Yesterday, I wrote at some length about Sen. Clinton’s campaign and misogyny and uttered the opinion that some of the opposition to her is not grounded in sexism, but is merely and solely attributed to a dislike for her position on Iraq and Iran and for the method and reasoning of her campaign.

I’m sure they didn’t read my blog, but in today’s Huffington Post and New York Times two women write columns accusing me and all other middle aged white men of being misogynists where Hillary is concerned. In the NYTimes, Judith Warner begins with a conversation over doughnuts with two men who say they go for the younger women and that morphs into … well just read it and don’t miss the comments that follow. On HuffPost, Karen Stabiner takes a poke at a comment made by Obama and turns it into a bra burning meltdown. (Along the way, Ms. Stabiner forces me to think about Sen. Clinton’s genitalia, mensus cycle and — since she’s 60 now — her menopause; none of which are topics I find appealing.)

My short and sweet response to both columns is this:

Has there been racism and sexism in the Democratic Party primaries? Why, yes, there has and no doubt about it. The difference? Sen. Clinton and her older, white female supporters whine about it and Sen. Obama doesn’t. Sen. Clinton’s campaign at present is founded upon a cold blooded attempt to use racial animus — Latinos vs. African Americans — but there is no conspicuous dividing of the genders by the Illinois senator.

This is the clip of Obama’s comment that generated the controversy:

As to Ms.Warner’s lament that men get older but not mature: yeah, what about it? Remember when we were 16 and I was desperate to go out with you but you wanted a college soph instead? Yeah. Tables now turned and you don’t like it. Sorry about life mistreating you that way. Try dating that guy who is only 5’6″. He’s been wondering his whole life why women couldn’t see past his height and fall for the great guy he is inside. Or maybe you could see past the dollar signs in that calculating libido of yours and date a guy who doesn’t have $100 bills falling out of his pocket, even though you might have to pick up the dinner check every other time. Don’t mind me, though. I’m sorry. You’re right. It’s all our fault. Mea culpa. Mea maxima culpa.

Meanwhile, John X provides me with what may be a lot more interesting and long term topic: the end of reading and the dumbing of America, via this article in the Washington Post.

A post script on the feminista gnashing of teeth about the Hillary nutcracker: I’m offended, too. In fact, I was offended when the far right first came up with it in 1993. This isn’t something Obama has done, nor his supporters. It’s an artifact of the 15 years of Hillary bashing that started with Hillarycare and her “baking cookies” comment way back when. It’s part of why I don’t think she can win in November; it’s too late to change her image after a decade and a half of negative image crafting. The people I speak to who are “Hillary haters” can’t be reasoned with, their dislike of her is non-rational and they simply will not listen to any other viewpoint. Is it sexist? Certainly. It’s also reality that 45% of the voting public has bought into that viewpoint and will hate her and never vote for her no matter what. She has the highest “negatives” of any political figure I know about, including the current president, who so much more deserves our contempt.

A further aside as to the nutcracker… . There have always been emasculating women, but it’s only been since the mid-70s that this behavior pattern has been clothed in feminism. For myself, I’ve come to the place that I avoid women — feminists or not — who see me as an older home to be remodeled to fit their tastes. I’m not an old car to be restored and made a classic. I don’t want to be “fixed” like my cat, who my sister and mother gleefully got chopped. I rather like myself and don’t think of myself as broken and therefore needing fixing. If you don’t wish to be portrayed as a “nutcracker”, try changing your co-dependency behaviors before you start pointing your fingers at my supposed lack of evolution. Maybe it is simply a matter of wishing to be accepted for who I am and as I am. You know. Unconditional love. The same thing you with your sagging breasts and flabby ass also want. Ooops. There I go again. Sorry. So sorry. All my fault, my most grievous fault.

blogblah

AFTERNOON POSTSCRIPT

Just in case you wondered, here’s a “Red State” review of the Dem. nomination campaign. Just thought you’d like to see how Republicans think. Perhaps you ladies who think Obama is misogynist might want to consider how Republicans view the worldview of Obama and see where you fit in. Or, maybe you just aren’t yet familiar enough with the creeping COMMUNIST/SOCIALIST agenda of the Democratic Party and its Main Stream Media lackeys.

EVENING UPDATE

For some reason, I’ve run into some vintage Molly Ivins, the late and great Texas pundit and friend of Gov. Ann Richards. Just before her death, she had some words about the campaign we’re seeing now.

First, only because it’s short, a recollection by a blogger, Myra MacPherson of Neiman Foundation of Journalism at Harvard, of Molly:

In December 2006, the ever-prescient columnist and best-selling author Molly Ivins was asked whether or not Barack Obama should run for president. Her answer: “Yes, he should run. He’s the only Democrat with any ‘Elvis’ to him.”

Next, a bit of a column by Molly about Mrs. Clinton:

“I will not support Hillary Clinton for president”

AUSTIN, Texas — I’d like to make it clear to the people who run the Democratic Party that I will not support Hillary Clinton for president.

Enough. Enough triangulation, calculation and equivocation. Enough clever straddling, enough not offending anyone This is not a Dick Morris election. Sen. Clinton is apparently incapable of taking a clear stand on the war in Iraq, and that alone is enough to disqualify her. Her failure to speak out on Terri Schiavo, not to mention that gross pandering on flag-burning, are just contemptible little dodges.

The recent death of Gene McCarthy reminded me of a lesson I spent a long, long time unlearning, so now I have to re-learn it. It’s about political courage and heroes, and when a country is desperate for leadership. There are times when regular politics will not do, and this is one of those times. There are times a country is so tired of bull that only the truth can provide relief.

If no one in conventional-wisdom politics has the courage to speak up and say what needs to be said, then you go out and find some obscure junior senator from Minnesota with the guts to do it. In 1968, Gene McCarthy was the little boy who said out loud, “Look, the emperor isn’t wearing any clothes.” Bobby Kennedy — rough, tough Bobby Kennedy — didn’t do it. Just this quiet man trained by Benedictines who liked to quote poetry.

THIS IS GETTING OBSESSIVE

I knew we men weren’t Neanderthals! Actually, we are just what we’ve often been labeled — dawgs. Or, at least we can be trained like one, according to this article in Newsweek.