Goodbye To All That (#2) by Robin Morgan

[murielm99]

Robin Morgan wrote the 1970 essay breaking free from the politics of accommodation as it affected women. She says she has avoided writing another "Goodbye" essay until now.

http://www.womensmediacenter.com/ex/020108.html

I am posting a few lines from each part of the Goodbye:

Goodbye to the double standard...
Young political Kennedys -- Kathleen, Kerry, and Bobby, Jr. -- all endorse Hillary. Senator Ted, age 76, endorsed Obama. If the situation were reversed, pundits would snort, "See? Ted and establishment types back her, but the forward-looking generation backs him.

Goodbye to toxic viciousness...
Carl Bernstein's disgust at Hillary's "thick ankles." Nixon-trickster Roger Stone's new Hillary-hating 527 group, "Citizens United Not Timid" (check the capital letters). John McCain answering, "How do we beat the bitch?" with "Excellent question!" would he have dared reply similarly to "How do we beat the black bastard"

Goodbye to the news-coverage target practice...
The women's movement and Media Matters wrung an apology from MSNBC's Chris Matthews for relentless misogynistic comments.

Goodbye to pretending the black community is entirely male and all women are white...
Women have endured sex/race/ethnic/religious hatred, rape and battery, invasion of spirit and flesh, forced pregnancy, being the majority of the poor, the illiterate, the disabled, of refugees, caregivers, the HIV/AIDS afflicted, the powerless. We have survived invisibility, ridicule, religious fundamentalisms, polygamy, teargas, forced feedings, jails, asylums, sati, purdah...We have tried reason, persuasion, reassurances, and being extra-qualified, only to learn it was never about qualifications after all.

Goodbye, goodbye to...
Goodbye to the shocking American ignorance of our own and other countries' history. Margaret Thatcher and Golda Meir rose through party ranks and war, positioning themselves as proto-male leaders. Almost all other female heads of government so far have been related to men of power --granddaughters, daughters, sisters, wives and widows: Gandhi, Bandaranike, Bhutto, Aquino, Chamorro, Wazed, Macapagal-Arroyo, Johnson Sirleaf, Bachelet, Kirchner, and more. Even in our "land of opportunity," it's mostly the first pathway "in" permitted to women Representatives Doris Matsui and Mary Bono and Sala Burton; Senator Jean Carnahan ... far to many to list here.

Goodbye to a misrepresented generational divide...
And goodbye to the ageism...
How dare anyone unilaterally decide when to turn the page on history, papering over real inequities and suffering constituencies in the promise of a feel-good campaign? How dare anyone claim to unify while dividing, or think that to rouse U.S. youth from its torpor it's useful to triage the single largest demographic in the country's history, the boomer generation, the majority of which is female?
Old women are the one group that doesn't grow more conservative with age...

And one last thing:

Hillary said she found her own voice in New Hampshire. There's not a woman alive, who, if she's honest doesn't recognize what she means. Then HRC got drowned out by campaign experts, Bill, and media's obsession with everything Bill.
So listen to her voice.

[REDFISHBLUEFISH]

1. Male voter for Hillary here!

Go Hillary!

[Sapphocrat]

2. "If the situation were reversed..."

"...pundits would snort, 'See? Ted and establishment types back her, but the forward-looking generation backs him.'"

Yep.

[eyecolor]

3. Goodbye To All That 90's Stuff

With less than a day before the Tsunami, Robin Morgan's revamped "Goodbye to All That (#2)" for Hillary is no less than *required reading*: http://www.robinmorgan.us/ . It is the Flipside to the election-tipping DipDive that swamped the net yesterday ( http://dipdive.com was yesterday's required viewing), that might possibly change your mind. Robin spots her laser key on the elephant in the room, the obscene double-standards heaped on Hillary Clinton. And she shows them for what they are -- not just backwards, not just obnoxious, but obscene.

Oh how I wish Hillary was the insurgent. Or... How I wish Robin Morgan was the nominee. Or... Goodbye to all that 90's stuff. See, Hillary wipes the floor with John Kerry and the 2000 / pre-Nobel persona of Al Gore. The slate of democratic candidates we've witnessed this time around... wow, thrilling. Even more thrilling is the shattering of the white man mold possibly upon us. But that feeling that, to make a heap of the sexist heapings exposes America's doright superhero ... requires a eye blind to a stubborn Team Clinton liability that actually is getting in the way of the gender possibility that so motivates us. Yes, that motivates us. We ignore the historical conditions at our peril, especially if and when Hillary Clinton is the nominee.

Only once two debates ago did HRC hit home the importance of electing a woman president let alone for its own sake, wherein the Luntz curve of enthusiasm hit the roof and stayed there for a full minute, and reverberated in the press and blogs for days. Of course, yes! Hillary woke us up to this obvious we keep just below consciousness: from the U.S., a woman president (finally!) will move the world in ineffably, incalculably positive ways. Democrats anyway seem to be embracing this, clearly, so that's not number one difficulty here, not at the primary level. So then what's the problem?

The Clintons as a team have been the powerhouses of Democratic politics, pretty much from the beginning of the first Clinton presidency (Hm, see, I like the sound of that -- first and second Clinton presidencies. But, see, that is the danger; the electorate is fatigued with dynasty canadacies, first Bush and now Clinton, and people will only become more and more aware of the all-over-again as November rolls around. We see it happening already. I certainly feel the fatigue. HRC conjures strong 90's sensations. Unlike George, HRC is not running away from the other guy -- the Clintons are an institution the way Sr and Jr never would or could be. Been-there-done-that feelings are not to be ignored. End parenthesis...). The Clintons backed several of the few, and notably less progressive, democrats who lost in 2006; for starters, Harold Ford whom they then tried to foist into Howard Dean's victory seat at the DNC. Clinton / Carville politics deny to this day the reality that divide-and-conquer centrism didn't win the day in 2006, but rather... look at it this way: the house progressive caucus is bigger than it has ever been in history. I think this democratic primary reveals the clash of two paradigms -- ironically, brought to fore by Edwards, not Obama, but now embodied almost by accident in the Obama insurgency.

I vividly remember my excitement during the first Clinton-Gore Campaign in 1992. I came of age under the impossibly discouraging Reagan-Bush era. There was so much insurgent promise from outside-the-beltway in Clinton (and yes, in "two for the price of one" too), energy that people obviously feel now in the Obama campaign. The promise started to fizzle after the UHC fiasco, and died with Welfare-to-Work and NAFTA. Other than the presidency, Democrats were losing the day, cycle after cycle. Clinton One had no coattails. The 96 campaign was the absolute opposite of the 92 campaign, wherein the Team Clinton school of Democratic politics was truly hardened. It is that school that was rocked in 06 and is on the block now this election cycle. This election, for me, is about getting beyond that fatigue.

That is the importance I see in the Obama campaign from the public arena. There is tremendous significance in the energy and passion of the street ART dedicated to Obama. All you have to do is imagine DipDive type of inspired creatively bubbling forth under the feet of Kerry, or Gore, or either of the Clintons (post-1992). You can't. It doesn't happen. The reason for it, and the social significance should not be underestimated. My fear, of course, is embodied in the "don't fall for false hopes" put-down of the Clinton campaign: That Obama will be all promise, but when in office just another lobby-friendly econocrat, at a time when America psychologically needs a return to the moon.

HRC's "the importance of a woman president" moment two debates ago was a taste of a return to the moon. Otherwise, the Clinton DLC legacy to date has been one that I see only fortifying that old depression voters will harbor come November. At the same time, FDR (who went into office with about as much experience as Barack, Teddy, and JFK too), reminded us that it is up to *us* and not the leaders we choose, to make the leadership. So hoping for the best from Barack Obama is not enough. Just remember that the Clinton machine won't be fodder for any DipDive videos -- it's just not in it or its legacy. Whoever is the nominee, we gotta lotta work. That's what we have to notice now.

__

[murielm99]

4. If Obama supporters were so worried about

dynasties, they would be turning away from the Kennedys instead of campaigning with them. No family brings to mind the word "dynasty" more than the Kennedys and Camelot. Obama would not allow Ted Sorenson to write his speeches.

Street art? How about substance? Please read the Huffington Post diary from Joe Wilson that is posted currently on the front page of DU. Read the whole thing. Read about how Obama has never convened a policy meeting of the Senate European subcommittee, of which he is chairman.

Read about his "conventional and timid" votes, his true answer about the war: "I'm not privy to Senate intelligence reports. What would I have done? I don't know."

Wilson says he never heard of Obama until he announced his run for the Senate in 2006. Guess what? Neither had I, and I am very involved in state and local politics in Illinois.

When Obama ran for the 2006 Senate primary, he did not bother to campaign outside of the Chicago area. He did not come to Rockford to a meet the candidates event. He sent surrogates. He did not go to the Quad Cities, which has a large, vital Democratic base. Of course when he won the primary, he came out here, but not until then. Such behavior is insulting to the people who always show up to vote and keep the party together.

Since then, I have seen firsthand the arrogance of his on the ground campaign. If he wins the nomination, I will work for him and vote for him. That is much, much more than I am hearing from Obama supporters out here in the trenches.

Interesting, that someone with one post is here right before the primaries. Not that I am calling anyone out. I am just saying that it is interesting that there are so many new low-post members today of all days. And the tone seems to have changed, too. It is a bit more conciliatory . Too bad that I base my vote on more than what I read on message boards.

[murielm99]

6. I would like to add that I watched Obama on

C-span when he voted to confirm Condoleeza Rice as Secretary of State. Of course the nomination would have gone through anyway at that point. But he could have fought harder, especially after Durbin got him such a plum of a committee assignment. He has been nothing but a disappointment to me.

[KoKo]

5. There's a sadness about this...that could seem as pandering...to some

"lost generation." I wish she had phrased it better without the anger and disgust...because what she says is important...but the delivery sounds very sour.

And...I know exactly what she's saying. Wiping out history is never good. That Senators and some Congresscritters "wiped out Vietnam" and that "sorry" of War that cost us Blood and Treasure...and voted to send us into another Vietnam...on faulty intelligence shows why we need the combination of "wisdom of the elders" and "enthusiasm and hope of those younger." We should compromise on this. Obama has made unfortunate statements where he "cuts off" a whole generation of "elders" who are Democrats who have much wisdom to impart...while chasing like an evangelical preacher after the voters he can get "energized." We need BOTH to be successful in forging ahead and undoing what we can of the Bush Years, IMMEDIATELY before the ROT and Evil settles in longer. Obama needs to understand that bringing the Elderly, Boomers and Youth TOGETHER is what Dems need for that NEW COALITION.

[Berry Cool]

7. Morgan says:

Goodbye to the shocking American ignorance of our own and other countries' history. Margaret Thatcher and Golda Meir rose through party ranks and war, positioning themselves as proto-male leaders. Almost all other female heads of government so far have been related to men of power --granddaughters, daughters, sisters, wives and widows: Gandhi, Bandaranike, Bhutto, Aquino, Chamorro, Wazed, Macapagal-Arroyo, Johnson Sirleaf, Bachelet, Kirchner, and more. Even in our "land of opportunity," it's mostly the first pathway "in" permitted to women Representatives Doris Matsui and Mary Bono and Sala Burton; Senator Jean Carnahan ... far to many to list here.

For some of us, it's not "ignorance." It's disappointment, that it seems that the vast majority of women who have achieved political power have only done so by having powerful male relatives to smooth the path for them. It would be nice to see more Thatcher-Meir types of whom that cannot as easily be said. Isn't it about time for a woman to get power in a way other than the "permitted" way?

Also, she says "HRC got drowned out by campaign experts, Bill, and media's obsession with everything Bill." Well, getting drowned out by Bill and the media's obsession with everything Bill could have been prevented easily. She could have told Bill to put a lid on it. Instead, she let him take over, let it look like she was dependent on him to conduct her campaign.

Am I impressed? No.