. PUMA’s understand that many of Senator Obama’s supporters are good, decent progressive Democrats that share our values. We have no problem with those people. But there is a group of Obama supporters that are obnoxious, abusive and nasty.

These people are not progressives or liberals. The are fauxgressive libertarians. This group is overwhelming young, male, and infected with CDS. They not only drove Hillary supporters away from the “A” list blogs, they followed us to new sites and attacked us there. The things they say range from rude and condescending to abusive and threatening.

Some say we should not blame Senator Obama for the behavior of some of his supporters. That might be true, but there is an old saying that “you are judged by the company you keep.” Senator Obama did little or nothing to prevent or denounce their behavior, and in some instances he seemed to encourage it, like when he used the contemptuous “dirt off your shoulder” gesture referring to Hillary.

PUMA’s have taken a long and thorough look at Barack Obama. They have given careful consideration of all the issue and arguments made for and against his candidacy. And they have concluded that Senator Barack Obama is unfit to be President of the United States.

But he is now the “presumptive” Democratic nominee, so many people think we must support him. Rebecca Traister at Salon said:

“These angry people have nowhere else to go. So the safe expectation is that they will fall in line without much kicking and screaming. And that, ultimately, is why many of them are kicking and screaming. Yes, they’re going to vote for Obama. Of course they’ll vote for him. The truth is, they’ll probably love voting for him. But after what they feel has been done to them — the way in which they were written off, marginalized and resented, their hopes mocked and their history-making ambitions dismissed as retrograde identity politicking — damned if they’re going to be nice girls about it.”

Ms. Traister apparently didn’t bother to interview any PUMA’s before writing about them. If she had, she would have discovered that we do have options. We own our votes. They are ours, and we owe them to no one.

We will not give them to Barack Obama.


Some PUMA’s see their actions as a protest. I see it as a battle for the soul of the Democratic party. Allowing John McCain to win is bitter medicine, but necessary to purge certain elements from the party, or at least the party leadership. There is no place in the party for sexism, misogyny, race-baiting, or CDS.

Sure, we believed that Hillary was the best qualified candidate back then. We still believe that today. But if she had lost fair and square most of us would have probably held our noses and voted for Obama.

I wrote that post I quoted above 3 1/2 years ago on June 28th, 2008. The evidence against Obama, the Democratic Party and his supporters is much stronger and more detailed than it was then. Now we know that there is one thing we were wrong about.

Obama turned out to be worse than we ever imagined.

This entry was posted in Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

63 Responses to It wasn’t about Hillary

  1. imusthavepie says:

    Yep and yep. New slogan:
    It was about the cheating stupid.

  2. 1539days says:

    RD started as an Edwards supporter. Others preferred different candidates. By Super Tuesday, it was only Hillary vs Barry and a lot of Democrats didn’t like him.

    There are Clinton die-hards, but when vote totals are equal or greater and the decision is made by coerced superdelegates, delegate allocation made after the fact based on nothing but a whim and a floor vote that was rigged live on national TV, it would make anyone question what happened.

  3. foxyladi14 says:

    There are Clinton die-hards. LOTS N LOTS 🙂

  4. Must have this made into bumper sticker! With the melting ologo

    It was about the cheating stupid.

    • Mary says:

      Amen! It wasn’t just about Hillary–although that counted for a lot.

      It was about the party itself, about the cheating, about the superdelegates who were bought by Obama and denied the votes of their own constituents. That’s not democracy at all.

      It drove thousands away from the Democratic Party, and that won’t change, until the process changes.

  5. yttik says:

    I’m an idiot for clicking the Cannonfire link because now I’m pissed off all over again! Right now, today, he’s still calling people ratfuckers?! Well fuck you!! I was a loyal Dem for 30 years and deserved the respect of having my valid concerns about Obama heard. Instead I was silenced, called names, and accused of being a ratfucker. Well guess what? You called me a Republican so many damn times, I lost my fear of them. Anything, and I mean anything, is better then the bullying and abuse I experienced at the hands of Obots during the 2008 election. Yep, even Republicans.

    Right now, today, somebody has a website trying to recruit Hillary2012 and Cannonfire calls them a ratfucker? WTF? Have you learned nothing? Nope, not a damn thing.

    • 1539days says:

      I wonder if Joe is holding a grudge because he thought Anthony Weiner was part of an eleborate smear campaign by yfrong hackers and Breitbart while Hillary is 44 knew Weiner was a sleaze for a decade.

    • djmm says:

      Yttik — I think that by using the word “ratf*ckers” what Joseph means is that he thinks Republicans or Obama supporters, not genuine Hillary supporters, are conducting the robocall operation. I think his idea is that someone who is not a Hillary supporter is trying to make it look like she is running either to divide Democrats (if Republicans are doing it) or that she is “disloyal” (if by Obama supporters). Seems unlikely to me, but weirder things have happened.

      I would rather think patriotic Americans are doing it because they know 4 more years of President Obama would be terrible and the Republican candidates would be as bad or worse.


    • glennmcgahee says:

      I’ve been over Cannonfire for a long time now. He got his reader’s help to move cross country and self=promoted his cartooning ad-nauseam. How many variations of large breasted female warriors has he shown us? So much for thoughtful essays.

      • Lola-at-Large says:

        I give Joe a break because he at least is intellectually curious, but he has definitely drunk some kind of kool aid, just not the Obot Blue.

        • myiq2xu says:

          Joe hasn’t closed the circle.

          Many of us spent our lives believing that everything and everyone on the left was good, and that everything and everyone on the right was bad. Some of us eventually realized that not everything and everyone on the left was good. The final step (closing the circle) is realizing that not everything and everyone on the right is bad.

        • Lola-at-Large says:

          That’s a fair assessment, Myiq. I would agree entirely.

      • Pips says:

        Yes, he has exposed his sexism in so many ways … and yet many still don’t see it.

  6. Lola-at-Large says:

    It was about the cheating, and what that cheating represented: creeping authoritarianism. It showed us that our worst fears had been realized: that failing to do anything to hold the line on Bush’s constitutional atrocities had the effect of infecting the left with the same creeping authoritarianism that had infected the right.

    As I have said from the beginning, Bush turned our world upside down, and Obama turned it inside out. Here were my thoughts a year after his election, when PUMAs were in the midst of another chaotic division (this was when a lot of them returned to the Democratic fold).

    • Karma says:

      Yup, the authoritarian creep was my major concern and it was clear Obama would never push back on that front.

      Geez…the only thing he has ever fought back against was FoxNews and bad press (the truth). The Whiner-in-Chief is still holding a grudge against the SF Chronicle, they are banned from covering any events he attends in SF.

  7. DeniseVB says:

    Real PUMA’s didn’t vote for Obama. They could have been a force of change like the tea party later became, but no, someone had to change the Party Unity My Ass to something more docile like Party United something something. Then got behind Obama because we all know a bad Dem is still better than a bad Republican. Groan.

    Well, with the tea party’s demo being made up of 41% Dems/Indies, I have a feeling I know where most of the angry, original PUMA’s went. Especially when it became clear Obama morphed into Bush’s 3rd term.

    There are still good Dems out there, I just wish they’d speak up.

  8. Karma says:

    Killing Americans without trial and now indefinite detentions. Is there anything left of the Constitution after Bush III?

    And you’re absolutely right. It wasn’t about Hillary, and it still isn’t, but every vote I cast will be seen through that election.

  9. DeniseVB says:

    So when Hugo Chavez calls you a “clown”…….. ?

    CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) — President Barack Obama’s sharp criticisms of Venezuela’s human rights record and its ties to Iran are heightening tensions with Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who on Monday responded by calling Obama a “clown” and telling him to mind his own business.

    Chavez suggested Obama’s stances toward Venezuela are a campaign ploy.

    “He’s looking for votes,” Chavez said. Addressing Obama directly, he added: “If I could be a candidate there in the United States, I’d sweep you away.”

    Oh I know Chavez is a tool, but didn’t the same people who support him, vote for Obama ?

  10. trixta says:

    I do not want or have NEVER wanted Hillary to be BO’s VP. That would be insulting to her on so many levels! They still don’t get it.

  11. djmm says:

    “PUMA’s are outraged at the way the Democratic National Committee and certain Democratic party leaders manipulated the rules in order to give the nomination to Senator Obama. The Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting on May 31st was especially galling, because they took delegates away from Hillary and gave them to Senator Obama. Donna Brazile in particular will always be infamous to PUMA’s.”

    Yes, and cheating in the Texas caucuses was widespread. It is the cheating we do not like and did not expect from the Democratic Party.


    • fif says:

      It wasn’t just the Texas caucuses either. It was statistically impossible for him to win 12 of 13 caucuses, and lose many of the primaries in those same states and other swing states. It didn’t add up–not to mention the widespread intimidation and bullying, right up to the reported threats against superdelegates who wanted to switch at the Convention.

  12. fif says:

    Sheesh…what is so hard to understand about this? It was clear then, and it’s even more obvious today.

    Speaking of the Charlatan: it’s CNN of course, but can some of you poll specialists translate this sample and the results? I don’t have a dog in this hunt, because the alternatives are so uninspiring, but I cannot bear another four years of this poseur. To think that anyone would vote for him is beyond me…

    CNN Poll: President’s approval nearing 50%

    Washington (CNN) – President Barack Obama’s approval rating, a crucial indicator of his reelection chances, is on the rise, according to a new national survey.

    A CNN/ORC International Poll out Tuesday also indicates that the partisan battle over extending the payroll tax cut may be partially responsible for the jump in the president’s numbers.

    • Melissa says:

      I read through the whole PDF describing the questions and the breakdown of the responses, but I can’t find the percentages by party affiliation. Oh sure, they ask how favorably people view the parties, but nowhere does it tell us the percent of the sample affiliated with each party. Fishy, but typical, if you ask me.

  13. timothy says:

    The dimocratic party can kiss my ass. Not only did they gift us the buffoon in the Oval Office, but they stole something I treasured and believed in and that was a faith in the system. Not over it and no plans to get over 2008. In fact I foresee it being easier to vote for ABO.

  14. foxyladi14 says:

    CNN Poll: President’s approval nearing 50% 😆
    they have always been in the tank for him.

    • myiq2xu says:

      I don’t pay much attention to opinion polls because there are so many ways to rig the outcome.

      But when you seen lots of polls saying the same thing it gives you a good idea of the trend.

    • timothy says:

      I spend a lot of time in some hard core blue collar bars(as owner/consultant/customer) bluest of the blue lifelong democrats and I hear them no way if this union steel worker town is bashing him that his approval has gone up. Impossible. They payroll tax cut is scary to people who have a parent living on it. 50(or whatever the figure is) means in a month especially when everyone knows if we start drilling even though it won’t be available for years but the price will fall at the gas station. Joe Average is a hell of a lot smarter than he has been given credit and he is from what I can see more than a bit angry by the whole obama fiasco.

    • cj says:

      Hate to quote Hot Air, but I can’t find any info on the sampling anywhere else…

      “As in the earlier post on the Republican primary results, one has to keep the sample skew in mind. The D/R/I of 32/25/37 in the current sample may have a D+7 and a ridiculous I+12 skew against Republicans, but in the poll series dealing with Obama, it’s not as bad as the skew in some previous surveys. However, it is worse than the last full poll in this series, which had a D/R/I of 29/26/38.”

      (AP poll still has him declining)

  15. Rocky Hussein Squirrel says:


    OWS Anatomized


    What did Frontier Lab discover? First, that many of the rank-and-file occupiers feel isolated in their lives, and appear to lack basic community ties such as are provided by participation in clubs, churches, and strong families. Indeed, much of the report could have come from the early chapters of Robert Putnam’s Bowling Alone. They thus attach to their political causes with something like a religious fervor. For many, a commitment to “social justice” is “not the end, but rather a means to an inflated sense of self and purpose in their own lives.” Crucially, involvement with others who agree with them provides an “overwhelming feeling of being part of a family.” I noticed this on my first trip down to Zuccotti Park, when I saw a telling sign adorning the entrance to the tent city: “For the first time in my life, I feel at home.” On subsequent visits I was struck by the importance of the commune to the project. As much as anything else, vast swathes of occupiers were simply looking for a new club. This group, Frontier Lab dubs the “Communitarians.”

    The second group, which to all intents and purposes forms the leadership, is less existentially lost, and derives its fulfillment from the “prestige,” “validation,” and “control” afforded by the movement’s coverage in the media. Frontier Lab calls this group the “Professionals.” Its members fill the ranks of the professional Left and boast long histories of attending and organizing protests. For them, indignation is quotidian, “community action” is a career, and they feel “validated by the fame and attention” and “rewarded for their life choices.” Unlike the Communitarians, the Professionals actually want tangible change, or a “win,” but politics is still playing second fiddle to self. There is nothing spontaneous or organic about the movements they lead. They are waiting for the revolution and hope to be in its vanguard. Their careers depend upon it.

    • Lulu says:

      “Second fiddle to self”. It was not about the 99% for whom they do not connect with. It was about career or their own isolated, disconnected little lives.

    • Duh. Like those things weren’t obvious from what we saw and what the followers tended to say. The same sort of cult movement as OFA by some of the same people, for some of the same reasons. Sad that many can be so easily taken in by something so obvious.

    • Lola-at-Large says:

      Interesting. OWS data-mined.

    • Pips says:

      For the first time in my life, I feel at home.

      That’s so sad, and I feel sorry for anyone having to feel like that. Just as I feel sad, but in a more sardonic way, with those who thought “Yay! We’re exactly like Tahir Square” They are just sad.

  16. elliesmom says:

    How can the PUMAs be back when we never went anywhere?

    • myiq2xu says:

      I never go anywhere.

    • timothy says:

      What is a PUMA? I was engaged by some sites in 2008 and then I got confused. Some seemed to be just male bashing. I shared most opinions with but don’t like I hate guys. Always enjoyed Murphy and Puma Pac but some of the others went to a place i could not relate. What does a Puma mean?

      • elliesmom says:

        I don’t hate guys – from Mary Poppins, “Though we adore men individually, we agree that as a group they’re rather stupid.” /s

        But myiq has a good description of what the PUMAs are in this post. There were groups who tried to co-opt the PUMA name, and some of them succeeded. When the election came, true PUMAs were faced a real dilemma. Some of us couldn’t escape from the Democratic tribe and voted for Obama in spite of how we felt about him, some of us couldn’t bring ourselves to vote for either McCain or Obama so we voted downticket only (It was called going “topless.), and some of felt that the only way to really send a message to the Democrats was to vote for McCain/Palin. For me voting McCain/Palin was a twofer – protest the Democrats and maybe get a woman in the VP slot at last. It has been my experience that those of us who chose options 2 or 3 are more likely to still call ourselves PUMAs. YMMV

        • timothy says:

          Still not sure what a PUMA is. In 2008 I voted for Sarah Palin not John McCain. The fact that I can see that she loves her kids puts her heads above the others. Maybe its silly to involve parenting into voting but I think how someone does that job tells me a lot about how they would govern. I do a bit of hiring and it is almost always the case that a bad parent is a bad employee. I’ll deal with late parents because of a snow delay anytime over the one’s who just don’t seem to care about anything.

        • DandyTiger says:

          For the most part PUMA was a group that didn’t like the cheating of Obama and his followers and the destruction of the old Dem party for their new coalition, new Dem part (that is, read Republican party lite). It wasn’t about Hillary though they saw her as the better candidate. It was about the cheating that it took for Obama to get the nomination.

          What happened after that was splintering as some decided it was better to vote for the cheater who possibly destroyed the Dem party than to have Republican’s win, whereas others decided against unity and wouldn’t vote for Obama no matter what. It was a principle thing. “Principles before Party” was a major theme there. Some of those voted third party, wrote in Hillary, and some voted for McCain/Palin often as a protest vote, and some voted for Palin as a pro woman vote. It varied. But the main theme of the ones that remained was that this new Dem party was corrupt and broken and needed to be defeated if there was ever to be a party that was actually pro working class, pro equal rights, etc.

          Some on the other hand left the new Dem party never to return, noting that the party they knew was dead.

        • indigogrrl says:

          timothy- PUMA started one night when we were all joking around at The Confluence. SM77 said Im not a democrat Imma PUMA – Party Unity My Ass. It kinda went viral from there and then the term got co-opted from a variety of bloggers / groups. But it started as a joke. I know i was there that night.

      • myiq2xu says:

        PUMAs are quite naturally feminists – otherwise they wouldn’t have supported Hillary.

        There is a subset of feminists that don’t like men. I’m not talking about lesbians (although some of this subset are lesbians) I’m talking about man-haters. When you realize that most or all of them are victims of physical and/or sexual abuse by men, their feelings are quite understandable.

        But their hangouts are not the kind of place anyone with a factory-installed penis will feel welcome. OTOH everyone (with or without penis) should drop by occasionally to lurk and listen to what they have to say. It will open your eyes.

        • elliesmom says:

          I think that a lot of men are resistant to feminism because they believe it’s a zero sum game. Most feminists believe that men will gain more than they lose if women ever become truly equal. I’ve been married forever, I have a son, and a grandson. For someone to say that I hate men would be ludicrous, but I do believe that my husband, my son, and my grandson were born with privileges that I, my daughter, and my granddaughter have to fight for. I’d settle for a level playing field for us all.

        • timothy says:

          I have always liked Puma Pac and i think we are in agreement on most issues. I think I am just confused. I do not know what feminism means. I look it up and I am still not sure. I stumbled upon an infant and I do what I can but I also adore my nephews. Never want my charge to look at anyone and judge based on race or gender or economy. Total hypocrite though as she has a 5 year old affinity for Jasmine and I beat her over the head with Jane. Eyre

      • Pips says:

        Timothy, if you want to know more about Feminism – the sensible kind 🙂 – I would recommend you to go to Violet Socks’ place Reclusive Leftist. And rest assured, she loves men. 😉

  17. glennmcgahee says:

    BTW, I wonder how McCaskill’s kids are doing? Weren’t they the ones who persuaded her to support “the one”. I hope they’ve found work cause I believe their mom is gonna need some extra help. Then Donna Brazille, I thought she was supposed to quit if the Supers decided the nomination. I’d love to run into her somewhere. Hopefully, I’ll be in my car and she’ll be in th crosswalk.

  18. timothy says:

    i think i may be a reluctant PUMA. Life has thrown me a couple of curve balls and most of them I was later thankful for. Walked out of a WAWA on 16th and Locust in Philadelphia and ran into a woman who had just been shot in the head. Never made a decision to help her out I just did what you do. She is alive and a great grandmother now bullet went in one side and out the other and missed everything. I had to hold her while she was bleeding my hands pressed against her wounds. Paramedics arrived and picked us both up to get her to the hospital. Woman had a bullet that had gone through her head and all she could say to me through garbled breath is I can’t die I have children. Not once did she exhibit any fear for herself just her kids. I can see Hillary. Bill. Michele Bachman even Rick Santorem doing the same but not so much with the obamas. To me if you can’t treasure and nurture what is the most vulnerable and the most near how can you lead a country?

  19. timothy says:

    Can anyone define feminism for me? I love my grand niece and I work hard to make sure she feels the same way about herself. I am however a guy albeit gay but still a guy and I work pretty damned hard to make sure my little one judges no one. i want her to accept people in her life who are positive. Asian. hispanic. outer space, gay, white, black i could care less as long as my baby girl is not negatively impacted.She just needs to be able to dream and dream out loud. Make no mistake no one is gonna even get close to getting a chance to silence her.

    • elliesmom says:

      Feminism is believing that “women’s rights are human rights”. It’s believing that we cannot excuse discrimination against women as being “cultural” and not something that we should speak out against for fear of being too interfering. Feminism is about recognizing that we live in a patriarchal society, and that male privilege is so ingrained in our everyday life that many people don’t even see it. It’s not about not not wanting the very best things in life to come to our sons. It’s about wanting them to come to our daughters, too. It’s about recognizing the hypocrisy in putting Plan B behind the counter because we are paternalistic to teenage girls, but making condoms easily available to boys regardless of age. It’s not about penalties for sexual harassment. It’s about making sexual harassment non-existent. It’s about making ugly words that demean women as culturally taboo as words that demean people because of their race. It’s recognizing that parenting is a two-person job and not penalizing one sex for being a parent and needing work accommodations while praising the other for taking advantage of the same. It’s about not requiring women to be the “sex class”. About not judging women on whether they dress to meet the expectations of men- either positively or negatively. It’s about not making women invisible in our history books or in today’s news. It’s about judging a woman on her ability to lead, not holding her to a higher standard. And so much more, Timothy. But feminism is not about hating men. It does require the occasional dope slap, though.

      • DandyTiger says:

        Well put.

      • timothy says:

        I guess its just the word I have a problem with not the philosophy. I have negative associations with it. I hear it and I think cold and angry. Justifiable given our history but I don’t want my baby girl to be upset with the world. I have a distinct advantage when it comes to my little one as I am a great gay uncle I see things a little differently than a 25 year old on their second kid who is more often than not just broke and flat out tired. I make a concerted effort to involve her classmates in her life. Hopefully she will spend the next 12 and a half years with these cretins and i want it to be a supportive growing experience. Sadly even at the tender age of 5 there are quite a few well intended parents who are already in some bizarre competition involving their kids and it is from my side line view mothers with their daughters. Guess it is reactionary behavior but I just don’t have the energy for it often as we wait for them to be dismissed I feel like I am trapped. in a really bad tv episode. I find it suffocating and usually climb a tree to get away. Poor kid has to walk out and hear me yelling dangling from a branch. From my perspective it seems that the mothers are the biggest impediment to their daughters development and i see a huge difference between how the boys and the girls are treated.

        • elliesmom says:

          Maybe because you’re trying to raise a daughter and no son, your window into the world of child-rearing is skewed. Try going to a youth hockey game for boys if you want to see competitive parenting. And why do you think that “feminism” as a word might have become what it is? If you want to limit a group’s power, one of the best ways is to make it “icky” to identify oneself with the group. “I’m not a feminist, but” is part of most women’s vocabulary. What woman wouldn’t want equal pay, fair maternity policies, entrance into any field of work she chooses, the right to dress how she wants, to not be scared every time she hears footsteps behind her in a dark parking lot? But make the word feminist bring forth images of hairy-legged militant man-haters who believe that most men deserve to be castrated and send to their own island, and most women will decline to join the group. Without solidarity, it’s much harder to get the everyday things that all women want and need and impossible to elect a woman POTUS. The backlash toward the second wave of feminism is nearly complete. Your niece will have to start the fight again if she wants to be a fully recognized human being. If you try to convince her that feminism is “icky” mostly because you don’t understand, it, it will be left to her daughter to fight for full personhood again. My grandmother was a suffragist. My mother was a typical 50’s housewife. I worked hard for the ERA. My daughter is “too busy just trying to live the life she has to worry about this stuff and anyway, Mom, you got us so much more that the rest can wait.” Her daughter will have to take to the streets again, I fear. Hopefully, I’ll be around long enough to teach her how.

  20. timothy says:

    Thanks for the response. For the record I think I am probably closer to feminist than not. Sometimes I need a wake up call, i am trying to be honest with my little one and doing so requires that I be honest with myself. I still have quite a bit to learn and I try to be open with it. i will be 45 in January and i had Maude and Charlie’s Angel’s in the background. Want neither for my rugrat. Kid loves Disney world and all of the princess garbage. Sleeping beauty does not sit well with me. I read her Jane Eyre(basically a feminist response to the Cinderella story) Smart kid and she is able to grasp the symbolism behind a woman locked in an attic labeled insane. I wrote my senior thesis comparing Jane Eyre and Sethe from Beloved . Love Hillary’s kids book Dreams taking Flight and have mailed copies to all of the local schools. You can buy it on Amazon for 1.64 plus 3.99 shipping. In sending books to my baby girl’s school I am well aware that I am sending a message to the administration. Pay attention because I am. I need to revisit my feelings about the term feminism but i despise Naiomi Wolfe and her banal book The Beauty Myth

  21. Pingback: Festival Of Lights — Hillary Is 44

Comments are closed.