Comments on: Kennedy on Clinton

By: Chris

Chris — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 00:00:29 +0000

I’m not opposed to voting twice. I’m from New York, remember. Tammany Hall politics is in our blood. I think the Chicagoians learned their dirty tricks from us!

Actually Christie and I will be in Chicago for a few days in early June. Christie’s good friend dates the guitarist from REM, and they are having a concert there in June, so we’re hooked up with sweet tickets.

I’ll definitely look you up while we are there!

Oh — did you take that class with Nussbaum?

By: Swad

Swad — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 22:20:59 +0000

Yeah, I think the whole car-in-the-bay thing doesn’t matter much these days… but I had to reference it nonetheless.

Oh, and if the longing for machine politics ever gets too overwhelming, I’d be more than happy to give you a tour of Chicago. You could vote again while you’re up here! It’s great!

By: Chris

Chris — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 05:19:11 +0000

Hey, Gangs of New York is a great film. The old Tammany Hall politics of old get me all misty eyed and nostalgic.

By: Million

Million — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 04:38:01 +0000

I’m interested to hear who YOU will endorse.

Will it be the Senator from back home? New York City! The place that brought us rampant voting fraud immortalized in Gangs of New York? And machine politics!

Will it be the Gentleman from Arizona (who I’m sure you share an AARP membership with).

Or silence prove to be golden?

By: eyeingtenure

eyeingtenure — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 04:10:18 +0000

I grew up listening to my dad demonize Ted Kennedy, mostly on the basis of the Chappaquiddick incident. I grew up believing it.

I’m not so convinced any more. That was almost 40 years ago, as Chris points out. I’m idealistic enough that I’d like to believe he could redeem himself, and that philandering isn’t a civic sin of politicians. It’s inevitable.

By: Chris

Chris — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 03:55:36 +0000

Swad,

That’s actually what I was referring to above with respect to his “historical shenanigans.”

Still, that was 40 years ago, so I don’t think it sheds any light at all on this issue.

Like I was saying — I’m not defending Kennedy’s record with respect to women’s rights/legislation. The Kennedy’s have hardly been model citizens when it comes to their treatment of women.

But short of some actual evidence other than a 40 year old event, his support of Obama doesn’t say much to me vis a vis his stance towards women as president.

By: Swad

Swad — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 03:46:47 +0000

As if Chappaquiddick didn’t prove he was anti-woman…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chappaquiddick_incident

By: OFF: Ted Kennedy’s Sexist Agenda « On the Tenure Track

OFF: Ted Kennedy’s Sexist Agenda « On the Tenure Track — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 02:22:51 +0000

[...] both points of view, check out the links here, here and here. No Comments Leave a Commenttrackback addressThere was an error with your comment, please try [...]

By: Chris

Chris — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 01:51:02 +0000

That’s pretty much right. Now, I’m not naive here — I suspect that many people who won’t vote for Obama probably are racists. And I have no doubt that many who won’t vote for Clinton will refuse to do so because she’s a woman.

But in particular cases, without further evidence showing that this is indeed the reasoning, you can’t simply point to the behavior of not voting Clinton (or Obama) and then condemn them as anti-black or anti-woman.

By: eyeingtenure

eyeingtenure — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 01:24:18 +0000

By that same logic, those who don’t support Obama are racist.

What’s a forward-thinking white male to do?

http://awaitingtenure.wordpress.com/