2008 Primaries Thread 3: The Rejecting and Denouncening

we can talk about cultures in which (the Medicis in 14th century Florence, for example) the idea of a powerful woman wasn't seen as a challenge to "patriarchy."

really though? can you not think of any segments of american society who could possibly provide a coutner-example here?

The average American citizen has more access to information than his ancestors in 1908 did yet the political culture hasn't changed one iota.

we can talk about cultures in which (the Medicis in 14th century Florence, for example) the idea of a powerful woman wasn't seen as a challenge to "patriarchy."

-- Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Thursday, April 17, 2008 12:11 AM (19 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

mainly because patriarchy is a generalized, ahistorical cateogory with a relatively recent vintage, i.e. no-one used it in 14th century florence. so indeed, it wasn't challenged.

The average American citizen has more access to information than his ancestors in 1908 did yet the political culture hasn't changed one iota.

-- Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Thursday, April 17, 2008 12:12 AM (35 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

"one iota"?

To use more onerous grad school jargon, "privileging" progress is a mistake; it's just another determinant, ever in flux.

sorry, why is it a mistake?

within a given society, say, the US; and within certain parameters; say, voting rights or laws, why is it a 'mistake' to talk about progress?

Progress vs progress

illuminating

You're changing the terms. I merely said that elevating progress as the means by which we judge material or spiritual improvements instead of a complex give-and-take is a problem. I never said that, say, gays and blacks haven't seen genuine improvements in their lots.

(xpost)

i'm not changing the terms at all. you said

The average American citizen has more access to information than his ancestors in 1908 did yet the political culture hasn't changed one iota.

-- Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Thursday, April 17, 2008 12:12 AM (5 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

i don't know what "I merely said that elevating progress as the means by which we judge material or spiritual improvements instead of a complex give-and-take is a problem" even means -- *you're* changing the terms here.

calling something a 'complex give-and-take' is fair enough because it's a messy world; but that doesn't invalidate the idea of progress.

Nobody's invalidating it! There are times when women were treated as equals, and times when they weren't, and that's as true now as it was in 14th century Florence.

i.e. progress is just one factor, and it's not that important.

Aaaaand with an hour before debate time:

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/usa/2008/04/ordinary_people_screw_em.html

In January 1995, as the Clintons were licking their wounds from the 1994 congressional elections, a debate emerged at a retreat at Camp David. Should the administration make overtures to working class white southerners who had all but forsaken the Democratic Party? The then-first lady took a less than inclusive approach. "Screw 'em," she told her husband. "You don't owe them a thing, Bill. They're doing nothing for you; you don't have to do anything for them."

Asked to respond, the Clinton campaign replied: "This quote differs from the recollection of others who were in the room at the time this comment was allegedly made." Asked to produce any witnesses who could back that up, the Clinton spokesman changed the subject. Classy.

whoah I walk away for a few minutes...

bye, hillary

there have been matriarchies? name one.

I'll grant that "matriarchy" is a hotly contested term, but if we use it to refer to societies where there were established traditions of women holding positions of political and economic power there are plenty of examples: Egyptian Kush dynasty, Nubia, southern India (Mangalore/Kerala - still in existence today!), various European states at various times, etc.

interesting timing

xp

so anyone know where/if the debate is going to be streamed online? abc doesn't seem to have a clear link, maybe i missed it.

let me know!

bye, hillary

don't worry, she's been "fully vetted"

mark, this seems be the local abc station's stream: http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/index
but, you might have to watch with the silly reaction graphs...

wow so according to huffpost youve got 3 people in the room who remember hillary saying that - best part is bill tried to talk her down w/a v obamaesque argument

thanks robot!

shall we have a separate debate thread?

wait when does debate start - am heading home now

now

what a fucking debate, first hour was pure BS

first hour was meaningless pain

there were flashes where I was reminded of everything I like about Hillary. Her answer on how to handle support for Israel by reassuring other middle eastern allies that they'd get the same American military support & response if they were to be attacked was totally lacking from Obama's somewhat content-free 'I promise you I will be tough' response. and she did her homework on her gun control answer for Pennslyvania and I was kind of shocked at how little Obama seemed to care about his answer on an issue that was so crucial for that audience, it just didn't matter to him. not smart!

her frustrated non-apology on the sniper thing reminded me of all the many long months that have passed since I liked Hillary

they gave her a pretty nice pass when she basically said "I lied, so what"

you could just see her seething that she was being forced to 'apologize' over such a trivial non-issue, right on the heels of her stressing the validity of the 'questions' about Obama's associations w/ Wright and argh Ayers

she's a machine and she fucking thrived in that poisonous first hour

It's not hard to "thrive" when all of the questions are directed at your opponent.

HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THE AMERICAN FLAG?
DOES REV WRIGHT LOVE AMERICA?
etc.

Embarrassing debate.

new low for America tonight, agreed.

yeah when jonah goldberg says your mod is spouting repub talking points you're in some shit

"Senator, two questions. Number one, do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?"

good lord.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/16/us/politics/16text-debate.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

huh i just got xposted by myself somehow

after Obama repeats his theme that the campaign is obsessed with meaningless contentless talking points, and starts talking about how the US economy and how income inequality is worse than any time since the 20s:

MR. GIBSON: And Senator Obama, I want to do one more question, which goes to the basic issue of electability. And it is a question raised by a voter in Latrobe, Pennsylvania, a woman by the name of Nash McCabe. Take a look.

NASH MCCABE (Latrobe, Pennsylvania): (From videotape.) Senator Obama, I have a question, and I want to know if you believe in the American flag. I am not questioning your patriotism, but all our servicemen, policemen and EMS wear the flag. I want to know why you don't.

(Announcements.)

MR. GIBSON: Back to the Philadelphia Debate, the Democratic Debate, just less than a week now before the Pennsylvania primary.

And I would be remiss tonight if I didn't take note of the fact that today is the one-year anniversary of Virginia Tech. And I think it's fair to say that probably every American during this day, at one point or another, said a small prayer for the great people at that university and for those who died.

It also, I suspect, makes this an appropriate time to talk about guns.

"Nash, do I look like a fireman?"

haven't any older, non-starry-eyed Obama supporters shown up on the trail with YOU BET I'M BITTER signs?

And I think it's fair to say that probably every American during this day, at one point or another, said a small prayer for the great people at that university, except for the goddamn atheists, or people who don't have every school-shooting anniversary marked in red on their fucking calendar.

haha i know that part was like whaaa

George Stephanopolis: Senator Obama, if your wife were raped and killed by an American flag, would you salute it, burn it or lethally inject it?

http://i26.tinypic.com/2ce0tw5.jpg

obama on the debate:

I will tell you it does not get more fun than these debates. They are inspiring debates. I think last night we set a new record because it took us 45 minutes before we even started talking about a single issue that matters to the American people.

It took us 45 minutes — 45 minutes before we heard about health care, 45 minutes before we heard about Iraq, 45 minutes before we heard about jobs, 45 minutes before we heard about gas prices.

Now, I don’t blame Washington for this because that’s just how Washington is. They like stirring up controversies and getting us to play gotcha games and getting us to attack each other. And I’ve got to say Sen. Clinton looked in her element.

She was taking every opportunity to, you know, get a dig in there.... That’s all right, that’s her right, that’s her right to kind of twist the knife a little bit....
Look, I understand though, because that’s the textbook Washington campaign, because that’s the politics that’s been taught to be played, that’s the lesson that she had heard when the Republicans were doing the same things to her back in the 1990s.

http://politicalinquirer.com/2008/04/17/stephanopoulos-was-coached-by-hannity/

http://media.gallup.com/poll/graphs/041708DailyUpdateGraph1_nmjkou5.gif

http://thepage.time.com/2008/04/17/mccains-nerve-center/

MARK HALPERIN IS REALLY BORED TODAY DUDES

Among the things Davis tells The Page:

“I don’t have to use my glasses when I use the AARP calculator…since I turned 50 I’m qualified to have an AARP calculator so that’s totally extraordinary.”

“I do a lot of three-hole punching…I’m an active three-hole puncher. My world revolves around punching holes in things.”

Get an even closer look at Davis’ desk featured in this week’s TIME here.

Barack dusting his shoulders off: http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/04/17/sot.obama.criticizes.abc.debate.cnn

haha so awesome