Jezebel: intramural+(bad)+sports

When Spite Trumps Common Sense, A Resentful Clinton Supporter Is There

Megan — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 13:00:00 EDT

The six weeks since Cynthia Ruccia announced that sexism would force her to support John McCain in the general election haven't, as many had hoped, made her any more reasonable. Like many a Clintonista, Ruccia — the co-founder of Women For Fair Politics who appeared on Larry King Live last night (see clip above left) — is still spitting mad and not going to take it anymore: she's going to vote for John McCain! See, John promised her personally that he'll appoint lots of women to jobs in his Administration (you know, like how Bush appointed feminist leaders Christine Todd Whitman, Ann Veneman, Elaine Chao, Condoleezza Rice, Mary Peters and Margaret Spellings to his Cabinet) and that trumps the cunt thing, reproductive rights and other issues that Ruccia, a lifelong Democrat, holds dear. Because in the battle to combat sexism in the media, it's important to show that women have a voice that can be used to show that Clinton supporters are crazy, spiteful bitches who will sell out their own political ideals to nurse a grudge. Way to strike a blow for us ladies, Cynthia!

•Related: Hill, Yes! O., No! [Washington Post]

Meet The Women Who Will Doom Us To A McCain Presidency

mcarpentier — Fri, 16 May 2008 14:30:00 EDT

Yesterday, I appealed to all that was good, right, feminist and holy among us to stop with the attacks on groups like NARAL on the basis of disappointment over Hillary Clinton's likely inability to garner the Democratic nomination. Many of you suggested that the Democratic Party would, once the disappointment ebbed, come together and support Obama against John McCain and his choice-hating, abstinence-educating, unequal-pay-giving minions because even a guy that calls you "sweetie" is preferable to one who calls you a "cunt." Well, meet the ladies who would love nothing more than to prove you wrong: Cynthia Ruccia and Kimberly Myers.

They got on O'Reilly last night to say that they're so mad at the Democratic Party over sexism directed at Hillary that they're going to vote Republican in the fall "if it comes to that." Guess they really aren't mythological creatures.Ruccia and the other members of Clinton Supporters Count Too have decided that not only will they vote against the Democratic nominee if it isn't Hillary, they will actively campaign against Obama because, as far as they are concerned, the race is by no means over yet. In a press release yesterday, they stated

We have a plan to campaign against the Democratic nominee. We have the (wo)manpower and the money to make our threat real. And there are millions of supporters who will back us up in the swing states. If you don't listen to our voice now, you will hear from us later.

They believe that millions of other women will not only support them in their efforts to overturn the votes of millions of other Democratic voters (and women) who voted for Obama come the convention in August, but will also support their work to elect another (male) Republican President to spite the Democratic Party. A Republican, by the way who has no apparent problem with the misogyny directed at Hillary by his supporters.

Clinton Backer Backlash [Politico]
Women Threaten Obama Boycott [ABC News]

NARAL's Endorsement Of Obama Is Neither Disrespectful Nor Disloyal

mcarpentier — Thu, 15 May 2008 18:00:00 EDT

Here's a reminder of what the pro-choice movement is supposed to be fighting: the anti-choice movement. I put this picture up in case you, like a lot of women today, have forgotten that these people are the enemy, and John McCain is their candidate. Because from all the ugly backlash against NARAL Pro-Choice America's endorsement of Barack Obama yesterday, it seems like a lot of Clinton supporters have decided the enemy is Obama/NARAL and not people that are, you know, actually actively fighting to deny women the right to choose. But, hey, why bother tearing down the anti-choice movement, their leaders and the politicians that pander to them when we can just tear other pro-choice Democrats and organizations down? No one undermines women like other women, right?

With 3 weeks to go in the primaries and virtually no chance of a Clinton upset, NARAL came out yesterday in support of Barack Obama who, along with Hillary Clinton, has a 100% score on their ratings scale. (They also both score 100% with Planned Parenthood - Obama is here, Clinton is here). Besides the obvious political advantage of being the first pro-choice organization to endorse him, NARAL said this about its decision:

Sen. Obama has been a strong advocate for a woman's right to choose throughout his career in public office. He steadfastly supports and defends a woman's right to make the most personal, private decisions regarding her reproductive health without interference from government or politicians.
Sen. Obama has been a leader on this issue in the United States Senate. Since joining the Senate in 2005, he has worked to unite Americans on both side of this debate behind commonsense, common-ground ways to prevent unintended pregnancy. Sen. Obama supports legislation to provide our teens with comprehensive sex education, prevent pharmacies from denying women access to their legal birth-control prescriptions, and increase access to family-planning services.

Since then, many of NARAL's state affiliate groups have taken pains to point out that they remain neutral in the race. EMILY's List President Ellen Malcolm called the endorsement "disrespectful" of Clinton's continued pursuit of the nomination, adding, "It certainly must be disconcerting for elected leaders who stand up for reproductive rights and expect the choice community will stand with them." EMILY's List, by the way, backs only female pro-choice Democratic candidates and thus would never back Obama regardless of his stance on choice, unlike NARAL and Planned Parenthood, whose PACs support pro-choice candidates regardless of gender.

Several Congresswomen who back Clinton's bid for the nomination weighed in today, with Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz telling reporters she feels "abandoned" by NARAL and California Congresswoman Jane Harman calling it a "betrayal" that NARAL has decided to back the presumptive pro-choice Democratic nominee for the Presidency. And, of course, they're not alone in their hyperbolic condemnation of a pro-choice group endorsing a pro-choice candidate who happens to be the presumptive winner of the primaries and, you know, pro-choice. A quick glance at NARAL's blog reveals a startling 3,152 comments, many of them screeds of rage against NARAL and Obama. One great commenter, Liz B says with no apparent sense of irony:

Et tu Brute! That's quite a blow to your gender and delivered at a prime time in the campaign, too. The most rabid woman haters could not have done more damage.
It's not enough that I've endured months of witnessing "Hillary hate" in the media, on the Internet, etc., and had to listen to calls of "F——g whore" and "bitch" and "c—-t" hurled at the candidate I support. Now, at a crucial moment in this tremendously important race, you choose to betray the interests of the women of America by endorsing a man who has inspired slogans like "Bros before Ho's" and who, in appearances made after his Pennsylvania debate with Clinton, "flipped off" his opponent and her whole gender. You expect him to defend our rights?

I very much doubt that your choice will win the presidency if he is the candidate. He is no match for McCain and Huckabee (the Republicans' probable vice presidential nominee). Unlike Hillary, your guy does not connect with and cannot win over the bulk of mainstream working people in America. Huckabee, who is rooted in the religious right and sees women as the "servants of men" is perceived as a "populist" who can "talk the talk" with everyday working people. We need Hillary, with her proven ability to connect with working Americans, in the race to avoid defeat in November.

Congratulate yourselves on helping the Democrats once again fulfill their historic mission by seizing defeat from the jaws of victory once again.

Ah, yes, endorsing the candidate that is sure to be the nominee 3 weeks in advance of the concession of the candidate that almost certainly cannot win is a betrayal of the cause of choice and women everywhere. Can you hear Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter snickering with joy as they watch the pro-choice movement attack itself over a pro-choice group endorsing one pro-choice candidate over the other?

So, look, can we please, please take a deep breath, all of us, and look at the picture above and remember that McCain is no longer going to support even a rape/incest/health exception to the Republican party's anti-abortion platform rather than trying to tear down the candidate, please?

[Full disclosure: This writer volunteered for NARAL at the Million Woman March handing out stickers to, hopefully, many of you.]

NARAL Pro-Choice America Supports Obama [NARAL]
And There's Even More On NARAL [American Prospect]
EMILY's List Hits Back At NARAL [The Atlantic]
Clinton supporters push back against NARAL endorsement [Salon]
Blog For Choice [NARAL]
McCain Poised to Flip on GOP Abortion Platform [ABC]