Kristen Schaal explains how the Obama campaign intends to pander to the cartoonish “Non-Mom Mom”, otherwise known as “women”
The Daily Show was full of uncomfortable truths yesterday. Let’s see if I can summarize them (go watch it yourself to see if you agree):
1.) Obama is pandering to the LGBT community. He says he’s all for marriage equality. Yeah! But he still supports states making up their own minds. Boo. Did I mention that gay advocacy groups have withdrawn their campaign contributions to Obama’s campaign because he refused to sign onto a non-discrimination clause in government contracts? You don’t think there could be a monetary motive for this “evolving” position that comes 5 years after he announced he was running for president?
2.) North Carolina just passed the most reactionary law on same sex marriage as it is possible to pass. Not only have they explicitly forbidden in no uncertain terms that gay couples may not marry under any circumstances, they have also outlawed civil unions and domestic partnerships. That will apply to straight couples as well- and their families. If you are a child of one of these families, you should have chosen your parents more responsibly and if the wrong parent dies before you reach maturity, well, tough noogies, kid. Social security for minors of the wrong deceased parent was not YOUR birthright. By the way, Obama’s evolution on marriage equality came *after* the state of North Carolina voted it out of the question so, presumably, he’s ok with the decision this state has made. He didn’t say he was going to try to do anything about it.
3.) Obama had a significant challenger in the West Virginia primary election from a felon in Texarkana, Texas. Keith Judd won 40% of the vote in West Virginia after getting on the ballot with a $2500 filing fee. The WV primary is closed to party members only so 40% of WV’s Democrats would rather vote for a felon than Obama. Obviously, they are racists. Or maybe they are just royally pissed off Hillary Clinton voters from 2008 who beat the snot out of Obama in the primary but whose votes were trashed at the convention. Oh, and Obama’s campaign pretty much called them racists back then too. So, not a lot has changed. Except the “racists” have watched the candidate they did NOT pick turn out to be a lousy president. So, you know, there’s that.
4.) Finally, Kristen Schaal did the Life of Kristen, a take off on the life of Julia, a cartoon of how the typical American woman will benefit from Four. More. Of. The. Longest. Years. Of. My. Life. Yes, to the Obama administration and campaign org, we are cartoons, mere blips of data, carefully mined to hit the principle component sweet spot. In case the point was missed, we’re not individual human beings with our own unique talents and dreams, and with the drive, ambition and agency to attain self-actualization like men are. No, we’re Non-Mom Moms. It’s just easier for the Obama administration to do data reduction on a demographic it has made no attempt to understand or work with over the past 4 years and has pretty much left to defend itself against the insane Republican party. Wasn’t it part of the plan to leave us out there on our own without a champion against those rabid snapping crocodiles? So that Obama would look like a hero in return without having to lift even one of his finely manicured pinkies?
More and more, I get the feeling that the outrages against women are bunched so that it becomes too overwhelming to respond to each one. We’re just sitting here on the curb after a multi car pileup wondering what the f^&* just happened. Can’t get birth control, can’t get an abortion, can’t get a job, can’t get food stamps, will get a LOT less social security after paying a LOT more after 30 years of work. I guess we’re supposed to feel relieved that Obama says we have the right to have birth control. Jeez, it’s almost like Reg of the People’s Front of Judea saying men have the right to have babies. What does it really mean to Obama except that he thinks he has said *just* enough to keep the women on his side without pissing off the evangelicals too much.
But here was Schaal’s parting shot after noting that she once again gets to choose between two males who are pandering to her for office:
“Please run for office, Hillary Clinton”
It wasn’t me, this time. Nooooo, this time it was a member of a popular late night TV show. And by the way, millions of viewers, and a LOT of women, all thinking the same thing. Yep. It’s that bad.
5.) Note that Schaal didn’t say “Please run for office in 2016, Hillary Clinton”. We want her now. Nevertheless, there is no way Hillary Clinton is going to run for office in 2016. I notice that every single one of the mainstream media posts I read that mention Hillary also mention this unbelievable and stupid 2016 scenario. Do they think we are really soulless secondary beings with the IQ of children? So, I’d just like to say to all of you women out there who are desperately hanging on by your fingernails waiting for for Hillary because everyone from the NYTimes to Nancy Pelosi has sworn and promised that she is going to run in 2016:
Hillary Clinton is not running for president in 2016. It’s not going to happen.
The sooner you accept that, the sooner you can do something about your present situation. The 2016 meme is designed to 1.) enforce “learned helplessness” and make you passively accept your fate and 2.) turn your attention to supporting Obama. But if you do that, you will, like Kristen Schaal, have to choose between two guys for president and they don’t give a shit about your concerns because the idiots in charge of the Democratic party and their clueless creative class activists have no intention of ever letting Hillary Clinton near the White House in 2012- at least, not yet. (I’m betting there have already been discussions about this) Their troubles are not your troubles. They just need to make sure you are sufficiently depressed about not getting Hillary but not too depressed to not go to the polls in November.
Is that what you want?? Did you see what Obama did to get the LGBT community back in his win column? (I think they’re stupid if they settle for some meaningless words) If you are a member of the majority segment of the population and are sick and disgusted and angry that once again, you have to choose between two guys, don’t take it. Tell the next person you see that Hillary is NOT running in 2016. It’s the one thing I believe she means when she says it. She will be 69 years old. The Clinton years will be a faded memory and by then, the economy will be in shambles and our liberties as American women will be gone. You know they will.
Don’t tell me there’s nothing you can do about it. Tell them you aren’t going to vote for Obama. What difference does it make? No, seriously. I don’t for a minute think that Romney is worse on women’s issues than Obama is. Are you kidding me? You could maybe make an economic argument about Romney but Obama has been so bad in that area as well that it’s not very convincing. You might as well vote for Stewart Alexander or Rocky Anderson or whoever that Green Party woman is. Save your Democratic votes for Congress.
Why settle? Oh sure the Democrats are going to protest and call you stupid racists but so what? You were right in 2008 and they weren’t so who are the stupid ones, the ones who see clearly what reality is, or the ones who are too afraid of their own shadows and too enamored with their own aspirations to do the right thing?
BTW, Hillary has ditched her contact lenses and make-up. She says she’s going to do it if it feels right and who cares. Indeed. Unfortunately, it just means we want her even more.
Filed under: General | Tagged: campaign contributions, gay community, Kristen Schall, learned helplessness, Non-Mom Mom, passivity |
The Confluence 
What I want to know is, does Hillary Clinton have what it takes to lead America into its fourth round of anacyclosis?
Cf, the Archdruid (Democracy’s Arc and The Descent into Stasis)
http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/
No idea but I’d feel more grounded if she were in charge. Does that make any sense?
BTW, I think you have the best gravatar of everyone. It looks like a walking chili pepper.
If you haven’t heard of a website (blog?) called Decline of the Empire, by David Cohen, you might like that one too. Several years ago he referrenced something he called The Cycle of Futility into which America has been carefully guided by its ruling elites.
Off topic: I see that over on the Hullabazoo, Jody lowered himself to mansplain to RD why she was being too emotional about losing her job and needed to “dial it back a bit”.
I am stealth-banned over there, so I can’t comment there. I guess they still have to allow a few dissenters from the Oborg Collective for the sake of appearances, which is why RD is still allowed there.
Would anyone else like to see Jody and Spoony both get smacked in the face with a wet fish? 😈
Oh yes, I am sure there are entire segments of the left that would prefer we dial it back a bit. I am surrounded by people who are falling out of the middle class because we can’t find jobs in our fields in highly technical life sciences but we’re supposed to dial it back. I guess that is supposed to make them feel better.
Utter cluelessness does not explain it. It’s like a willful blindness. They cannot take it in. If we, the highly educated technical cohort can get dumped into the food stamp contingent, nobody is safe. Or is it because lefties are supposed to hate pharma people? Help me out here, what is it about our young male graduate student class that makes them so dense and arrogant?
Because of how much more difficult it is for middle class and poor people to go to college now, a significant percentage of the people who make to grad school are from the economic privileged classes. They have no more clue about the world than Romney, even the one who claim to be progressive
Was Jody’s comment in reply to a RiverDaughter comment on Hullabaloo itself? Or was Jody’s comment in remote-reply to what Riverdaughter has been writing here? Because if it is THAT, then the Good News is that Jody has been reading The Confluence whether Digby and her little mini-me Atkins approve or not.
(By the way, I realize that Digby remains just as good a writer as Riverdaughter points out she is. Riverdaughter suspected that Atkins might get a paid Very Serious Blogger gig before Digby does. The irony of that would be that since Digby give Atkins his big break into the A List Blog bigtime to begin with, Digby would be responsible for Atkins getting that big paycheck gig. Would Digby appreciate the irony of that?)
I have been getting flayed over NC’s vote so I would like to thank RD and the commenters here for not acting like jerks to everyone from the South. I’ve even but subjected to the “we beat your ass in the Civil War and we can do it again” rhetoric, which is akin to dragging out Nazis and Hitler. The roughly 40% of Tarheels who voted against the amendment were defeated by the, at least, 70% of the black vote that voted for the amendment, so it’s not always racist bitter knitter gun clingers who swing elections.
It is moderately amusing to hear “dial it back” from folks who have been consistently wrong since at least 2008. Maybe the larger Democratic mass ought to assume the vote for what I think it is– a repudiation of Obama the President, not a commentary on skin tone.
That is a very interesting point you raise that the Liberals don’t want to face up to. The Christian Satanist Black Church helped Michigan get a Constitutional Marriage ammendment very similar to the one you just got in North Carolina. The Christian Satanist Black Church helped get Proposition 8 passed in California. Perhaps the White Liberals feel too much racial shame to point out the poisonous festerous influence of the Christian Satanist Black Church right along with the Christian Satanist White Church.
The Obama Brand brought out the reformed Republican,( KOS, Huffingt+n, Ed, big mouth ,Schultz) thinking they were getting progressive and it brought out the naive un-political groupies who became the wandering Obama propaganda spewers. They, who have no historical perspective and never voted before, but they do see everything just as Axelrod has planned….through Obama rose colored glasses and with blinders thrown in for free.
Obama is like Wal-Mart…something for everyone and selling at a cost-loss.
only thing,we all lose here.
HILLARY !! Run as far away as you can in 2013. Put your feet up. Write us a book we can live by and learn.
RD you are right again. Good post.
OMG, Walmart! It’s perfect. I always thought he was tofu. You project your secret sauce onto him and he takes it on. But maybe Walmart is more apt this time.
Why is there so little mention of Edwards’ trial in liberal blogs? I guess it would become a heated topic very fast. However, I find it astonishing that not more attention is paid to it, considering the insight it provides into the 2008 campaign. I find it astonishing that he outright asked for a position in return for his endorsement , and even mainstream press (or prosecuation) has not pointed out that this was CLEARLY illegal.
I don’t know. I covered it briefly last week. At this point, it seems more like a soap opera to me. I saw the guy in Chicago in 2007 and I did not like him, even though I went to YearlyKos as an Edwards fan. I wasn’t impressed. Yep, I am also gobsmacked by the risks he was willing to take to become president and how that would have impacted the Democrats’ chances of success in 2008. But in a way, after seeing him in Chicago, it all makes sense to me. The guy is a dangerous narcissist. I know that we throw that word around all too often wrt Obama but in Edwards’ case, it was really true.
That loathesome law in NC will not impact Social Security eligibility for surviving children which are set by federal law.
I do think it’s ironic that this law was passed in the right-to-work state where Obama chose to have the Democratic convention. I mean, really, why bother to provide the revenue to the citizens of a state that actually reflects Democratic values?
I wouldn’t be too sure about that. Maybe if it’s your biological parent, it’s not an issue. But if your parents can’t marry, it might be another problem entirely.
Did Obama make the choice of where to have the convention? Or did the Democratic PermaParty Leadership make that choice?
Yeah, Hillary will be 69 in 2016, 5 months younger than Reagan and presumably without the incipient Alzheimers . I think what bothers you and the other diehard PUMAs is that if she did run and win she would be taking the baton from supposed usurper you hate so much.
Ok, you are delusional. If she won, she wouldn’t be “taking the baton”. She’d be responsible for the biggest cleanup in history. I don’t hate him. I see him as a giant obstacle for working people put there deliberately by the very class we *do* hate.
But no, she won’t be running. It would be stupid for her to do it. She would be much older and she will have lost the advantage of proximity to the Clinton years. If YOU want her, why wait? Obama isn’t going to be a savior in his second turn. He doesn’t know what he’s doing. Aren’t you paying attention?
Well, whatever. I’m sure as hell not voting for him.
I see neither a distinction or a difference from hating him in your “explanation.” Hillary would be, now and in the future, just as much a Wall Street-Beltway “hireling” as Obama. As for delusional, do you think Obama can simply decree a constitutional amendment or act of Congress recognizing gay marriage overriding all state laws? I guess so, because you seem to think the Democrats can simply replace Obama on the ticket with Clinton just like the Labor and Tory parties can deselect their leader in the UK.
Wow, you really weren’t paying attention in 2008 were you? The Democrats are a private party and they can do anything they damn well please. They can award delegates to people who weren’t on ballots, they can take delegates that were fairly won from one candidate and give them to another, they can pretend they’re knocking two state delegations to half strength and then restore them to full strength before the convention in order to make it look like one candidate was behind another, they can harrass, threaten and intimidate convention delegates until they change their votes. It’s amazing what can be done when they want one candidate to win over the will of the voters, especially when that candidate brings with him loads and loads of money from his friends on Wall Street. If the Democrats decide that Obama is dragging them down this election season, they’ll replace him (if they’re smart). They’ll get him to resign or say he’s not going to run for re-election. James Carville said a couple of days ago that the Democrats are cruising for a bruising if they don’t start acting like underdogs.
What do I expect from Obama? Nothing. I have never expected anything from him. The point is not that he can do nothing about gay marriage amendments. The point is that this is a pattern with Obama. He makes it sound like he’s totally on your side. Heck, Ms. Magazine made him a superfeminist on their cover. But it’s all lip service. So, he’s for gay marriage. He also thinks it should be left up to the states. So, no skin off his nose. He loses no points with conservative voters because they’re going to do what they’re going to do and he just gave them permission. But he could have made sure that gays weren’t discriminated when it comes to government contracts and he didn’t. How can you be both for marriage equality and against a non-discrimination clause? I’ll let you figure it out.
He’s going to say just enough to each individual voting bloc to keep just enough of them on his side without having to commit to anything. Then, *iff* he gets elected, he will ignore you. He will ignore you because you didn’t really hold his feet to the fire.
BTW, no one is entitled to a second turn, you nitwit. If you don’t like your choices, and I certainly don’t, then you have every right to agitate for something different. And I will. Obama is an overconfident incompetent. You can call that whatever you like. I call it reality.
Good – no, not rant, just factually setting the record straight.
Kudos!
It might even be easier. There is absolutely NO requirement that delegates vote as their primaries & caucuses went.
And (even more bizarrely) there is no requirement that the Delegation Chair casts their votes according to the delegate votes.
I assure you this is true. In 1968 the Democratic nominee, Hubert Humphrey didn’t run in a single primary. Not one. Yet he won the nomination.
In 2008, Hillary got a fraction of her committed delegate votes on the floor of the convention. And in many states she got NONE in spite of winning the state primary in a landslide.
The primaries are and expensive, meaningless game.
And I ASSURE you that if there was a visible, obvious groundswell of resistance to re-electing Obama, the party leadership would ditch him in a flash.
Oooo, good point, Katiebird! Touche. I think you’re right. When the party gets to the point where it realizes that Obama is an albatross, they’ll ditch him. You can’t (or shouldn’t) wish for another financial collapse to save his bacon and this time, everyone knows what he’s capable of doing to correct it, which is not much.
Isn’t it funny how the Obots show up when they realize they’ve been had by Obama? The minute you harsh their mellows with cold hard facts, they’re all over the place accusing you of hatred. Poor things, just can’t handle the truth.
H8RZ GONNA H8 😛
Spot on!
Remember when Michelle Obama ‘threatened’ that this was the one and only chance Americans would get to vote for her husband? Well, wouldn’t it be nice if Bill Clinton did the same for his spouse this time around – with the one difference that it would be their second but last chance. Instead of campaigning for Obama. I know, I know, that’s not actually how politics and politicians ‘work’, but still … Sigh.
And – what made Kristen Schaal’s “Please run for office, Hillary Clinton” even more amazing than just the brilliance of her plea was the reaction from the audience. Even though her heartfelt call was barely audible, the studio audience burst out in genuine cheers, applause and even screams of consent/ content. And this from an audience who usually applause instantly (robot like?) to the mere mentioning of Obama’s name. Quite telling, wasn’t it?
About this ‘instant applause’, I’m reminded of how years back I attended several Talk Show tapings in various N.Y. studios. It was a big hit among friends and family visiting from abroad. (Later, watching the airing, we would look for ourselves in vain, and joke about the poor editing, lol).
Once when the ‘Applause, Applause, Applause’ sign was blinking I stubbornly refused to comply – you know, like: No one puts baby in the corner and no one tells me when to applaud [rolls eyes] – and my friend would turn to me shake his head, sigh and whisper: “And so, why do you think that they invite you in as an audience … for free!
😆
Yes, I heard that. Unfortunately, it was cut short for a commercial break. She was speaking for millions of us.
People who say they won’t vote for a ticket with Obama on it have to understand that means Romney may be President instead. Once people have accepted the reality of that possibility, if they are really prepared to let Romney be elected rather than cast a vote for Obama,
then they will be in a position to tell their Democratic whatevers all about it. Politicians can smell an empty threat the way dogs can smell fear, so don’t tell your Democratic whatevers that you are prepared to
see Romney elected rather than cast a vote for Obama unless you really are prepared for that. But if you really are prepared for that, then go ahead and tell whichever Democratic whatevers you think might be relevant.
Of course such people would have to overcome a sense of weary resignation as well. I know I would. Obama wants to take away my Social Security just like Romney does and Obama has a better chance of getting away with it. But the DLC Third Way Democratic Party also wants to take away my Social Security just like Obama does
(which Feingold pointed out in his “et tu, Pelosi” question to Bormann Democrat Pelosi). So my suspicion that the DLC THird Way Simpson Bowles Catfood Democrats are committed to Obama no matter what makes me feel “why even bother” telling them anything anyway. I am not recommending such defeatism to others, merely noting a possible reason why so few people would actually bother telling the Class Enemy Occupation Democrats anything anymore anyway. Actually, I HAVE told that to a few bright young volunteers, so there is that.
HRC won’t be running in 2012 any more than she would be running in 2016. Once that becomes clear, perhaps people will be set free to think in terms of decontaminating or exterminating the Democratic Party.