Presidential Mentions for Senator Klobuchar
July 30, 2009
by Judy Silver
|
Following Secretary Clinton’s assertion on Meet the Press that “there is a woman” out there who will one day become president, Chris Cillizza of the Washington Post column “The Fix” has been speculating on who that woman might be. He says that
No politician got more recommendations on The Fix than the Minnesota Senator [Amy Klobuchar]. Klobuchar is young enough — 49 — and ambitious enough to make a bid [in 2016].
Sen Klobuchar, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, recently called out sexism against Judge Sotomayor. According to the Minnesota Independent:
Klobuchar said she had bristled at “mostly anonymous question[ing of] Judge Sotomayor’s judicial temperament” and cited her own experience in Minnesota: “Where I come from, asking tough questions and showing very little patience for unprepared lawyers is the very definition of a judge.”
Sexist standards implicit in such critiques “irritate me,” Klobuchar said, adding that the country should “appoint as many gruff, to-the-point female judges as gruff, to-the-point male judges.”
Yet she’s not a strictly girls’ team player, having endorsed then-Sen. Obama last March, months before then-Sen. Clinton conceded. At the time of her endorsement, Klobuchar did decry what many saw as sexist pressure against Clinton to withdraw, saying:
She has every right to continue her campaign. I don’t agree with those who have said things to the contrary.
Likewise, Klobuchar doesn’t strictly play on her party team. A member of the Democrat-affiliated Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party, she supports most Democratic positions. However, the Minneapolis Star-Tribune reports that she recently was the only Democrat to vote for a measure that would have required GM and Chrysler to issue stock to taxpayers.
Plus, she’s a pretty good comedienne. Here’s a clip of her at the Washington Press Club:
I’m hoping Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will run again.
Great find Judy.
We’ll keep an eye out for her!
Yet we mustn’t forget that Klobuchar endorsed Obama during the PA primary even though she pledged that she would remain neutral- I have a hard time forgiving that and a hard time hearing her talk about sexism- The Obama team got to her-not sure what they promised but she buckled-just when we needed her the most-
She’d have to go pretty far to convince me that she was “What a feminist looks like”..
I agree with WRAHR.
That is all I am saying about that.
I agree with WRAHR and Jessica. She is better than nothing but I have had it with self righteous Democrats. After seeing them in action I don’t know what it will take to make me forget the misogyny and corruption. And I don’t see even Dems trying to make us forget their behavior or even acknowledging they have a problem.
Okay so just one thing..
I don’t care what your party affiliation is.But if stand against sexism then stand AGAINST sexism.Something as vile as sexism and misogyny is too important to be used as a political tool for one’s agenda’s.Period.
The Fore mothers fought too hard to get us where we are today for us to just pull the sexism card out when it is convenient to our needs.
And to honest with you that is what it looks like.Just saying.
We stand against viable sexism no matter who it is against and we should never use this issue for gains whether personal or political.
But that is my opinion.
I’m definitely in the same camp as WRAHR, Jessica, and Bes. I haven’t forgotten or forgiven that she turned on Hillary. HOWEVER, should she make a serious bid for president and get the nod, I will support her to the end——while holding my nose. Why? Because if we allow ourselves to be divided over her, the men will have succeeded dividing us once again so that women won’t hold any power. And I’m NOT falling into that trap!!!!
I guess this is where I break with most TNA posters.
Supporting HRC or Palin in the last election, or aggressively speaking out against any perceived sexism during the last election, is not a prerequisite for my vote in 2012 or 2016. What women’s rights legislative policies and programs you have supported and will endorse gets my vote.
Whether it is Gillibrand or Klobuchar, I am assuming women who voted for Obama honestly believed he would be a better president. I agree to disagree with these women. The degree – and who was responsible for – the amount of sexism during the last primary and election is so subjective, I am not ruling out Klobuchar for my support because she was not as vocal as I thought every American – not just women – should have been,
How can one be for the 30% solution, when one cannot support a women who is obviously qualified.
if the republicans put up a male and the democrat a female, I am supporting her. found the jokes quite entertaining on the tape.
whether Hillary Clinton is really done with campaigning we will see. sympathies still run with her and Sarah Palin. but my gut tells me will have another tow guys running.
I’d feel better if it was someone like Gillibrand! A real feminist team player who didn’t go out of her way to cut another sisters throat! I think that women have to support each other in order to gain power and influence as a whole. Otherwise, we end up with one or two here and there who have been co-opted into believing male ways of thinking, offer little to bringing out the female prospective, and continue to undermine other women inexchange for the boys letting her into the club.
Klobuchar (like McCaskill) accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars from EMILY’S LIST and then, after winning their senate seats, endorsed Barack over Hillary.
[...] Post columnists Dana Milbank and Chris Ciliza (whom we treated as a credible journalist earlier this week). WaPo employees on the official WaPo website and WaPo YouTube channel effectively called our [...]
Klobuchar is not my first choice. Hillary is my first choice. We need a woman who will stand with women all the way– and not be bought off by man to turn against a competent woman leader.
And when Emily’s List called me today to ask for a donation, I told them they would not get another penny from me because they turned on Hillary.
Klobuchar is one of the fools who was quoted in the NYT as saying she was told to support Obama by her 12-yr. old. It was all very cute.
So if I understand it correctly, there is exactly one litmus test for politicians in the US as used by The New Agenda: If you supported Hilary Clinton or Sarah Palin in the 2008 US Presidential election, you are a feminist, if you did anything else, regardless of your gender, your political affiliation, your work for feminism or anything else, then you are a misogynist. That’s brilliant.
You’re not feminist if you didn’t speak up the historic misogyny in 2008 and 2009. Otherwise you’re admitting misogyny was a strategy of the Obama campaign.
Here’s an example of the misogyny in circa September 2008:
http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=165823
There were many videos and articles like this. The misogyny was out of control.
This thread is probably finished, but the NHS post has all the earmarks of a distracting troll.
No one called anyone misogynist.
NHS,
If defending and supporting either Hillary or Sarah means that we are feminist, then yes, you’re right and I’m damn proud of it. Any real feminist should publicly abhore the kind of treatment these two women were expected to endure from the obama camp, his supporters, the DNC and the MSM. Following is a link detailing what Hillary had to go through:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eseoMOEaFnM
Here’s an article detailing the sexism Palin had to endure:
http://www.ohio.com/editorial/.....99062.html
No woman should be subjected to this treatment. Racism is evil, but so is sexsim but no one is allowed to acknowledge that it exists. Yet, it was entirely acceptable for obama to be given 30 minutes of prime time TV to lecture the entire country about the evils of racism during the middle of the democratic primary (no favortism shown there, right?). Please explain to me why we haven’t also been afforded the same kind of prime time TV for Hillary and Sarah to lecture the country about the evils of sexism?
Don’t come here acting like sexism wasn’t unleased with glee by the MSM, the obama supporters and a complicently silent DNC upon these two women (and it’s still continues) and for any other woman who dares compete with the boyz for real power.
All,
I don’t consider myself a troll but I am confused. What is TNA’s position:
* Only support women that supported both HRC and Palin. I supported HRC but voted for Obama because the team of McCain/Palin had a track record of voting policies that advancement women in politics, business and corporations.
* Support women whether or not they support policies and legislation that foster the advancement of women in politics, business and corporations. I will generally vote for women over men but will not vote for women who do not support progressive policies for women over men that do.
Do my positions make me not a feminist or valid TNA supporter?
LVL,
It seems to me that you are a valid TNA supporter. Part of the object here, as I understand it, is to accept that the major political parties and other special interest groups engage in “group think” but to seek evolving consensus amongst a varied group of people who share a common interest in achieving safety and opportunity for all women and girls.
I didn’t vote for McCain/Obama because of their unacceptable policies/sexism.
Obama supporters cannot be feminists:
I. Obama supporters who don’t believe the sexism of 2008-2009 was really bad don’t believe fellow women Democrats who constantly tell you the sexism was really bad. This is like not believing rape victims or battered women. Therefore these women are sexist/not feminist. Examples: New Agenda Obama supporters
II. Obama supporters who knew the sexism was really bad but did not say anything. This means they knew misogyny was a strategy of the Obama campaign because they knew misogyny benefitted his campaign and criticizing it would hurt Obama and benefit Clinton or Palin. Examples: Establishment feminists including Kim Gandy, NOW, NARAL, Emily’s List, Feministing, Feministe and Pandadon. They obviously recognized the sexism because they recognized sexism for years before the campaign as feminist activists.
III. Obama supporters who kinda knew the sexism was really bad but spoke up once in a while about it. Examples: Some establishment feminists and New Agenda Obama supporters.
IV. Obama supporters who kinda knew the sexism was really bad but never spoke up about it. Examples: Some establishment feminists and some New Agenda Obama supporters.
V, Obama supporters who criticized the really bad sexism of the MSM and Netroots bloggers but not Obama supporters/commenters who were very abusive towards Clinton/Palin/PUMAs/Clinton supporters. Example: Shakesville.
THEREFORE, NO OBAMA SUPPORTER CAN BE A FEMINIST.
ADDITIONALLY, ALL OBAMA SUPPORTERS ARE MISOGYNISTS.
LVL, you are in Category I.
Donna,
At least I know where I stand with you. And at least I was not listed in some of the other categories.
However, there is another category you are not considering because you are convinced of your own truth. I am not convinced of my own truth and am to consider and respect different interpretations of the primary and election different than you.
The category is Obama supporters who believed sexism, racism, ageism and xenophobia where all present within the primaries and election and it was engaged in by all parties. The alarming growth of the “birthers” illustrates the degree racism was below the iceberg in determining who voted against Obama. But, unlike you, it would be wrong for me to say McCain/Palin were generally racist – there were other reasons they voted for that ticket (e.g., the role of government, methods to stimulate economic growth, etc.).
Sexism was rabid and viciously directed at HRC and Palin. Obama did not overtly speak out against this sexism but I am not convinced that he, a young African American senator, was able to control and direct the sexism that existed. Because he did not speak out against this sexism and HRC had a better record on women’s rights, HRC was my choice for the democratic nominee. But McCain and Palin had either no established women’s rights record or it was one that was against equal pay, equal rights and the type of affirmation in politics and business that TNA now supports.
I believe one can admit and acknowledge that Palin was a horrible victim of sexism but not vote for the McCain/Palin ticket because their women’s rights record has worse than Obama/Biden.
Thus, to me, while a McCain/Palin supporter can be considered a feminist because they voted for a ticket that included a women, a Obama/Biden supporter can be considered a feminist because they voted for the ticket with the stronger women’s rights record.
Respectfully yours,
LVL
LVJ, here is where you and I disagree on one major women’s issue. You seem to think that equal pay is the dominant women’s rights issue and while I also want equal pay, I believe there are much more worse things in our country that need to be tackled first.
Palin actually has a rather strong record on women’s rights. For instance, Palin has signed legislature designed to protect women from rapists and designed to increase/strengthen the punishment for rape. I am not certain why you think the McCain/Palin ticket had a poor record on women’s rights.
All it takes for you to be a TNA member is to set aside all partisan feelings in order to combat sexism and equality.
Also, LVJ, sorry that I forgot to say this at the top of my post… I am happy that you are eager to become a part of TNA! We appreciate new voices here. ^_^
Karen,
Thank you for the welcome. And I agree with your point that there are more women’s rights issues than equal pay.
However, increasing the number of women in business and corporations (affirmative action); ensuring women are not discriminated against on the job (equal pay, anti-discrimination laws) and that there is adequate health insurance for children and dependents (where women carrying the heavier burden than men), place women in a more powerful and secure place to advocate and stand against issues like sexism, rape and domestic violence.
While I thought HRC had a strong record on these core women’s right’s issues, when I used tools like
http://votesmart.org/index.htm
And read articles like
http://www.nowpacs.org/2008/ob.....yside.html
http://www.prospect.org/cs/art.....inst_women
http://jezebel.com/5050610/mcc.....s-not-good
I decided I could not support the McCain/Palin ticket.
Now, after the election, I don’t really hear Palin talking about women right’s issues, it is more about the horrid reporting by the media of her and her family (which is wrong). McCain has said he is voting against Judge Sotomayor and I can’t remember reading a piece about Palin supporting Judge Sotomayor.
Again, I have and will vote for either party and will vote for women over men but it is difficult for me to vote for women who do not have positive women’s rights records over men that do. As of today, I want both female representation and women’s rights advocacy and believe there are plenty of women out there who accomplish both goals. The fact that some of these women voted for Obama over McCain as a lesser of two evils does not stop me from supporting them.
Hi Karen,
Thank you for the welcome. I wrote a response to your comments but somehow lost it. I will re-write it and respond to your thoughts.
LVL
I read the Jezebel article dealing with the rape kit issue. Last semester, I printed out a discussion within the Alaskan House of Representatives dealing with this issue. The Representatives list a lot of cities that charged victims for the rape kits, so the Jezebel article was rather biased in its false assertion that Wasilla was the only town to do so when many other places did the same. The Representatives never mentioned Wasilla at all. In fact, until 2001 or so, Alaska never had a law stating exactly where the funds for rape kits should come from. And the Alaskan House of Representatives also attributed the initial problem to the police departments and the hospitals; they never mentioned any mayors being to blame despite the other towns and cities they listed.
I just now read the http://www.prospect.org article. I have absolutely no clue where it got its information because it contradicts everything about Palin. Not only does it contradict her positive qualities, it in fact contradicts other smears and other distortions of the facts.
I had printed out another article which stated that Palin wanted a cop fired. This certain cop had a history of numerous legal and ethical violations. He drove drunk, tasered a young boy, shot moose without a legal permit, committed acts of violence, etc. Palin wanted to talk with Monegan about removing him from the police force. When Monegan refused, Palin wanted to move Monegan to a different official position, but they ended up getting into a heated argument, and Monegan was flat-out fired. I can look up all the sources and provide links after I am done with work for the day.
I didn’t vote for Obama or McCain because of the sexism and policies.
There is still the question of whether Obama supporters believe fellow women Democrats who say over and over how bad the sexism was. I don’t think there can be healing until it is acknowledged.
In defense of Palin…
Everyone knows there was the smear stating that Palin forced victims to pay for their own rape kits. This is absolutely NOT true. The true causes were detailed in the Alaskan House over four sessions starting here:
http://www.legis.state.ak.us/b.....;time=1503
And on April 10th, 2000 Lauree Hugonin stated clearly, “The direct charges usually result from the accounting procedures at the hospitals and not the law enforcement. She noted that there has been some difficulty in Mat-Su, Anchorage, Kenai, and Sitka, and possibily Bethel.” She advised that this problem is not on going and pervasive, but that it does occur more than sporadically.
So, there you have it direct from the Alaskan House; Palin is not to fault for the rape kit issue. Any statement that she forced them to pay for their own kits is a lie and a smear. Palin is NOT anti-woman and is in fact, very pro-woman.
Correcting the prospect.org smear…
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....13ELM8.DTL
“McCann told authorities that Wooten had said to her that he would shoot Heath if he hired her a divorce lawyer…
The family also reported that Wooten, who was assigned to the wildlife investigations unit, shot a moose without a permit, used a Taser on his 10-year-old stepson and drank a beer at a friend’s barbecue before taking a second one for the drive home in his patrol car.”
I am certain we all believe this man does not deserve to be a police officer and upholder of the law and morality, hm?
Karen,
I appreciate your research. It provides me with a different and better perspective on Palin but not to the point that I believe the McCain/Palin ticket was more progressive on women’s rights issues than the Obama/Biden ticket.
Donna,
I general agree that within a dispute or argument a healing cannot take place until the hurt, or wrong is acknowledge. So here are the questions:
What is said by whom to whom?
You and I do not know what type of conversations, or healing have happened between HRC and Obama. And HRC does not appear to want to revisit the 2008 primary. While sexism clearly played a role, honest people disagree whether or not the only reason HRC lost the primary was sexism.
Who is expected to say what to Palin? Did the McCain/Palin lose the election in a landslide solely due to sexism?
I believe the following events would be exciting:
* For HRC/Obama to host through the While Council on Women some town hall meeting s on addressing sexism and promoting women’s rights in this country. More importantly, I an anxiously to see a clearly articulated agenda accomplished by the Council.
* For Palin to host town hall meetings on women’s rights and communicate her view on feminism. Is it possible to be a conservative and a feminist – what would be your beliefs and what policies and legislation would one advocate?
For me, these would be progressive steps forward. I want to learn from the past (not be anchored in it), be in the present and plan for the future.
I consider my self a conservative (to an extent) and I consider myself a feminist. I don’t understand why women on the Left/Liberal/Dem can not picture women ont the Right/Conservative/Republican as feminist. That is just silly really. Conservative women have made the same steps as women on the Left for success in businesses and in politics. And we all want the same things. Better opportunities,education, and things like that.
So I think we should get that out of heads that a certain group of women due to their political ideology couldn’t possibly be feminist. Because that is just incorrect and feeds into the divide.We need representation of ALL kinds of women. Not just one type of woman.
Toodles,
Jessica
Jessica,
I consider myself a moderate and believe feminists are along the political spectrum. In order for TNA to hold itself together though, what should be clear is how the stripes of feminists believe “better opportunities, education and things like that” should be achieved.
It would be wonderful – simply wonderful – if Palin said “I am a feminist” and “feminism means to me …….” and “here is how I propose we achieve these feminist goals ……..”
LVL
Grassroots supporters can be honest and passionate about ideals and principles while politicians treat campaigns like a job. Clinton gets along because that’s her career. You may not have been following the news or been online during the sexism against Clinton, Palin and Clinton supporters.
Leave your Response Want an avatar? Get a gravatar!
Community Room
February 6, 2012 at 4:25 pm
January 30, 2012 at 2:36 pm
January 26, 2012 at 4:38 pm
January 23, 2012 at 1:04 pm
January 15, 2012 at 11:37 am
January 9, 2012 at 6:36 pm
January 7, 2012 at 10:10 pm
January 5, 2012 at 9:31 am
BUILD your NETWORK
Our Network of College Women
Protecting our Teenage Girls
We’re in the Media »
Click to see our latest stories in the media
More Stories »Recent Comments
The Latest from our Blog
Archives
Pioneer Mentors
Blogroll
Find us Online
Subscribe Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)
The New Agenda is a 501(c)(4) organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls by bringing about systemic change in the media, at the workplace, at school and at home. More...