home

Hillary Interview: Her Views on Sexism in the Campaign

Lois Romano of the Washington Post has an audio interview with Hillary Clinton taken yesterday in Kentucky. The topic: Hillary's views on the "sexist" treatment she has endured at the hands of pundits, media and others.

The Post sent me the transcript which appears below the fold.

Q. One of the stories that has been well documented over and over again is basically how you've been treated by the media. Can you talk about that a little bit, because I get the idea that it's really pissed off a lot of women.

A. "I think it has. I think it's been deeply offensive to millions of women. ... I believe this campaign has been a ground breaker in lots of ways, but it certainly has been challenging given some of the attitudes that have been forthcoming in the press, and I regret that because I think it's been really not worthy of the seriousness of this campaign and the historical nature of the two candidacies that we have here. But I don't really stop to worry about it because there's nothing I can do about it."

Q. Are women going to be upset if you don't get the nomination?

A. I have more voters now than my opponent. I have more popular vote, more people voting for me.

Q. Counting Michigan and Florida?

A. According to ABC, and I think it's a fair way to total it up because my name was on the ballot they voted for me. But in any event, it's one of the closest races we've ever had and I think that a lot of people are deeply invested in their candidates, so there will probably be disappointment no matter which of us gets the nomination. And then it will be up to us to unify the party and make sure we are victorious in November against McCain.

Q. What's the scenario by which you could still win the nomination?

A. If people start asking themselves who's the strongest candidate against John McCain, because I believe I am.

Q. Do you think he can win?

A. Sure. I think he can win--I think I will win.

Q. But short of a scandal on his part do you see people coming to that conclusion?

A. I don't know, that's why we're not going to quit. We're going forward. We're going to give the people in the remaining elections the chance to vote, which I think is absolutely fair. And we're going to resolve Michigan and Florida, which has to be done sooner instead of later. And then we'll see where we stand.

Q. Do you think this has been a particularly racist campaign?

A. I do not. I think this has been a positive, civil campaign. I think that both gender and race have been obviously a part of it because of who we are and every poll I've seen show more people would be reluctant to vote for a woman to vote for an African American, which rarely gets reported on either. The manifestation of some of the sexism that has gone on in this campaign is somehow more respectable or at least more accepted. And I think there should be equal rejection of the sexism and the racism when and if it ever raises its ugly head. But it does seem as though the press at least is not as bothered by the incredible vitriol that has been engendered by comments and reactions of people who are nothing but misogynists.

Q. Isn't that how it's always been though.

A. Oppression of women and discrimination against women is universal. You can go to places in the world where there are no racial distinctions except everyone is joined together in their oppression of women. The treatment of women is the single biggest problem we have politically and socially in the world. If you look at the extremism and the fundamentalism, it is all about controlling women, at it's base. The idea that we would have a presidential campaign in which so much of what has occurred that has been very sexist would be just shrugged off I think is a very unfortunate commentary about the lack of seriousness that should be applied to any kind of discrimination or prejudice. I have spent my entire life trying to stand up for civil rights and women's rights and human rights and I abhor wherever it is discrimination is present.

< NBC Oregon Exit Poll: White Men for Obama Around 2-1 | NBC Dismisses The People Of Puerto Rico >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    What A Class Act....Some Of America Doesn't (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue May 20, 2008 at 06:39:59 PM EST
    even deserve her!!

    GO HILLARY!!!

    This is an amazing woman. (5.00 / 5) (#2)
    by madamab on Tue May 20, 2008 at 06:40:56 PM EST
    She made some really great points about the root of sexism being the desire to control women. And - I loved what she said about how there are places in the world where they are racially unified, but women are still oppressed. As usual, she was incredibly gracious towards Obama.

    I can haz Presnit Hillary now?

    one more thing....NARAL Can Take A (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue May 20, 2008 at 06:41:03 PM EST
    flying leap!

    This is "Teh Best Speech Evah" (5.00 / 5) (#4)
    by Kathy on Tue May 20, 2008 at 06:44:11 PM EST
    but no one cares because it's (1) about sexism and (2) coming from a woman.

    Something about that audio interview really (none / 0) (#25)
    by bridget on Tue May 20, 2008 at 07:31:17 PM EST
    brought out the feminist out in me

    America needs a woman president NOW

    and Hillary is the one -

    no doubt about it

    She is so right, there are so many people supporting her and only her - but the media doesn't cover it

    It's so incredible, really, here we have a First Lady turned Senator running for President of the USofA and right now it's very close ... but the media wants to ignore.

    Isn't Angela Mitchel from NBC part of the Clinton press gang? Has she ever anything worthwhile to say? What about all the other reporters who follow her around? Shouldn't we hear a lot more Clinton campaign news every single day? What are these people doing. Eating powdered donuts all day?

    Parent

    yes. (none / 0) (#29)
    by Kathy on Tue May 20, 2008 at 08:08:33 PM EST
    What are these people doing. Eating powdered donuts all day?


    Parent
    She is just awesome!!! (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by TalkRight on Tue May 20, 2008 at 06:44:19 PM EST
    Most of the pundits do seem to agree on one thing: Sen. Clinton is a very different candidate today, and a far better one since the early days in Iowa. Post mortems, should it come to that, might dwell on whether she made a mistake when, at the beginning of the campaign, she focused on her experience more than on her convictions: that, I think, would be a spectacular mistake. As the first viable female candidate for the presidency, Sen. Clinton had to make her case early in order to erase another invisible disadvantage; the fact that very few now question whether a woman, or this woman in particular, has what it takes to be the Commander-In-Chief of this great nation is a testament to her success, not to her missteps.

    The truth is that almost no one has ever had one iota of interest in who the "core person" was; rather, they've all been too busy painting a distorted, grotesque picture, and selling that picture, to care. Even with all that, Sen. Clinton has earned more votes than any other candidate during the primary season, ever. That isn't just a victory, but a triumph. And the story isn't over yet.

    This needs to be said again and again (none / 0) (#36)
    by Cream City on Tue May 20, 2008 at 10:56:16 PM EST
    The first woman ever to win a primary in this country's history, four months ago now, became . . .

    the candidate, a month ago now, who earned more votes than any other candidate during the primary season, ever in this country's history -- woman, man, Democrat, Republican, Progressive, Green, Whig, Whatevuh.

    "That isn't just a victory, but a triumph" -- you said it.  And it hardly was noticed in the media, no matter that she said it and her campaign said it . . . and some of us heard it.  It was a question on my final exam last week, after a semester that started with her first historic primary and roared back by the end of the semester to make history again.

    My students know it.  They know more than the media do about the real history being made this year and won't have to wait for the history books to tell them what wasn't in the newspaper or on the networks -- a historic triumph that just may encourage some girl today to grow up to try to be president, too.  If she can get up the gumption to go through the horrors that Clinton has endured -- and has done so for my students and us all.

    Parent

    Hillary's last response is compelling -- (5.00 / 7) (#7)
    by jawbone on Tue May 20, 2008 at 06:45:06 PM EST
    If you look at the extremism and the fundamentalism, it is all about controlling women, at it's base I have spent my entire life trying to stand up for civil rights and women's rights and human rights and I abhor wherever it is discrimination is present.

    Thank you, Sen. Clinton, and I so hope she is our nominee. She gets it, for everyone.

    WOW, just WOW (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Foxx on Tue May 20, 2008 at 06:46:04 PM EST
    What a fantastic out front right on feminist statement.

    Imagine someone with that insight as President of the US. What a message that sends to the wimmin of the world.

    I am forever in her debt.

    It's our honor to have (5.00 / 0) (#24)
    by JavaCityPal on Tue May 20, 2008 at 07:26:31 PM EST
    her working so hard for the people. I just don't understand why anyone would choose someone else.

    She is right now giving the most fantastic speech in KY. Her well wishes to Ted Kennedy were so heartfelt and sincere.


    HRC's Comments on Sexism Spot On (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by kaleidescope on Tue May 20, 2008 at 07:46:20 PM EST
    The media has been horrible to her and at least part of that is sexism.  People still laugh about jokes about women that -- if the jokes were about racial or ethnic minorities -- would never be tolerated.  The same goes for countries that have horrendous discrimination against women.  If that discrimination was against a racial or ethnic minority there would be international economic sanctions applied.

    I still get mad when I remember the stupid fuss made over her having breasts, her laugh and her showing feelings.  That, after Chris Mathews G. Gordon Liddy and Peggy Noonan were all practically drooling over Bush's Mission Accomplished cod piece.

    We have a long way to go in this country.

    She should have (none / 0) (#6)
    by thentro on Tue May 20, 2008 at 06:44:33 PM EST
    been more much outspoken about this earlier. Why wasn't this a central campaign issue?

    When it was brought up by anyone connected (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by jawbone on Tue May 20, 2008 at 06:52:37 PM EST
    with the Clinton campaign, she was accused of being a whiner. I think a certain amount of MCM (Mainstream Corporate Media) comment was needed before she could address it as an actual issue -- not the whining of a losing candidate.

    Somerby at DailyHowler.com keeps pointing out that we need libs and progressives in the MCM with the courage to take on their cohort in the MCM. When the Dem pol does it, that pol  is usually derided, made fun of, called a whimp.

    Life is not fair -- but we do indeed need a better media.

    Parent

    She is already being criticized for this (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Joan in VA on Tue May 20, 2008 at 07:22:24 PM EST
    and it's an interview! She can never bring it up on her own.

    Parent
    I'm glad she focused on issues rather than her (none / 0) (#13)
    by leis on Tue May 20, 2008 at 06:59:19 PM EST
    gender. She really showed voters her tremendous intelligence.  And she ran the risk of turning people off by focusing on her gender. Her run speaks for itself, in a historical sense.   And I think it has far more impact now as opposed to a running theme.

    Parent
    If she had (none / 0) (#14)
    by MonaL on Tue May 20, 2008 at 07:00:30 PM EST
    the MSM and Obamamaians would have accused her of playing the 'gender card' again.

    Parent
    You must be joking (none / 0) (#34)
    by Upstart Crow on Tue May 20, 2008 at 10:24:32 PM EST
    because they would say she's complaining and playing the victim.

    Parent
    Fight back then! (none / 0) (#41)
    by thentro on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:22:29 PM EST
     

    Parent
    I think she's great (none / 0) (#9)
    by PaulDem on Tue May 20, 2008 at 06:46:26 PM EST
    I've never been a strident supporter of any of the candidates (well Dodd, but I knew he didn't have a chance) and I would have welcomed a Clinton nomination and worked hard to make history by electing the first woman.

    I hope both she and Senator Obama work hard to unite the party and make the case to their supporters that the Democratic candidate, no matter who that may be, is the best choice in November.

    Well, . . . (none / 0) (#17)
    by marirebel on Tue May 20, 2008 at 07:07:13 PM EST
    PaulDem: Most of the ugly and vitriolic sexism in this primary race has come from Obama's supporters.  More, Obama's deafening silence on this subject, in addition to some of his troubling comments, evidence his acceptance of this sexist behavior . . . No wonder he is now winning white men 2 to 1 in Oregon!  It is highly unlikely that Clinton supporters concerned about misogyny will unite behind Obama.  Would you urge African-Americans to unite behind a person who stood silently in the face of racism, and who even used some racist dog whistles?  I hope not!

    Parent
    Hillary needs to expose Obama and the media for (none / 0) (#10)
    by cpa1 on Tue May 20, 2008 at 06:50:52 PM EST
    what they unscrupulously did regarding Bill in SC and Geraldine and discuss what kind of troubles liars have winning GEs.

    Then she should sing this about Obama:

    ((youtube kBBiwusmHLs))

    hmm that didn't work, sorry (none / 0) (#11)
    by cpa1 on Tue May 20, 2008 at 06:51:39 PM EST
    Only if she is prepared to end her future (none / 0) (#15)
    by Christy1947 on Tue May 20, 2008 at 07:01:02 PM EST
     the day she says that. There are many who do not think she walks on water, and they have long memories.

    Parent
    The outrage will bloom but (none / 0) (#18)
    by cpa1 on Tue May 20, 2008 at 07:12:45 PM EST
    if she stays strong, she will tie up the super-Ds in knots.  There are no knots now because there is safety in numbers.  

    Everyone used to buy IBM, not because they were better but because everybody had them.  Those chosing IBM could always, hey, they have 70% of the market.  

    When I was in the market for a mainframe, I bought a Honeywell that ran circles around the IBMs and the support was 1000 times better.  But that was when a 30 meg platter hard drive cost $33,000.

    Let's face it, he is a liar and unless you know something that I don't, she should do it.  She has run one very classy campaign and what a shame to let it go to a slug like Obama.

    Parent

    Wow! Maybe OT, delete? (none / 0) (#16)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Tue May 20, 2008 at 07:01:50 PM EST
    On CNN, Lou Dobbs just talked about the Clintons  having been vilified by some Dems and Donna Brazile (sp) said "you didn't hear that from me". And Dobbs said "sounds like the healing has begun"; one of the CNN panelists said something like Obama has to make that case to the voters (his emphasis).

    Hillary is coming out SOON!

    Great job by Hill in that interview (none / 0) (#19)
    by Firefly4625 on Tue May 20, 2008 at 07:17:02 PM EST
    She made it NOT personal, NOT about her - talking about mistreatment of women universally, historically.

    And while she was NOT THE LEAST BIT WHINY - or B*TCHY - actually, quite the opposite - how long do ya'll think it's gonna take the MSM and the big orange, etc. to use misogynist code words like "whiny" and "b*tchy" with regard to her statements?

    A matter of seconds, I predict...

    On CNN the panel of jerks (none / 0) (#20)
    by zyx on Tue May 20, 2008 at 07:22:02 PM EST
    talked about Hillary's comments on sexism in the media and that Alex Republican jerk fellow was extremely obnoxious about it.  Did anyone else catch that?  He didn't admit to any of it, just said it was basically stupid of Clinton to say anything about it and particularly for her to say anything at this point in time.

    He was awful, and nobody else told him so anything like forcefully enough.

    Worse (none / 0) (#23)
    by chrisvee on Tue May 20, 2008 at 07:22:54 PM EST
    He said she was abrasive and so the comments were true, therefore not sexist.

    Parent
    When Eric Boehlert writes his book about (none / 0) (#26)
    by bridget on Tue May 20, 2008 at 07:37:30 PM EST
    this primary and the sexism and misogyny Hillary and her supporters had to endure I hope he quotes people like that Alex fellow. And Carl Bernstein really outdid himself in the nasty department.

    He will need a couple or more chapters for NBC alone. One for Russert, one for Matthews, one for Olbermann .... there is no end to it.

    And then there are the blogs.

    Parent

    Bernstein's in the Psychic Friends Network (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by Ellie on Tue May 20, 2008 at 08:21:12 PM EST
    He's sliming into the spotlight to flog his crappy blat-all book about HRC and drop gossip-points for the "news" panel to slobber over.

    I love how he (literally) wrings his hands to telepath into HRC's brains and tell everyone what she's thinking. This is somewhat different than extrapolating campaign movement from her speech and actions.

    Bernstein is mind-melding.

    Parent

    Very soon people won't even remember that (none / 0) (#31)
    by bridget on Tue May 20, 2008 at 08:42:49 PM EST
    Woodward and Bernstein for decades were the most famous and celebrated reporters in the world

    Come to think of it I have a hard time believing it myself these days. But that was the story for the longest time.

    P.S. Bernstein sold out completely.
    I did not read his HC book but Bob Somerby writes that it is not at all a negative book. That's why his silly telepath into her brain has to be all about $$$ and a place on TeeVee. Or maybe he uses HC to channel the brain of his former wife who now bashes HC (and men) on HuffPost. You know the one who has problems with her neck (and Bernstein?) ;-)

    Parent

    Woodstein is just so sad these days (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by Ellie on Tue May 20, 2008 at 09:32:56 PM EST
    Woodward with his head up Bush's ass and Bernstein talking like the domestic equivalent of one of Lady Diana's hangers-on.

    They used to exemplify what journalists were supposed to do in a functioning democracy.

    Parent

    Bold (none / 0) (#21)
    by chrisvee on Tue May 20, 2008 at 07:22:18 PM EST
    The treatment of women is the single biggest problem we have politically and socially in the world. If you look at the extremism and the fundamentalism, it is all about controlling women, at it's base.

    A very bold statement -- way to go, Senator!

    Does anyone (none / 0) (#32)
    by kayla on Tue May 20, 2008 at 08:48:17 PM EST
    have a link to the exit poll saying gender has been a factor in voting against Hillary?  I've always wondered if they actually asked voters that question and why the media never reports it...

    email, please (none / 0) (#35)
    by Upstart Crow on Tue May 20, 2008 at 10:29:39 PM EST
    What's the email addy?  We'll go for it.

    what whining nerve (none / 0) (#37)
    by diogenes on Tue May 20, 2008 at 11:16:57 PM EST
    The only reason she is suddenly getting Appalachian (as opposed to Western) white support is because of racism against her opponent, and she complains about sexism?  Many countries (England, Germany, Chile, Israel, India, Argentina) have elected women leaders.  No countries have elected a leader with an oppressed minority's skin color.  Heck, in some countries you have to be the right tribe, much less race.  If the machismo Latin Americans elect women, maybe this is less of an issue than racism is.    

    Huh? (none / 0) (#39)
    by Leo9 on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:04:08 AM EST
    No countries have elected a leader with an oppressed minority's skin color.  

    So how do you explain Barack's success among the dominant white culture in these primaries? Plus, how do you know the WWC vote is just "racist"? There are always somwe racists floating around but why not other factors like their worries about the crumbling economy which is affecting them far more than the more affluent voters in Oregon who are voting for BHO? Some say WWC votes are suspicious of Obama's "reformer" qualities, they're not used to "change." That doesn't mean they're a bunch of racists. Or they like Hillary's economic policies and Bill Clinton's policies for 8 years they remember as good times. Maybe they like her fighting spirit. Maybe they like her because she's a woman, a gender that has never done as well in America as in many other counties. Plus some might not trust Obama (like his knack for retelling/reframing scenarios to sound better, like the way he re-told the SF remarks in a completely different light; and the way he sidesteps any criticism, typical for a pol but maybe some WWC voters don't like it).

    Hillary is remarking on how many media commentators are covering her in denigrating ways and her supports are offenders. She's right. They have protected Obama at every turn but not given her the same breaks (KO and Tweety are perfect examples of this pro-male attitude, let the female fall into the cravass on the ice floe). KO/MSNBC and Daily Kos have created a reverberating echo chamber of contempt for Hillary Clinton that has no doubt attracted an increase in young males (adoring Obama and reviling Clinton) into their viewer demographics which pleases MSNBC advertisers. I have no proof of this but believe this is going on to some degree -- at Hillary's expense.

    BTW, African-Americans, while still not perfectly equal in US, are less "oppressed" than they ever used to be; they make up a large part of our middle class, professional class, academic and military classes. You sound like we're back in Alabama in the 1920's. We're not.

    Parent

    "supporters are offenders" = offended (none / 0) (#40)
    by Leo9 on Wed May 21, 2008 at 01:09:38 AM EST
    Q after 9-11: Where are the women? (none / 0) (#38)
    by Leo9 on Tue May 20, 2008 at 11:40:56 PM EST
    If you look at the extremism and the fundamentalism, it is all about controlling women, at it's base. (HRC)

    Wow, this hits to the core. I remember vividly when I read about the 19 9/11 hijackers and asked myself (and my friends) where are the women? I ended up writing an op-ed in our local newspaper asking if societies in the Middle East and other nations around the world did not restrict women so rigidly and instead respected women on the same level as men and allowed women to be involved in decision-making on an equal level, would violent fundamentalist extremism arise?  We need a president who understands that very likely the answer is "Not often." I remember being struck profoundly by the notion that if boys/young men (like the 9/11 terrorist hijackers) are left to their own devices for thousands of years with little feminine influence on an equal level, when they get mad we can get the level of cold-blooded, massive, dramatic violence we saw 9/11 with absolutely no empathy.  As boys will be boys, for the next 7 years the Bush-Cheney boys of the fundamentalist Bush administration have made terrorism worse with their "counter-terorism" policies (Rice doesn't count as a woman, more of a sycophantic sidekick). This doesn't mean that if Hillary Clinton became president I would expect her to be a peacenik or a pacifist. It merely means she would likely use military force responsibly. I believe she wanted to do this when she voted yes on the Iraq resolution, trusting the process that was set in motion by the resolution (completion of inspections, etc.) but Boy Bush was so intent upon invasion, he reneged on the deal.