Erin ([info]erinin3d) wrote,
@ 2008-02-25 19:29:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
BITCHES GET STUFF DONE (the tshirt, I want it)


Okay seriously, how funny is it that as soon as the writers' strike ends Tina Fey and the SNL crew CHANGE THE NATIONAL DISCOURSE on this election with two skits pointing out the two most glaringly obvious things in the world: 1. Obama is getting a free ride from the media and 2. Everyone hates women who get shit done (except yanno, shareholders).

Today every single pundit aired clips from this weekend's SNL and followed it with segments centered on "Has Jesus Obama been treated differently than That Conniving, Calculated She-Witch Clinton by the media?" and "Does Obama's rhetoric match his speeches?"

And even though the answers to both those questions are pretty obvious, even the dumbest pundits on CNN and MSNBC were seething with bitterness and rage that "OMGZ SO INZPIRINGZZZ!" was not going to cut it in terms of preparation for work that day.

As much as it pains me to see Chris Matthews have his sad face on he needs a kick in the ass once in a while.


And PS, how funny is it that David Schuster is back from suspension (after refusing to apologize IN EMAIL for calling Chelsea Clinton a prostitute on the air, clever!) but only allowed to cover John McCain? Who uhm, is actually kind of a prostitute...? I LOL'd.


xox

(38 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]monkey1976
2008-02-26 03:57 am UTC (link)
thank you. so refreshing to see in the face of all this hillary-hating propaganda.

by demonizing her they're going to shoot themselves in the foot. if she wins the nomination i guarantee you there are going to be a ton of hipsters who get all fatigued and get too lazy to vote and throw in the towel.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]erinin3d
2008-02-26 04:01 am UTC (link)
Thank you, but it's not me, it's all Tina Fey!

Srsly, I'm going to sing "Before He Cheats" at karaoke this weekend for her.


xox

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]annaclaire
2008-02-26 04:36 am UTC (link)
I kind of wanted to post about this myself, but the Obama fans of my LJ are furious about the SNL thing and it just would not be pretty.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]erinin3d
2008-02-26 05:09 am UTC (link)
LOL, secret society! Like in Bridge to Terabithia!


xox

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]annaclaire
2008-02-26 01:59 pm UTC (link)
One of the Obama people on my LJ said just yesterday: "I know many of you are Clinton supporters, but I ask you to question yourselves and understand that Obama is the new way of doing things."

Which I actually consider terrifying.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]monkey1976
2008-02-26 03:56 pm UTC (link)
yeah, i've had people whom are normally very sweet and whom i know pretty well grind my ass into a pulp because i dared not vote for obama.

i'm not even anti-obama - i just thought they were close and i preferred one a little more than the other.

good luck finding an obama supporter who doesn't cultivate an extremely virulent, scary ass hatred for clinton.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]erinin3d
2008-02-26 04:53 pm UTC (link)
good luck finding an obama supporter who doesn't cultivate an extremely virulent, scary ass hatred for clinton.

Which they won't even entertain has even the remotest thing to do with sexism.


I'm all for political enthusiasm, but McCain is a nasty person and if people think this wide-eyed "Si Se Puede" stuff is going to survive against the right wing attack machine we should all invest in Kleenex now.


xox

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]annaclaire
2008-02-26 05:25 pm UTC (link)
haha, I know a guy who told me his dislike for Clinton isn't based on sexism, but on the fact that she seemed like "a crabby old librarian who is always shushing you" and that "she's the type of girl who sat at the front of the class and always knew all the answers," and I was like, 1. how is that not sexist? and 2. why wouldn't you want that type of person as a president?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]erinin3d
2008-02-26 05:29 pm UTC (link)
Yes, I hate it when other people's accomplishments make me feel bad about myself. Everything should be just like masturbating.


xox

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]sui_generis
2008-02-27 04:04 am UTC (link)


You're right, that does sound sexist.


However, on the other side of the coin, I would also find a Clinton supporter very scary if there was no way at all he could conceive of it not being possible to prefer Obama over Clinton without being a sexist. That would be equally silly.

Right?


(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]sui_generis
2008-02-27 04:02 am UTC (link)


I'm an Obama supporter and I agree with you.

That's a weird, stupid thing to say.

I support him on the issues, not cause I like the way he makes speeches. And also because he's the only alternative to Clinton, who I could never vote for because of her record.

But that's another discussion. You should tell those Obama supporters to shut up, because the way they act reflects poorly on their candidate.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(Reply from suspended user)

[info]sui_generis
2008-02-27 03:56 am UTC (link)


thank you. so refreshing to see in the face of all this hillary-hating propaganda.

Question: Do you equate all the people who want a woman President but don't want Clinton to be the nominee because of her record -- as being the same as people who "hate on Hillary" because she's a woman or are just crazy and vindictive?


Because sometimes it sounds like many Clinton supporters do...


xo

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]monkey1976
2008-02-27 04:14 am UTC (link)
nowhere in any of that did i mention anything about hilary being a woman president. i said "hilary-hating", not woman hating.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]sui_generis
2008-02-27 04:21 am UTC (link)


Okay -- but what I'm saying is,

a) You don't think that's the reason they hate her? Because she's a woman? Or are you suggesting they hate her for some other irrational reason?

and

b) You don't think it's possible to think she's the lesser candidate based on her record, her stances on the issues, and what she does and doesn't bring to the table (besides a penis)? In other words, you probably don't like, for example, GW Bush -- because of things he's done and said -- his record. Is that an irrational hatred of Bush? (Obviously I'm not equating the two, I'm using an exaggerated example to illustrate my point.)


(And also, do you think that sooooooooome of the people arguing about Clinton with you can actually still respect you and your opinion even though they don't agree with it? And even lurve you oodles? Or is the act of explaining their disagreement with you, like, hostile in itself...?)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]monkey1976
2008-02-27 07:10 pm UTC (link)
a. No, I'm saying that we Dems are all in the same gang, and it seems like sometimes we forget that.

b. I totally think it's possible not to like Hilary based on her stances on the issues, record, blah blah blah. But it weirds me out how the Obama Democrats - a group of people who typically are quick to call out others on sexism because they are Democrats and that's the very nature of the ideology - absolutely refuse to admit that there has been some of that levied towards Clinton by the media. However, they call the "he's inexperienced" argument racist and that's supposed to be acceptable. Either say that both are being influenced by sexism/racism or neither. You can't have it both ways. To say that sexism hasn't affected Hilary's campaign or racism Obama's is pretty freaking Republican to me.

finally, i know all of y'all lurve and respect my opinions. it's just hard sometimes being in the minority.

Edited at 2008-02-27 07:13 pm UTC

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]sui_generis
2008-02-27 07:17 pm UTC (link)


the Obama Democrats - a group of people who typically are quick to call out others on sexism - absolutely refuse to admit that there has been some of that levied towards Clinton by the media. However, they call the "he's inexperienced" argument racist and that's supposed to be acceptable. Either say that both are being influenced by sexism/racism or neither. You can't have it both ways.


Well, I can only speak for myself, but I do call it both ways equally. You recall my posts last year on Chris Matthew's sexism against Senator Clinton, no? Way, way, way back before ANYone else, especially in the media or among high-profile feminists, were talking about it?

If you don't remember, I'd be happy to find the link.


I just worry that a lot of people (not you, but people who share your opinions) don't want to hear any criticism of Hillary at all, and so they tar anyone who does with the misogyny or sexism brush. Much like Pappas of NY NOW or Gloria Steinem, who said nobody could be a real feminist and support Obama over Hillary. That's scary thinking.


But I'm glad you're not mad at me for disagreeing with ya on Clinton's suitability vs. Obama's. Because I HATE WHEN MOMMY AND DADDY FIGHT!


(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]erinin3d
2008-02-27 07:27 pm UTC (link)
OMG, did you wake up and find your medication?


xox

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]sui_generis
2008-02-27 07:31 pm UTC (link)


If you're talking about the fact that I go out of my way to be polite to Erin in my responses, it's because she always does the same with me.

I tend to reflect peoples' own attitude or tone back at them. Which may be why you think my comments are impolite.


(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]erinin3d
2008-02-27 07:33 pm UTC (link)
Were they under the dresser? Stuff rolls under there really easily.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]sui_generis
2008-02-27 07:34 pm UTC (link)


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

you sure are funny. do another one?

pleeeeeeeeeeease?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]erinin3d
2008-02-27 07:38 pm UTC (link)
I can't just turn it on and off, I have to be inspired!

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]more_bjorn
2008-02-26 06:32 am UTC (link)
That's great and all, but I'm still not convinced that Clinton is all that her supporters think that she's cracked up to be. She's implicitly running on the record of her husband's record, a record that in my mind has been notorious for its betrayals of certain key progressive ideals. I can't forget that. Call it some kind of horrific sexism, but she doesn't have by support.

And Obama may be getting a "free ride" from the media, but I don't really think that very many other candidates have received a full vetting from them. I mean, Chuck Norris gets on board with Huckabee, and suddenly the media seems like they are completely overlooking the fact that he's batshit crazy? Kucinich marries a tall redhead and he suddenly gets more airtime? I don't think that criticism of media coverage should be limited to Obama and Clinton.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]erinin3d
2008-02-26 06:53 am UTC (link)
Is Barack Obama everything his supporters believe he is? Because that's a much larger pill to swallow.

And you know what? It is 'horrifically sexist' to think it's no big deal that the one female candidate has had her personal and professional life run through a meat grinder while all the men (including the ones who are irrelevant? Who cares.) skate by on being all personality and rhetoric. And you would do well not to be so glib when you talk about it to me.


xox

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]more_bjorn
2008-02-26 07:34 am UTC (link)
To be honest? I think that if these are the two best candidates that the Democratic Party can come up with, it's a great thing that the Republicans are in disarray. Out of a number of qualified candidates, the top three were pretty much the least experienced out of the bunch, and that's really going to hurt when faced off against McCain.

Furthermore, I'm just not buying the line that I should kowtow to Clinton's candidacy simply because other people are ripping into her with some vile and sexist statements. I think that it is a big deal, but I'm just as irate with that as I am with the "Obama is a Muslim" whispering campaign that Clinton staffers seem to be continuously perpetuating. Neither in particular makes me want to vote for one over another.

But if she gets up and claims (to paraphrase) that it took a Clinton to clean up after one Bush, and it will take another Clinton to clean up after the second, and if she also has her husband on the campaign trail to speak on her behalf, his record as a politician is fair game for me to judge the type of politician that she will be. She might be radically different if she were to get into office, of course, but I haven't seen proof that she isn't part of the same party machine.

Personally? I consider his tactic of triangulation to be a massive betrayal of the ideals that I believed in for political expediency. If you could give me proof that she'd be a substantively different politician, I'd be more inclined to favor her, but nothing in her rhetoric or her record has changed that image that I've received.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]erinin3d
2008-02-26 05:10 pm UTC (link)
This logic is a mess. Everyone candidate is supported by their spouse. Most people consider being a political wife a job unto itself so no one thinks it's a big deal that those women rarely have opinions are any kind of employment background. Bill Clinton is supporting his wife's candidacy.

I doubt anyone is supporting Clinton simply because her coverage has been fairly sexist. Believe it or not, she's actually an extremely intelligent person and people think she would make a good president. And Obama supporters do not do themselves any favors by going on about 'uniting the country' while in no way acknowledging how fucked up the treatment is she's received in this campaign.

Everyone triangulates. In politics, in business, on the Hannah Montana show, that's life. If you think Obama doesn't then not only are you not paying attention but you're being very naive. And it's not my job to educate you.


xox

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]more_bjorn
2008-02-26 07:30 pm UTC (link)
Every candidate is supported by their spouse, but every candidate does not have a spouse that was a president. And given the unprecedented level of responsibility given to Clinton under her husband's administration, it is certainly fair in my mind to discuss her participation in that administration, just as if she were a cabinet member.

Is that an example of messy logic?

And have I said that Clinton isn't intelligent? That sexist attacks against her are fair? That politicians don't compromise? That I believe that Obama is the Messiah, and I have total confidence in him? Hardly. But exercising a fair amount of personal skepticism about her ability to get the "shit" that *I* want "done" in the way that I want it done should not be poo-pooed so handily.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]sui_generis
2008-02-27 03:54 am UTC (link)


a record that in my mind has been notorious for its betrayals of certain key progressive ideals


Exactly.

It's funny that you can't disagree with Clinton without being unfair against women no matter how big a feminist you are, but you can criticize Obama without being racist. I think he's an excellent candidate regardless of his minority status, but she's basing her candidacy on her minority status. Would Senator Clinton be this close to becoming the nominee if she was a he? It seems unlikely. They call Obama's campaign a "cult of personality" -- but it's really Hillary's campaign that's intensely based on specifically who Hillary is -- Obama's is based on his words.

Senator Obama has overcome his "outsider" status, Clinton has ridden hers.



Edited at 2008-02-27 04:32 am UTC

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]emrecom
2008-02-26 06:35 am UTC (link)
Actually, I rather despise both Clintons with equal vigor.

(Reply to this)


(Anonymous)
2008-02-26 07:49 pm UTC (link)
i thought the bit was brilliant!! Tina Fey rocks.

I created some "bitch is the new black" and "bitches get stuff done" shirts/buttons/etc the other night

gigglechick.com (http://www.gigglechick.com/erin/blog/2008/02/im_a_bitch_and_sos_this_one.htm)

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]erinin3d
2008-02-26 08:32 pm UTC (link)
OMG, have I just been tshirt spammed?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
T-Shirt spammmmmed
(Anonymous)
2008-03-07 06:44 am UTC (link)
hah! sorry. no, i just was.... oh okay, yes. you got t-shirt (and buttons and stickers and more) spammed...

but my name's Erin as well so it's okay :}

(Reply to this) (Parent)
hahaha
[info]sui_generis
2008-02-27 03:50 am UTC (link)


Yeah, Obama's gotten a HUGE free ride from the press -- every single statement made on him is full of racial patronizing nonsense on whether he's experienced enough, even though he has as much or more experience than many of the sitting Presidents we've already had.


Look, I'm sorry Clinton has more of a record to have to run from than Obama does, but I don't think everyone saying she's being treated unfairly by journalists calling her on BS and her votes is "discrimination".


Also, why is it that Obama doesn't run around saying "Oh, you guys are just asking me the hard questions because I'm black," but everyone seems to be implying the press doesn't like Hillary because she's a woman?


As a feminist, I find the way she's playing on people's sympathies really distressing.


p.s.: I think you're right though, it's an EXCELLENT IDEA for a t-shirt.



Edited at 2008-02-27 03:58 am UTC

(Reply to this) (Thread)
Re: hahaha
[info]erinin3d
2008-02-27 04:50 am UTC (link)
Thanks for embodying every issue I have with the misogynist strain of Obama supporters. 1. You're obfuscating or belittle any situation or issue you can't deal with 2. You feel it is totally appropriate to aggressively (and condescendingly) correct women's political beliefs and opinions. Well guess what kiddo, I kinda know what I'm talking about here and don't need advice from dilettantes.

The fact that you define yourself as a feminist while saying and doing these things is quite interesting. Good luck with that.


xox

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
Re: hahaha
[info]sui_generis
2008-02-27 04:57 am UTC (link)



Um...


WOW.

...I don't know what to say to that without setting you off even more.



I can't point out how irrational it is that you can't accept that someone might want another candidate over Hillary for reasons other than misogyny -- because that would be misogynist, wouldn't it?!?!?!

Of COURSE it would. If anyone thinks Hillary isn't infallible, they by definition hate women. Right? And if anyone disagrees with a woman, that is also misogynist. I see it all much more clearly now.


btw, every single claim or interpretation you make of what I said (or, more accurately didn't actually say) is incorrect and offensively so, but what's the point, really? You're only going to project your own issues onto anything I say anyway.

The fact that I've said all along that Chris Matthews has been unfair to Hillary and I've also stated that I will vote for Hillary if she's the nominee are yet two more examples of my rampant misogyny and hatred of women.

Wow. You realize you're totally alienating people who are on your side by painting everyone blindly with the same brush, right? (OH, and P.S.? You're astonishingly defensive anytime someone disagrees with you, no matter how politely -- you even got nasty with a commenter above me even though they were being pleasant, just disagreeing. Why is that?)



Edited at 2008-02-27 05:00 am UTC

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
Re: hahaha
[info]erinin3d
2008-02-27 05:02 am UTC (link)
If that's what you call being polite I think it might be time to invest in a new copy of Emily Post. And I'm not painting a broad group of people as anything. I'm just talking about you.

But thanks for calling me irrational! Totes not sexist!


xox

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
Re: hahaha
[info]sui_generis
2008-02-27 05:08 am UTC (link)


See? Even though I set you up to say it, you still couldn't resist.

Don't you think that's maybe a bad sign?

And I'm sincerely sorry if anything I've said offended, but honestly I guess I just don't have that much of my personal self-esteem tied up in my political opinions. (Not saying that you do -- just explaining why I don't get upset or insulted in political discussions.)

Obviously this is not a topic that we can converse on without there being pointless static, so I guess there's no point in me having even tried to ask the questions I did that angered you so.


So I apologize. For not realizing that this would be a waste of time, not for all the offensive, insulting, and silly accusations you made about me. Heck, at least people who actually know anything about me will get a good laugh over it. Thanks.



Edited at 2008-02-27 05:09 am UTC

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
Re: hahaha
[info]erinin3d
2008-02-27 05:14 am UTC (link)
You're welcome!

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(38 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…