madmonq’s joint

Maureen Dowd jumps on the jump-on-Hillary band wagon (a little).  Still, she’s got a point or two. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/09/opinion/08dowd.html?ex=1200632400&en=a5abb2c497df69f3&ei=5070

Salon pimp slaps (or is it ho’ slaps?) Chris Matthews and rightfully so.

http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2008/01/09/hillary_nh/index.html

Feminist Philosophers wont vote for Hillary but dislikes the the double standard, too.

http://feministphilosophers.wordpress.com/2008/01/08/exactly-what-is-the-acceptable-way-to-behave/

And Gloria Steinem schools us all

So why is the sex barrier not taken as seriously as the racial one? The reasons are as pervasive as the air we breathe: because sexism is still confused with nature as racism once was; because anything that affects males is seen as more serious than anything that affects “only” the female half of the human race; because children are still raised mostly by women (to put it mildly) so men especially tend to feel they are regressing to childhood when dealing with a powerful woman; because racism stereotyped black men as more “masculine” for so long that some white men find their presence to be masculinity-affirming (as long as there aren’t too many of them); and because there is still no “right” way to be a woman in public power without being considered a you-know-what.

I’m not advocating a competition for who has it toughest. The caste systems of sex and race are interdependent and can only be uprooted together. That’s why Senators Clinton and Obama have to be careful not to let a healthy debate turn into the kind of hostility that the news media love. Both will need a coalition of outsiders to win a general election. The abolition and suffrage movements progressed when united and were damaged by division; we should remember that.

I’m supporting Senator Clinton because like Senator Obama she has community organizing experience, but she also has more years in the Senate, an unprecedented eight years of on-the-job training in the White House, no masculinity to prove, the potential to tap a huge reservoir of this country’s talent by her example, and now even the courage to break the no-tears rule. I’m not opposing Mr. Obama; if he’s the nominee, I’ll volunteer. Indeed, if you look at votes during their two-year overlap in the Senate, they were the same more than 90 percent of the time. Besides, to clean up the mess left by President Bush, we may need two terms of President Clinton and two of President Obama.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/08/opinion/08steinem.html?ex=1200546000&en=64032a1f32a2ea0d&ei=5070&emc=eta1

Jaysus I’m not a big Clinton fan but that’s a good argument.  All the challenging perspectives I’ve been looking for are summed up in this essay.  I still think Obama is the better candidate, but now I think I see why I think so.  Steinem seems to be the only one left still backing Hillary Clinton. 

These are the top 3 most email articles on the NY Times website at this time. 

Maureen Dowd: Can Hillary Cry Her Way Back to the White House?

Op-Ed Contributor Gloria Steinum: Woman are never Front-Runners

Corpse Wheeled to Check-Cashing Store Leads to 2 Arrests

Does anyone else see the correlation?