Oh, I know I should blog about politics. So much going on! But I'm so effing over this race at the moment. The latest thing annoying me is Hillary's TV ad claiming that she has the popular vote lead and in fact, has the most popular votes of any primary candidate in history. The only hitch? That's only true if you give Obama ZERO votes from Michigan and Florida, AND you discount all the votes he received in four caucus states. So, let me follow this: HRC is so committed to every American's vote being counted (lest we turn into Zimbabwe...), but only if you didn't vote in a caucus that went for her opponent. Then the commitment wavers a little bit. This woman must be stopped. She is now fighting for her own vanity; there can be no other explanation for airing such a completely false ad with no shame. I know she wants Obama to lose so she can say, "See? You should have nominated me." Too bad she's the one doing all the damage while John McCain enjoys his ongoing happy dance with the media.
Some other thoughts on this race. I'm tired of hearing that Obama has "trouble" with white women. Hello?! I absolutely don't believe that to be accurate. With two exceptions, every white woman I know well enough to discuss votes with is voting for him. The key? We're all under 50. I think the female Hillary/Obama divide (again, with many exceptions) is one of generation. If you read Geraldine Ferraro's misguided and poorly-written op-ed in the Boston Globe this weekend, you know what I am saying. As a former "womyn" I absolutely never want to denigrate the struggles of the women who fought for equality during a time when it was not the popular thing to do. My life as it is today is possible because of what they sacrificed. But what I do reject is the ongoing sense that we are somehow still at war for women's rights, and that furthermore I should vote for a woman because she is a woman. That somehow breaking that glass ceiling is more important than voting my conscience. That somehow there is a zero-sum-game between sexism and racism, and I need to pick which side I'm on. Well, I'm on the side of not fighting these same old battles the same old ways with the same old tired rhetoric. And unfortunately, that puts me and my friends at odds with the cohort of women who are of the Hillary generation. I know I'm part of the new generation that doesn't understand the struggle, that doesn't know on a soul-deep level what women in the 60's and 70's had to deal with in the workplace and in the home. But isn't that the point? Don't we fight battles so our kids don't have to? I have always loved the quote, "Feminism is the radical notion that women are people." I still subscribe to that belief today. Which is why I don't vote for a woman just because she's a woman (or a Catholic because he's a Catholic or anything else for that matter), why I don't necessarily believe that there'd be fewer wars with women at the helm, and why I don't subscribe to the notion that voting for Hillary Clinton is somehow advancing the cause of women's equality (or, that not voting for Hillary is an expression of my inherent sexism). I'm a woman, which means I'm a person like anyone else, with the same rights, the same brain, the same conscience. And, guess what, Sisters of the Revolution? I'm going to use them. And isn't THAT what you fought for?
So how about that Scott McClellan book? I've got to say, I'm not going to read it. I'm no fan of Bob Dole, but I've got to go with him on this one. He wrote an email to McClellan calling him out for spinelessly going along with everything he says was wrong, enjoying his role in Washington, then cashing in when leaving by trashing his former boss. McClellan is a coward. The time to have walked out was back when he saw the Bush administration inflating the case for war. You know, before a lot of young men and women died. The time to dis Rove would have been back when Rove was actually in power in the White House. Now he's just trying to unburden himself, make a buck, and get on some talk shows. And I'm not interested. Even in what he's writing fills us with glee (we were right! we were right!), we shouldn't encourage this kind of ex post facto coming-clean. Scott McClellan could have had all of that and more if he'd only spoken up back when it mattered.
In other news, Australia has officially left Iraq. From smh.com.au: "FOR Australian combat troops the war in Iraq is over. The Defence Force in southern Iraq formally handed its commitment to the United States and lowered the Australian flag above Camp Terendak, at the US-run air base Tallil, at a ceremony yesterday morning. The handover, which fulfils the Rudd Government's election commitment to withdraw Australia's combat troops from a deeply divisive war, was based on an agreement between Australian and US commanders. About 550 soldiers, who have been overseeing Iraqi security forces in two southern provinces as well as training Iraqi troops and police, will begin returning to Australia." Good for them.
And, in a disturbing but not surprising development, it turns out that the US has been secretly running about 17 floating prisons a la Gitmo. Only on a ship, the media can't find you and take you to task for human rights violations. Nice: guardian.co.uk
Hmm. Well it looks like I did end up blogging about politics. I'll do better next time.