America’s Next Bill Clinton!


“Because a woman’s worth is based on her breasts and thighs …”

I was deciding between Clinton and Obama, and this did it for it. Look at it, here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/01/02/whillary102.xml

 A staffer on Obama’s campaign has the now popularized Hillary Meal picture on his desk top. For those who cannot get the link, it says “Hillary Meal Deal: Two large thighs, two small breasts and a bunch of left wings. $666.”

Right, because the worth of a woman’s leadership is in how big her breasts or small her thighs are, right? Nevermind the fact that she is a senator or has experience with working in both national and international politics …she’s a woman, and thus is reduced down to what she her body offers.

So apparently a woman can be as power as ever, and still, the judgment of her worth is her body …but funny, when was the last time we saw an ad for a man as having a small cock? I don’t see ads for Dennis Kuncinich’s Meal Deal, with a small cock and a bunch of nuts anywhere …

Why? Because he is a man. Rather than focusing on real campaign issues, this staffer is playing tongue-in-cheek politics based at devaluing a woman based on her body. Great.

 The fact that this is in a published report means that Obama is aware of it. The fact that he does nothing to take it back means he’s not the right candidate for me. It’s official. I am casting my vote for Hillary Clinton in 2008.

Advertisements

14 Comments so far
Leave a comment

I can definitely understand where you’re coming from. It’s pitiful.

Comment by blackliberal

That’s an old one; it’s been circulating around teh webz for years.

It does point to the rather creepy nature of the politics of a lot of Americans, and it’s also rather baffling. Hillary may well be the best candidate (I’m undecided myself; not that it matters, as I’m not an American) on an objective level, so what difference does it make if she’s a woman? Hell, if she’s got the best ideas, she could be man, woman or transsexual goat; the ideas are what count.

Comment by Mike

Well, that dropped Obama off my list. I think it’s very sad that my “presidential candidate” list is being decided by process of elimination and not because one or another is clearly “the best choice.”

A few days ago I saw another blog post wondering why the media hasn’t sensationalized Huckabee’s weight loss (apparently he had WLS and has lost a SIGNIFICANT amount). My response was, well, duh; Huckabee’s not a man, therefore no one cares what he looks like, past or present, while Clinton (I refuse to refer to her by her first name when no other candidate is) is being judged daily on her outfit and the size (or lack thereof) of every single one of her parts. Also, the joke about Clinton having a dick…hahahahahaha! Of course, because REAL genetic women couldn’t possibly lead the country! Ahahahahaha!

Comment by zombie z

OK, so you’re voting for Hillary because you object to her sex being of relevance politically?

Isn’t that sexist?

Comment by Exposing Feminism

You miss the point, Exposing – like most anti-feminists do.

I am voting for Senator Clinton – and call her that – she’s got a last name and a title, I don’t see you calling Bush “George” – because she has the qualifications to be president. In picking between Obama and Clinton, I will vote for the person whose campaign is not dehumanizing the other person’s gender – in this case, it’s the Clinton campaign that’s taken the high road.

For someone who seeks to expose feminism – you’re not very good at bringing your points together. I say go back to school, stop bitching and start thinking more logically.

A note on your posted video from Bil Maher – he was speaking of women and what was “womanly” based on gender roles – not on what feminism has to say about it. The next time you post a video that supposedly supports your cause, watch it and think about it first.

Comment by ProFeministMale

Unless we want a Baptist minister in office next, we should run the candidate most likely to win and it isn’t a black man or a white woman who is hated by half the members of her own party.

Comment by flimsy sanity

Flimsy, I’ll say this much – no one else stands a chance in this race against Clinton. Stop listening to the political rhetoric and what detractors have to say – the fact of the matter is that America is ready for a change. Based on his fundraising campaign, Edwards is not ready to be president.

America, whether we like it or not, is ready for a black and a woman president …and it’s already set in stone.

My predictions for tonight: 1) Obama 2) Clinton 3) Edwards.

Edwards will drop out by January 20th. Clinton wins the next three. Obama’s concession speech will come a day after Super Tuesday.

Clinton will pick Edwards as her running mate.

Comment by profeministmale

Haha that’s so funny. I think it’d be funny if they made one for men, but I think it would be harder.

Hey, Exposing Feminism, you have ”Men Are Better Than Women” in your ”Humor” blog roll? So saying women are useless pieces of shit is funny to you, but it’s not funny when a woman says it? You have ”American Women Suck” as a ”Resource”? Wtf? And the evidence for this is? None! That’s BIG TIME hypocrisy right there!

Comment by dnxx1

It does bear mentioning that Senator Clinton’s campaign is using her first name in a lot of advertising, and that seems to be an integral part of her campaign strategy (for example, check out hillaryclinton.com). As an amateur poli-sci geek, this sees to be a smart move – she definitely has an image of being somewhat strident and unpleasant (note that I don’t endorse this POV; most of it seems to be fuelled by RW orgs and individuals), and using her first name will soften that image and broaden her appeal. It’s just unfortunate that she has to play this sort of game.

Comment by Mike

I was dissappointed in Obama when he toured with a preacher whose message was strongly anti-gay and Obama said nothing against it. Now this… It makes me sad, as I think he could be a great candidate, but to keep silent on such big issues? What else will he sit and do nothing about?

Comment by Marcy

@ Marcy: I think some of the McClurkin controversy was spin. For instance, he is a famed gospel singer, and he’s sung for presidents, on Oprah, and at the Democratic National Convention. It so happens that he has lived a gay lifestyle himself and after being “saved” has declared himself “ex-gay.” I would categorize that as homophobic, absolutely, but it is different than being a career gay-basher.

As for the computer screen, it is appalling, but the article says it was on a public computer in a lounge at the hotel where Obama’s staff (but not Obama) was staying. So really, to jump candidates on this kind of dirt seems extreme. How he was supposed to know about a prank allegedly pulled by one of his many staffers is unclear.

Obama is not my candidate of choice, but I believe he is sincere and deserves a lot of credit for that, given the times. He’s had lots of opportunities to take shots at Clinton but doesn’t.

Comment by eliza

You know, the funny thing about this that occurred to me the other day, is if anyone on Clinton’s staff had had any sort of racist joke on a computer screen about Obama, it would have been a MUCH bigger deal than this story has been.

Comment by Marcy

Flimsy, I firmly believe that progressives should not allow bigots to determine their vote.

Saying the rest of America is “not ready” is a cop-out. So when is the time? How long must we obey the bigots before we decide it’s acceptable to be agents of social change? Let me tell you – the bigots are not going to wake up in 20 years and say “OK we’re ready now” if we keep electing “safe” white men. I like Edwards, but don’t vote for him because you’re afraid of scaring or scandalizing the bigots. I go back and forth trying to decide whether strategic voting is the thing to do.

But when has waiting for the bigots to come around EVER worked to advance women/minorities? Let’s have some courage.

Comment by SarahMC

That KFC/H. Clinton joke is friggin’ ancient. I can’t tell that the Obama campaign had anything to do with rehashing it yet again at that Holiday Inn though. I’d guess it was just some idiot who worked for the hotel. There are a lot of gender bigots out there. They’re not exactly famous for their originality or independent thinking.

“LOL Wimmin! Amirite?”

Comment by snobographer




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s



%d bloggers like this: