The things, you say
Your purple prose just gives you away
The things, you say
You’re unbelievable
~EMF – Unbelievable

That’s the way I feel about Sen. Clinton and the Clinton’s campaign. That’s not to say that they’re liars (which I know they are), but I find their antics and “purple prose” simply unbelievable.

  • I can’t understand how someone who’s had the media lapping up every single word of theirs complain that media doesn’t give them the right kind of attention.
  • I don’t understand how someone who made a big stink about Sen. Obama “rejecting” Louis Farrakhan, not only presents a story that wasn’t true, but when one of their own well-known supporters makes a racist statement, she doesn’t “reject” her.
  • I will not understand how someone who has spent the last 8 months smearing blacks and Muslims, can fake outrage on 3 week old factual flyers then say that the flyers are “Rovian”.
  • I still don’t understand how someone can generate fake outrage at being called a ‘monster’, yet embrace having a national “comedy” sketch show call you a ‘bitch’.

If I didn’t pay attention to politics; didn’t blog, didn’t watch CSPAN, didn’t obsessively check national and local news agencies info and only saw this, I wouldn’t vote for Clinton. A couple of weeks ago, I read a post somewhere that said something like:

Clinton is like that girl on the playground who’d whine that the boys were being mean and ignoring her, but would turn around a kick them in the knees because she knows that boys can’t hit girls.

When I read that–as a woman–I flinched. Mostly because I had seen that girl and I had despised her with all my 8 year old heart. That girl made it harder for girls like me to get a fair shake on the playground. It wasn’t fun playing with the boys when that girl was around. They made sure they didn’t hit her too hard with the dodgeball or tag her out too often. Meanwhile other girls were either treated with kid gloves or hit even harder. I was hit harder.

In reading or hearing Clinton’s female surrogates and female reactions to Sen. Clinton and how the media treats her, I have a sense that we females are divided into these two camps of girls; those who whined and those who played on level with the boys. That is why Clinton can claim hurt and demand a resignation when Powers called her a monster, yet is unwilling to disavow comments made by former vice presidential candidate and Clinton superdelegate Geraldine Ferraro. Who said that Obama is only where he is because he’s black. That Clinton stands by the bigoted rhetoric of one of her more important superdelegates, speaks a lot about her, the type of campaign that is being run and what kind of presidency we’re get if she wins in November.

John McCain, who has no scruples, properly distanced himself from Rep. Steve King’s ugly remarks about Obama. That speaks to a larger issue of Clinton’s character. When David Shuster made his inappropriate remark about Chelsea Clinton, Sen. Obama was asked about it and spoke up for the Clinton’s. That’s despite all their race-baiting and insinuations of the previous months. Sen. Clinton has been eerily silent on Rep. King’s remarks. Not that we should expect more. In fact, the only time Clinton has disavowed a surrogates/endorser’s remarks has been when that person is a black person. Every other person has been given cover for their Clintonian talking points.

Sen. Clinton, your purple prose just gives you away. It’s unbelievable.


The Clinton’s campaign has now accused the Obama campaign of “playing the race card” over Ferraro’s words. Same shit, different day. Didn’t we watch this movie in January? You know, back when Bill Clinton and their surrogates were dumping all kinds of racist buzzwords on airwaves and crazy-assed bloggers like SusanHu and Michelle Malkin Taylor Marsh were accusing the Obama campaign of playing the race card?

Mammy Maggie Williams memo said:

In January, NBC’s Tim Russert confronted Senator Barack Obama with a four page memo from his campaign characterizing statements they claimed the Clinton Campaign had made about race. Asked in hindsight whether he regretted pushing this story, Senator Obama said :

Well, not only in hindsight, but going forward. I think that, as Hillary said, our supporters, our staff, get overzealous. They start saying things that I would not say. And it is my responsibility to make sure that we’re setting a clear tone in our campaign, and I take that responsibility very seriously, which is why I spoke yesterday and sent a message in case people were not clear that what we want to do is make sure that we focus on the issues.”

We agreed then. We agree today. Supporters from both campaigns will get overzealous. Senator Clinton today reiterated that when asked about Geraldine Ferraro‘s recent comments:

“I do not agree with that and you know it’s regrettable that any of our supporters on both sides say things that veer off into the personal. We ought to keep this focused on the issues. That’s what this campaign should be about.”

Senator Obama’s campaign staff seems to have forgotten his pledge. We have not. And, we reject these false, personal and politically calculated attacks on the eve of a primary. This campaign should be about the leadership we need for a better future and these attacks serve only to divide the Democratic Party and the American people.

But you know…Geraldine Ferraro, who is still running her damn mouth, is still on the Clinton’s campaign’s staff so, they must agree with what she said.

But far from backing off from her initial remark, Ferraro defended it and elaborated on it.

“Any time anybody does anything that in any way pulls this campaign down and says let’s address reality and the problems we’re facing in this world, you’re accused of being racist, so you have to shut up,” Ferraro said. “Racism works in two different directions. I really think they’re attacking me because I’m white. How’s that?”

No…um…I’m NOT going to call her that…no one’s attacking you because you’re white, you’re being attacked because you say bigoted stuff not even in the ballpark of reality.

She also said she is familiar with Axelrod from his work for minority candidates in New York.

“He knows damn well that the best thing to do in a situation like this is to come back and hit with race,” Ferraro said, adding that the response is a sign that the Obama campaign is “worried” about the first-term senator’s lack of experience.


“Sexism is a bigger problem,” Ferraro argued. “It’s OK to be sexist in some people’s minds. It’s not OK to be racist.”

And I guess Geraldine Ferraro is going to make it her life’s work to make sure it’s OK to be racist.

I have just one thing to say to Ferraro:


9 thoughts on “Unbelievable

  1. Clinton is not the first woman to run for this office, she’s just the one that the media loved and pushed. She’s only in the position (2nd place) because the media has made it their mission to make it so.

    Thanks for letting me vent. I feel better. Now, just need to figure out who to go to PA with for canvassing.


  2. PS, this is it for me. I would have held my nose if she’d gotten the nod, but this is it for me. I’ll be staying home that day and I’ll work my ass off from here on out to make sure Obama gets the nod.


  3. I’m on a Teamster list and I was planning to also drop a line to my SEIU friends. I’m off on Fridays, so I can make it a 3 day weekend several times. Now I just need to convince a few friends to go with me as well.


  4. Everything that the Clinton campaign says is completely nonsensical. I can’t even begin to wrap my mind around it. It is the ultimate in projection/reverse psychology, where everything they accuse Obama of actually applies to them. I think they are determined to stir up hate in people’s hearts to cloud their minds when they go to the polling booths. Judging by the exit polls (almost no Hillary supporters say they will vote for Obama, yet like half Obama supporters say they will vote for her), it looks like that is exactly the strategy they’re going for, and then they’ll try to convince the superdelegates that HE is the divisive one, not her.

    God help us.


  5. And you, dear lady, have “made my day” with this post. It’s not often that I get so angry and frustrated that I cannot sit down and put my thoughts into words, yet that has been the case for the last week. While I still feel frustration over that, your posts lately–and especially this one–have made me feel better and maintained my hope and faith.

    And you have supplied me with more material for my “ongoing post.”

    And thanks to all the commenters on this blog. You, too, have made my day.

    And another thing…I just heard on “Countdown” that Ferraro’s initial comments were made on February 28, yet they were published just yesterday–well after the March 4 primaries. How’s that’s for favorable treatment from the media?


  6. wasn’t it a local paper in PA that broke the story? I think it was in Bethlehem or Allentown or maybe Somerset. I wonder how much we’ve missed about this race because it was in a local paper but never made it to the big network and cable news.


  7. The paper Ferraro interviewed with? That was a local SoCal paper. I’m trying to figure out why they sat on it too. The area the paper covers, the South Bay is like pretty resistant to change. Everything down there looks like Small Town USA, but the entire area is really diverse. IIRC, Harman is their Rep. and they’re pretty conservative even when they elect Democrats.

    But, CA has already voted, they knew what they were sitting on. Especially considering the shitstorm Ferraro’s op-ed in the NYT created on Feb. 28.

    Something stinks here.


Comments are closed.