The Podcast - Episode 3: ‘Talkin’ It Out’
May 14, 2008
In the third installment of Queer Messages - The Podcast, Matt and Tony chat about the 2008 Democratic Primary - namely issues relating to how one should interpret Senators Obama and Clinton and campaign rhetoric around race and economic issues.
Fun fact: Matt has written a total of 19 posts in the course of just over a year. Approximately 32% of his posts were written between May 6-11! So write in and encourage Matt to keep writing!
Several recent posts form the context for our podcast discussion (least recent to most recent):
It’s time for an intervention
The Clintons and the Gestalts of Interpretation
The New Clinton Strategy: Operation Racial Division
Another View
More reflections on race
A few more links
An Additional Link
Racial Division accomplished . . . Now on to class warfare
On Senator Clinton (& Sen. Obama): A Closing Argument
Enjoy the podcast!
I (Tony [and Matt, I invite you to respond]) want to make a quick comment about this podcast. After I stumble through my explanation of the conclusion of my post - attempting to articulate a preferential option for the oppressed (and indicate how fluid power relations can be) - Matt raises the issue of people feeling sorry for Clinton. I noted it was Chris Matthews, in the context of the New Hampshire primary, who said: ‘Let’s not forget — and I’ll be brutal — the reason she’s a U.S. senator, the reason she’s a candidate for president, the reason she may be a front-runner is her husband messed around. That’s how she got to be senator from New York. We keep forgetting it. She didn’t win there on her merit. She won because everybody felt, ‘My God, this woman stood up under humiliation,’ right? That’s what happened.’ Now, if that is not demeaning (to voters, as well), I don’t know what is (Matthew’s did apologize). And it’s this type of feeling for Sen. Clinton that strikes me as sexists or misogynistic. Of course, Matt and I don’t feel sorry for Sen. Clinton. Anyway, connecting to this thought, Matt also raises the issue of racism. He suggests some people may be feeling uncomfortable because they don’t like seeing ‘this sixty-year-old, seasoned, white woman being beaten at the family business by a forty-five-year-old black man.’ Matt is thinking generally, but it seems to me, in the moment, that he is connecting my advocacy for Sen. Clinton to this type (the poor white woman) of feeling sorry for Sen. Clinton. Of course, I have never thought of the race in these terms, and I find this way of casting the race terrifying…because it seems to me to be another strategy that, in effect, turns attention away from those who need to hear a word, if you will, and effectively dismisses those who believe a wrong is being committed as simply racist.
I am not reacting to the fact that Sen. Clinton is losing (’beating beaten at the family business by a [..] black man’); I am reacting to the deplorable manner in which she is being constructed as inhuman. And what I am, in fact, suggesting is Sen. Clinton is in the position of the the gay in this country. This is not to say Obama has not suffered from racism (e.g., in Texas, W. Virgina) and other terrors. And that’s a deplorable fact. I am suggesting, in the context of this race as a whole, Obmaniacs have taken on a role similar to that of homophobes (e.g., note the psychological lingo used to described Sen. Clinton; note all the ‘feel sorry’ stuff - the specter of the pitiable - note the way in which she has been characterized as a threat to the good [think 'Empire Strikes Barack']; note the manner in which Obama can hide behind grand rhetoric and every attempt to expose what hides behind the rhetoric is thought to be an attempt to destroy the fabric of that which is considered above reproach, etc.). Sen. Obama has not be made into an evil reality (if there are people out there who think he is evil - well, they suck) - however, a lot of people think it’s acceptable to construct Sen. Clinton as evil/crazy/maniacal/pitiable, etc.
Posted by Tony 
Posted in Bi/Partisan Politics, Podcasts, Posts by Matt, Posts by Tony
May 15th, 2008 at 9:14 am
Well, I think that it’s a well-documented fact that Chris Matthews is just an asshole
And Senator Obama IS being made into an evil reality (blatant suggestions that he is endorsed by Hamas, obvious references to his middle name), just not openly by any of the candidates or mainstream news organizations…although they don’t seem to be rushing to his defense any time soon
And I’m sorry, but Clinton is a cold, calculating politician, taking advantage of whatever she can in order to be elected. I don’t think that there’s any way that you can deny that.
…I’ll hold any further comments and rants until I actually listen to the podcast.
May 17th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
I second Eric’s comments.
But I think the Clinton’s may be coming around - note their lack of divisive language more recently, and Bill made a call for party unity in November:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080517/ap_on_el_pr/democrats_delegates;_ylt=AoRKhHvt0_4vofMl6giR6rmMwfIE
Faced with a vocal crowd of Obama backers, Bill Clinton all but abandoned typical campaign rhetoric. He mentioned his wife’s candidacy only briefly, and instead focused his comments on a call for party unity against the Republicans in November.
“Don’t you forget why you came here. You did not go to all this trouble to have an argument with each other,” Clinton said. “The argument is necessary so we can pick the best president and the most electable one. Those are the only two things that matter … After that, we have to get the show on the road, folks. We have a country to change and a future to secure.”
I am glad that the Clintons are coming around (like I said earlier, I don’t really see her staying in as necessarily harmful for Obama at all), and they may get my respect back.
July 13th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
[...] Podcast 3: race in the primary election (conversation begins @ 10.58) Podcast 7: Obama and gay marriage (conversation begins @ 16.59) Podcast 4: making exclusive claims about Jesus (conversation begins @ 35.53) Podcast 7: homophobic discourse and HIV/AIDS (conversation begins @ 42.53 & 39.02) [...]