Everyone’s favorite Offensive Remarker Rush Limbaugh asserted on the 20th that the other Democratic presidential candidates do not criticize Hillary Clinton, then followed it up with this gem:
Well, you might say, “No, Michelle Obama and Mrs. Edwards are out there criticizing her,” but, see, I finally figured this one out, too. You can’t hit the girl. You just — you can’t hit the girl. And for Edwards and Obama to go out there and criticize Hillary would — she would — she plays the victim better than anybody does, and she could make real hay out of that. So they’ve got their wives out there ripping her.
Oh my. Where to begin?
Well, first of all, Hillary Clinton is not a “girl.” And to those of you who objected to my post about Sen. Clinton referring to herself as such, I hope that you would at least agree that Rush Limbaugh is not entitled to refer to her in this manner, and that in this case it is intentionally insulting and infantalizing.
Statements like “you can’t hit the girl” purposely aim to portray her as “just” a woman, and therefore more weak-willed than all of her opponents. Funnily enough, Rush seems to forget that while he’s accusing her of “playing the victim” now, he’s also constantly working to portray her as a “ball-buster,” too masculine, etc.
When, exactly, has Hillary Clinton played the victim, anyway? She didn’t even do that when her husband’s affair was all over the news. I suppose that we could say her rhetoric about how authorizing the war was not her fault, but Bush’s fault for lying to her, is “playing the victim.” But I highly doubt that this is what Rush was referring to. No, he was pushing his world view that anytime someone brings up issues of race or sex, they’re “playing a victim” and trying to get “special” privileges. Because when you’re an old, rich, heterosexual white man, you’re smart enough to realize that the world is fair, and pointing out any kind of inequality just makes you a sore loser. I’m sure that from where Rush is sitting, life looks very equal.
I’m also pretty pissed about his characterizations of the Edwards and Obamas. Yes, Elizabeth Edwards has been critical of Hillary Clinton. But what about Michelle Obama? Personally, I haven’t heard of her being openly critical of Hillary Clinton, except for a comment she made that was taken completely out of context by the right-wing media and spun to make it look like she was talking about Sen. Clinton. Did I miss something?
As for John and Barack, this guy clearly hasn’t been watching the same debates that I’ve been watching. John Edwards has been very critical of Hillary from the start, particularly regarding the Iraq war and her refusal to apologize for her vote in favor of it. I have watched him address her directly on that issue, among others. And am I the only one who remembers this ugly little scuffle between Obama and Clinton last month, where Obama called her “Bush-Cheney lite?” Geez. Seems to me that he definitely wasn’t too scared to confront her, then.
The problem, of course, is not that everyone is afraid to “hit the girl.” The problem is that seemingly no one is afraid to “hit” her, and they’re especially willing to do it specifically because of her sex/gender.
Take this lovely article about whether or not a woman can win the presidency:
“Hillary can go to hell,” said Alice Aszman, 66, a Democrat from Ottumwa. “I’ll never vote for her. I don’t think a woman should be president. I think a man should. They’ve got more authority.”
Her husband, Daniel, 50, also a Democrat, agreed: “I think women should stay home instead of being boss.”
Oh, yeah, Sen. Clinton’s got it easy. Boobs sure can be a benefit in the political arena!
Saying that everyone is afraid to criticize Hillary because she’s a woman is really just providing people with an excuse, justification and defensive moral principle to people who want to criticize her in nasty and outlandish ways. It’s a way to set up a climate for “oh, she’s playing the sex card!” and then having the ability to say “SEE! I told you this would happen!” Rush hasn’t predicated anything, here, he’s doing nothing more than defending his own shitty rhetoric and making excuses for bigotry. Of course, those are two of the things he’s best at. If only he could find a way to insert some homophobia and racism into that argument. . .
{ 5 comments }
“Because when you’re an old, rich, heterosexual white man, you’re smart enough to realize that the world is fair, and pointing out any kind of inequality just makes you a sore loser.”
Therein lies the beauty of privilege.
I HATE this “you can’t hit the girl” argument. I haven’t watchdogged (listendogged?) Rush in a while, but it sounds like I should start up again. Totally offensive.
Oh god, I could never actually LISTEN to Rush. My brain would explode. You are much braver than I.
Quite honestly, I’m kind of embarrassed that I let him get me this pissed off. It’s not like his being a massively bigoted douche bag who couldn’t tell the truth if his life depended on it is anything NEW. On the other hand, some people actually do believe what he says.
“On the other hand, some people actually do believe what he says.”
Like my father, only recently. And precisely because Rush Limbaugh is “an old, rich, heterosexual white man” does my father take Limbaugh ever the more seriously.
It makes me incredibly sad.
Somehow, when Rush Limbaugh says ‘you can’t hit girls,’ you definitely get the feeling he’s complaining about the unfairness of it all. Why, oh WHY can’t you hit those smaller than yourself? Why can’t you beat up your wife? Oh, it’s just not fair!
Can’t you just feel his pain?
Oh, and if his position is that Hillary Clinton can’t be attacked polititally because she’s a woman? Really? When’s THAT policy going to go into effect?
I only ask because golly gee, I remember her being attacked polititally waaaay back in the day before Bill Clinton was even president.
Comments on this entry are closed.