This argument was simply inevitable. Rather than taking responsibility for any of of the many reasons why voters didn’t want to vote for Martha Coakley — her abysmal campaign, her elitism and arrogance, the fact that she was in complete lockstep with Obama and the extremist liberal Democrats in Congress — the Daily Beast columnist James Carroll takes the easy way out and blames… misogyny. That’s right. According to him, it wasn’t any of the above reasons that Massachusetts voters didn’t elect Martha Coakley. They didn’t vote for her because she’s a girl!!
That the Democratic nominee for the U.S. Senate seat formerly held by Ted Kennedy lost to the Republican non-entity Scott Brown is a moment of reckoning for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The current discontents do not explain this staggering defeat. Tea-baggers, disgruntled independents, an electorate made weary and confused by the health-care debate, the unemployed pissed-off, anti-establishment nay-sayers—add it all up and you still don’t have the explanation for what happened. The short of it is that the most liberal state in the nation (“Don’t blame me,” we crowed when we alone went for George McGovern in 1972, “I’m from Massachusetts”) practices the politics of misogyny. When it comes to positions of real power, no women need apply. Martha Coakley was croaked by an electorate that could not get past her gender.
… Now the wise guys say that Coakley blew it. A distinguished attorney general, and the victor in a hard-fought primary against formidable opponents, she lost the general election to the lightest of lightweights, the centerfold Scott Brown. For weeks, the press had unloaded on Coakley (inconsistent on the death penalty? Flip-flop on the health-rights bill? Isn’t her net worth awfully low?); over the course of the same weeks, the press had given Brown a pass. That he was elected only proves the point: No one knows diddly about this guy. About Coakley, meanwhile, everyone “knows” what happened. She “didn’t want it enough,” “didn’t work hard,” “didn’t ask,” “didn’t talk up Ted Kennedy.” Wrapping herself at the end in the double aura of Clinton-Obama, they say, only diminished her. Or made her seem too much of the club. Damned if she did. Damned if she didn’t. Anyway, she was sort of cold, don’t you think?
Right. The voters of Massachusetts ignored everything they knew about Martha Coakley and voted in Scott Brown because he’s a man and she was just a girl. Nevermind that she was voted Attorney General of Massachusetts over a man, Larry Frisoli. It didn’t matter that Coakley went on vacation in the middle of the campaign while Scott Brown was out pounding the pavement and meeting voters. It didn’t matter that Coakley snubbed voters and instead was hobnobbing with DC elites, union activists, and lobbyists. It didn’t matter that she just assumed that the seat belonged to her simply because she was a Democrat. It didn’t matter that she all but promised to vote in lockstep with Democrats who are currently pushing an agenda massively unpopular with the American people.
No, the only reason she wasn’t elected is because she’s a woman. It’s the patriarchy again!
This is quite frankly an insult to the voters of Massachusetts. Considering Hillary Clinton came incredibly close to winning the Democratic nomination and Sarah Palin could’ve been vice president. It’s completely typical of liberals to avoid any responsibility for their actions, though. I’m surprised Coakley herself hasn’t been playing this card. To be fair, Coakley herself seems to be owning up to the loss completely. Liberals just can’t accept, though, that perhaps Americans don’t like their socialist, extremist, big government agenda. So instead, they use discrimination as a crutch. Don’t like Obama’s agenda? You must be RACIST! Didn’t vote for Martha Coakley? You must be SEXIST!
Honestly, libs, give it a break. When you look for prejudice everywhere, you’re going to find it. But we conservatives don’t think that minorities or women should get special treatment because of their race or gender. We think they are good enough to be judged on their merits, their character, and their achievements. Isn’t believing that minorities and women are so inferior as to need special treatment to get ahead a form of racism and sexism in and of itself? What does Mr. Carroll expect — for voters to vote for Coakley just because she’s a woman, regardless of where she stands on the issues? It’s the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard.
Seems to me like the oh-so-typical cry of misogyny is nothing more than another sexist man projecting his issues onto everyone else.
(4 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading ...RSS feed for comments on this post.
TrackBack URI
Great post. Your right, its the typical “victimization” mentality. One thing that needs to be stressed about the misogyny card is that it was Democrats that were the misogynists. Dems have a majority in Mass, so the only way Brown could win is by getting some of those msogynist Dems to vote for him. So even by playing the sexist card, they still have to own up that it was their own party members that were the sexists.
[...] here is a good post about this whole sexism thing. Categories: Libtard Comments (0) Trackbacks (0) Leave a [...]
I think I’m going to make a new rule: anyone using the term “tea-baggers” automatically loses whatever argument they’re trying to win.
I feel sorry for these people who are so caught up in defining people (or being defined themselves) by what they are, not who they are.
I think I’m going to make a new rule: anyone using the term “tea-baggers” automatically gets their @$$ kicked. Same goes for anyone using the term “astroturf” to describe spontaneous dissent by average Americans. Not one friend or family member I know, liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican, is happy with ObaPeloReid.
Coakley was witless, shallow, incompetent, aloof, and deranged even by liberal standards. Even if she looked only half as good as Cassy in a bathing suit, she would have fallen short of Cosmo Guy.
Seriously, Brown ran an outstanding campaign and Obamacare was clearly an albatross around Coakley’s neck. If it weren’t, Pelosi wouldn’t have abandoned it so quickly and easily. I know my Congresswoman is scared to death of losing her job as Speaker in November. I’m taking great joy in their suffering!
Great catch Cass, revealing liberals for the self-hating, misanthropic, misogynists that they really are. It’s so ironic that the “racist and sexist” conservatives have more faith in the accomplishments and abilities of women and minorities than those who purport to hold their interests close to their hearts.
I agree with you all: I’m tired of the term “tea-bagger.” It’s as bad as the n-word for Blacks, or the b-word for women. I don’t understand why liberals get away with it.
Also, one of the comments on Carroll’s “oped” was illustrative of common-sense, which he doesn’t seem to have (when I noticed he is in academia, I knew his mind-set).
Here’s the comment: “A little dramatic aren’t we? And as a woman, you can take your patronizing rhetoric and stick it.”
The whole thing reveals the true liberal mindset.
I’m making a new rule: anyone using the word teabagger against me, I’m going to ask them how my b—- taste.
Actually, Dems are not the majority in Massachusetts. The Independents (of which I was one until today) are at 51%. Fortunately for us, Coakley’s decision to sit back and coast and wait for her coronation, combined with running negative campaign ads only served to wake up the electorate who normally would just either blacken the “D” or stay home altogether. The excuse that Coakley lost because she was a woman is a known and very tired excuse. It may have worked some years ago, but people aren’t buying it anymore. Massachusetts has some fight in it yet. We’ve been abused and taken for granted by both parties in this state, primarily by Democrats. We’re spoiling for a fight. The Independents have had it and made their voices heard on this one.
None of these “feminists” said the same thing about Sarah Palin. Now that is a double standard.
Long before the left wing dragged both Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin through the much, I recall them referring to Paula Jones, a victim of sexual harrassment, as “Trailer Park Trash.”
We all know now that her accusations had serious merit.
Seems to me like the oh-so-typical cry of misogyny is nothing more than another sexist man projecting his issues onto everyone else.
Damn straight. Is this a-hole on record with his opinion about Palin? Ten dollars says it’s some variation of the tired, worn out “We all know she’s a dimwit you can tell by looking at her porn star glasses” meme. And he thinks Joe Biden won the debate with his smartzz.
[...] Cassy Fiano exposes the “Martha Coakley lost because she’s a girl” meme, and beats it silly [...]
Martha Coakley lost because she didn’t campaign much, and, when she did, ran a 2008 campaign in a 2010 world.
We are tired of “Blame Bush.” We are tired of being told that the problem is “fat cat” bankers and Wall Street. We tried that with Obama and it got us 17% unemployment or underemployment.
The Boston Tea Party actually emailed Coakley and asked for a meeting/fundraiser; since Scott Brown’s campaign had sought out the Tea Party and done the same, we thought that we would be all non-partisan and reach out to Coakley. She ignored the request entirely.
Now, call me crazy, but I’m not sure what politician, save for one whose schedule is so jam-packed as to not have a moment to breathe, let alone schedule another fundraiser, would turn down the opportunity to meet with hundreds of her soon-to-be constituents and have the event announced to thousands more.
Contrast Scott Brown. You couldn’t go to an event (especially a conservative one) without running into the guy. He sent out an open invitation to his primary victory party – one need not be Somebody Important to get in. He friended about half of Massachusetts on Facebook and followed most of us on Twitter.
Actually Cassie is a Girl and a mighty fine one.
Martha Coakley, who knows?