Saturday, March 07, 2020

Representation Roundtable

C.I.:  Due to a number of issues, we're doing a roundtable with the women of this community who have their own websites.  Participating are   Rebecca of Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude; Betty of Thomas Friedman Is a Great Man;  Kat of Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills);   Elaine of Like Maria Said Paz); Ruth of Ruth's Report; Trina of Trina's Kitchen;  Marcia of SICKOFITRDLZ;  Ann of Ann's Mega Dub,  The Third Estate Sunday Review's Dona, and  Ava, and me, C.I. of The Common Ills and The Third Estate Sunday Review.

C.I. (Con't): On her PRIVATE DANCER album, Tina Turner performs a song entitled "I Might Have Been Queen."  For 2020?  I might have been president.  For women, that's the case.  Six women competed for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination.  Author and business woman Marianne Williamson, Senators Kirsten Gillibrand, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris and Amy Klobuchar, and Iraq War veteran and US House Rep Tulsi Gabbard.  Thursday, Elizabeth Warren became the fifth woman to drop out of the race.  Tulsi remains the only woman still in the race.  Rebecca?

Rebecca: Six women seeking one party's presidential nomination?  Unprecedented in my lifetime.  This was a historic moment.  And, as noted in Friday's "Iraq snapshot," some want to pretend you can half-historic it.  That's not how it works.  Six women did something amazing.  Pretending it was four women is insulting and dishonest.

Marcia: Agreed and it reminds me of 2008.  In this community, we noted -- rightly, I believe -- how historic it was that you had Hillary Clinton win so many votes for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination, how you had Sarah Palin named the vice president on the Republican ticket and how you had Cynthia McKinney as the Green Party's presidential candidate with Rosa Clemente as her running mate.  This was groundbreaking and historic.  And yet some people just want to celebrate what Hillary accomplished that year.  That's not how it works.

Elaine: I can remember when Walter Mondale selected Geraldine Ferraro as his running mate and how we were all, all women, supposed to be thrilled with that moment.  It was historic, I don't deny that it was.  Geraldine made history, she walked into the history books.  But if we're supposed to be proud as women, then it can't just be "My party! My party! My party!"  No, I don't have much in common with Sarah Palin.  That doesn't mean I can't look at what she accomplished and say, yes, she walked into history.

Betty: Right and there was a piece at THIRD back then, "The Vagina Strikes Back! (Ava and C.I.)," which included this:

By the way, you can vote for McKinney-Clemente or McCain-Palin. We're not telling you who to vote for. Your vote is your own and use it in the way that feels right to you. But even if you don't vote for either ticket or if you choose one of those two tickets, you should grasp that this is historic and that all women owe a debt to Cynthia, Sarah and Rosa. Hillary would have been in there doing just what the three women are doing so toss her in there as well. In 2008, four strong women have faced the most vicious, sexist attacks (sadly, too often from other women) and they've known the attacks were never about them individually, it was about discrediting women period. They've known that and they've gotten up each day and pressed on. There's no Pat Schroeder crying (which wasn't the end of the world, despite the way some try to play it). They fight the battle and they know that, yes, there will be a women president. It may be in 2008 if Cynthia gets enough votes. It may be in 2012. It may be later on. But a woman will be president and these four women made sure it was possible by fighting to the best of their abilities and by utilizing their strengths.

Betty (Con't): What Ava and C.I. wrote then is true today.  And it also applies to the six women.

Ruth: And, to be clear, we were not a Tulsi Gabbard fan base.  Tulsi and Marianne Williamson are the two women some 'feminists' on the left are leaving out over the last few days.  We were not a Tulsi Gabbard fan base.  I think most of us were interested in her run.  We thought she was anti-war candidate.  She turned out not to be that, not as we define it, and we can talk about that later.  But we did hold her accountable.  And we can still applaud her.

Ann: What I find interesting -- and I'm a Green, I'm not a Democrat -- is that White 'feminists' - put air quotes around that please -- can write out Marianne and Tulsi but they want to include Amy Klobuchar and Kamala Harris.  As an African-American woman, I do wonder how you can exclude Tulis and Marianne but include Amy and Kamala.  Tulsi and Marianne are not responsible for any African-American man being imprisoned wrongly.  Amy and Kamala cannot say the same.  So it's a funny kind of 'feminism' that thinks you can honor Amy and Kamala but exclude Tulsi and Marianne.

Ava: Ann, would you exclude Amy and Kamala?

Ann: Absolutely not.  Six women ran for the nomination, they all deserve credit.  But if one group wants to pretend that Marianne or Tulsi needs to be excluded for some idiotic reason, then let's be logical about who we exclude.  But, no, I wouldn't exclude them.  I was proud of Elaine, for example, during the campaign when she would note that she was not going to vote for Kamala Harris because Kamala was too far to the right of her, but that she wanted to post about something Kamala had done that impressed her.  And Rebecca did the same with Amy Klobuchar.  I don't have to vote for someone to find some trait or detail in them worth praising.

Trina: Good points.  And let's be clear, we have all been taught about men in history.  Sometimes only about men.  And these men are not paragons of virtue.  Why do we have to worship women for them to be historical.

Ruth: And this is women's history month.

Trina: I hadn't even made the connection.  Good catch. And to go back to this notion of four women to applaud in 2008 and six this year, women vary.  There is no one woman.  Why do we expect them to be all the same?  Tulsi, Marianne and the other four -- Kirsten, Kamala, Elizabeth and Amy -- to be perfect or to be our personal voice.  That's not what we should be expecting.  Women are diverse.  And I'm sorry -- it was Elaine, right, who brought up Ferraro?  She's right.  We, on the left, expected all women to be happy about Ferraro.  And they should have been, it was historical.  We need to be able to celebrate the historical.  It doesn't mean you're going to vote for this person or that.  It does mean that you say, "Yeah, that's historic."

Dona: Kat's "I can sort of relate to Ashley Judd" talks about being able to grasp Ashley Judd's disappointment over Elizabeth Warren's withdrawal from the race.  And I agree with Kat about it's not a grieving moment for me either.  I'm sad.  And I agree Elizabeth would have made a great president.  But I think, for Kat and me at least, the scars of 2008 are still there.  So, as a result, for me to grieve, it's going to have to be a lot more going on.

Kat: So true.  And I think 2016 was easier for Hillary because she and three other women -- Rosa, Cynthia and Sarah -- were front and center in 2008.  I think Hillary's 2016 run made it easier for the six women we're talking about right now.  Every bit helps and the road is being paved.  At least, I hope that's what's happening.

C.I.: Agreed.  Let's do a positive and a negative of the six women's campaigns.  Who wants to start?

Trina: I'll go with a positive about Elizabeth Warren.  Somewhere around the first debate of 2020, she became the strongest onstage in debate after debate.  She wasn't just better at explaining her positions and policies, she was better than anyone on the stage in terms of steering the debate and raising issues.

Ava: Can I jump in?  I agree with Trina but I want to note that Elizabeth was completely shut out by Gayle King and Norah O'Donnell.  They were the worst moderators, they are both friends with Michael Bloomberg and when Elizabeth brought up the very real issue of on the job harassment, they didn't want her to discussing that and they pushed her topic to the side and rushed over to 'electability.'  I was offended watching and I want to be on the record calling it out.

Trina: I fully agree.  In fact, let's put Isaiah's THE WORLD TODAY JUST NUTS "The Not Us Gals love Charlie Rose."

not us gals

Trina (Con't): And let's note the "Iraq snapshot" the morning after the debate when C.I. called out those awful moderators.  Now let me do the negative on Elizabeth.  When she was attacked on Medicare For All regarding what's-the-cost, she came out with a plan and then when that was attacked, she began backing off.  Sorry, I don't need her.  I don't need any politician who will not fight for what America needs and that is Medicare For All.  This isn't a minor issue.  This isn't a want -- it's a need.

C.I.: Yes, I agree. And Trina wrote, in real time, "Elizabeth Warren, I don't need you" about Elizabeth going wobbly on Medicare For All.   Who do we want to do next?  Kamala?  Elaine, you wrote about her in "Kamala."

Elaine: Sure, I'll grab Kamala Harris.  Kamala the candidate was someone who spoke clearly.  I would often agree with her in the debates.  She might have become the woman her words portrayed.  There's the whole fake-till-you-make-it school.  But, and here's the negative, she has a history that's never going to be 'of the people.'  She was a prosecutor.  That's never going to make for an easy run in the Democratic Party.  Anyway, I think Ruth wanted to take Senator Kirsten Gillibrand.

Ruth: Yes, I did, thank you.  Senator Gillibrand was met with open hostility.  People -- mainly men, but some women -- who can't address or deal with what Al Franken did need a fall guy and they have made it her.  The most offensive things were written about her in Tweets and elsewhere.  I do not feel she was given a chance and I do not feel that the media cared to cover her.  She has been a fighter in the Senate.  She stood, for example, with women veterans at a time when then-Senator Claire McCaskill betrayed them.  Senator Gillibrand fought repeatedly for women veterans.  The press really was not interested in it.  But you can refer to the March 6, 2014 "Iraq snapshot" to see what you should have already known -- and would have if the press had done their job.

C.I.: And negative?  Silence.  Okay, I'll toss this out -- and I really love Kirsten, she is a fighter.  I agree that the press did not cover her correctly.  But she was the candidate and she knew, going in, that the press was not friendly to the issues that matter to many of us including her.  So I would say one negative on her was not anticipating the obvious and having her campaign ready to address it.  If there's a lesson with regards to Kirsten's campaign it's that the issues that matter are not going to be covered by the media.  You have to be prepared to take on the media and you have to control the message of your campaign.  Rebecca, you probably covered Amy Klobuchar more than anyone in the community.  Did you want to include the observations you made in "sexist media covers for joe biden again"?

Rebecca: That's probably a good place to start.  I am not a fan of Amy's but the press repeatedly went after her or short changed her.  In the post that C.I. referred to, I was talking about a moment in a debate.  Amy Klobuchar has the floor.  Let me throw in the transcript:

KLOBUCHAR: But the way we do it -- the way we do it is having someone leading the ticket from a part of the country that we actually needs the votes. So I have long supported the assault weapon ban. I am the author of the bill to close the boyfriend loophole that says that domestic abusers can't go out and get an AK-47.
BIDEN: I wrote that law.
KLOBUCHAR: That bill, along with -- you didn't write that bill. I wrote that bill.
BIDEN: I wrote the bill, the Violence Against Women Act...
KLOBUCHAR: OK. You did you that.

BIDEN: ... that took out of the hands of people who abused their...
KLOBUCHAR: OK. We'll have a fact check look at this.
BIDEN: Let's look at the fact check...
KLOBUCHAR: Oh my goodness.

Rebecca (Con't): As the exchange was 'fact checked,' time and again the press went with 'they were both right.'  No.  Amy was talking about a bill she did.  Joe interrupts with "I wrote that law."  No, he didn't.  He wasn't in the Senate at that time.  It was Amy.  And a sexist press was more concerned with covering for Joe than in calling the truth -- even in a fact check.  I honestly give Amy credit for not exploding over the way Joe and Tiny Pete attacked her -- attacked her over and over.  Ann?

Ann: As with Kamala, and as I said earlier, both women -- Amy and Kamala -- have a history that includes the imprisoning of the innocent.

C.I.: Who wants to cover Marianne Williamson?

Marcia: I will.  Marianne is an author, a business person and a guru to many -- including Oprah.  As a result, she wasn't taken seriously by the press.  I don't get how someone who actually motivates people is less serious than a professional jerk like Michael Bloomberg.  Women are held to a different standard.  Marianne consistently raised real issues and asked tough questions that went to the heart of who are we and who do we want to be.  She never wasted a moment in a debate and they were better because she was on stage.

C.I.: And negative?

Betty: I'll go.  We all thought she did a great job.  If there had to be a criticism, I'd say she wasn't prepared -- or maybe she didn't care -- for the mockery.  She wasn't given much time in the debates so I know she didn't have a lot to spare but maybe if she'd made a joke on the debate stage?  She just struck me as Barbra Streisand's character Katie in THE WAY WE WERE.  When Katie's giving that speech and it's really reaching the other students but then they do that prank on her and she loses them?  And someone, HubbelL?, says if she'd laughed or made a joke then she would have had them back?  I feel that way about Marianne.

C.I.: We've got one candidate left.

Dona: Tulsi.  She gave good interviews.  I don't know a nice way to say it.  She self-presented as anti-war.  But in the debate on the last night of July, she had the chance to go after Joe Biden and she wasted on Kamala Harris.  I don't care that she went after another woman.  I care that she went after low hanging fruit.  No one in their right mind ever thought Kamala was going to get the nomination.  She had problems with her prosecutions, she had barriers she had to overcome in the race, she was one of six women so she didn't get the kind of attention Hillary did in 2008 when Hillary was the only woman seeking the nomination.

Trina: I would agree with Dona.  That debate turned a lot of people on her.  She could have gone after Kamala, as she did, and still gone after Joe Biden.  But she didn't.  She let him off.  She let him off so badly that Jake Tapper took it back to her and gave her another chance.  And she offered Joe had apologized.  I don't know, is that 'aloha'?  To me, it's just bulls**t.  And then she made it worse by going all over the TV in the days after minimizing Joe's actions.  Joe is a War Hawk.  He has not apologized for the Iraq War he has said he's sorry Bully Boy Bush tricked him.

Ava: He's not apologized for overturning the vote of the Iraqi people in 2010.  They voted thug Nouri al-Maliki out as prime minister.  Joe was part of the decision to overturn that vote.  You could have a united Iraq, seeking an Iraqi identity and moving forward.  Instead, Joe gave four more years to Nouri and, as a result, you have the rise of ISIS in Iraq.  It's not just his vote in 2002.  And Tulsi made clear that she's not anti-war with her actions.  That's when we washed our hands of her.

Betty: And we called that nonsense out in this community, C.I. especially.  But you had people like Glen Ford of BLACK AGENDA REPORT who, after that debate, would continue to call her 'anti-war' -- did he watch the debate he was writing about?  That was shocking to me, to watch her defend Joe Biden, to lie for him.

Elaine: I am still upset over that debate and over her refusal to call out Joe.  Let's be very clear, Joe was always a threat to people who wanted change.  Instead of confronting him and doing real damage to his run,  She not only wasted her time on stage in the debate, she wasted the chance to take out a War Hawk.  In real time, we all called that out and now, in March, we're only more correct.  Joe was the one she needed to focus her fire on.  Take out Kamala, don't.  But focus on Joe.  Instead, she gave him a pass and then made it worse by lying for him in the days that followed.

C.I.: So should she be in the debate?  I say yes.  So does one of the six women who campaigned.  We were just talking about Marianne and, last night, she Tweeted the following:

C.I. (Con't): I've made clear my stance on this.  There are three people still running for the nomination: Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden and Tulsi Gabbard.  Tulsi belongs on the stage.  Anyone disagree?

Kat: I think we all agree on that.  She needs to be on the stage.  She's not going to help end any wars and she's not going to be anti-war and she'll probably be up there defending Joe again.  But she is in the race still.  Three people are not too many candidates to have on one stage.  She has met the rules as they are in place -- so now they want to change them -- to qualify.  She should be on the stage.

Ann: I would agree with that.  And what does it say about the leadership of the Democratic Party that when a woman of color meets the rules, the party changes the rules.

Ruth: They were happy to change the rules to include Michael Bloomberg but, with Tulsi Gabbard, they want to change the rules to exclude her.

Rebecca: And to stress this again: None of us expect that she will suddenly take on Joe Biden.  We are not expecting her to do or say anything that we're going to be thrilled over.  This is not about, "We love her! Put her on stage!"  This is about fairness and democracy.  C.I., could you name something that she did worthy of applause in her campaign?  I know we're all disappointed in that July debate.

C.I.: You're right and I don't think any of us took a moment for a positive on her.  So some positives.  She's made history by being the first female combat veteran to run for a major party's presidential nomination.  Second, she was one of the few candidates in the race who took housing seriously.  Elizabeth Warren spoke of overcoming various barriers in housing.  But Tulsi was the only one dealing with the issue of housing itself.  In California, for example, she was addressing the issue of various people -- including first responders -- who can't live in the communities they serve because the housing market has outpriced them.  She was looking at and discussing various ways to combat the lack of affordable housing.  She was a candidate who didn't run from publisher Julian Assange. She called out the persecution of Julian.  Okay, Betty and I wanted to include three songs in this roundtable.  We already have Tina Turner.  Now for the next one and Betty will explain it.

Betty: If you grew up on THE WIZ soundtrack, you know that song by Diana Ross that Ashford & Simpson wrote for the film.

C.I.: And Quincy.

Betty: Oh, yes, and Quincy Jones, he has songwriting credit on the song as well.  The song is "Is This What Feeling Gets."  It does not appear in the play, it was written for the film.  And it's a beautiful song on the soundtrack -- whether it's vinyl, CD, cassette what have you.  But where it doesn't appear?  In the film itself.  You hear a few instrumental bars and that's it.  Which is a huge shame because it's a wonderful song and a great performance from Diana.  The version we're using is not from the soundtrack album issued in the seventies.  Diana recorded all the songs from the film for a planned 1979 release.  In 2015, the album was finally released DIANA ROSS SINGS SONGS FROM THE WIZ.  It's a great album and you can read Kat's review of it for more: "Diana Ross releases a masterpiece (belatedly)."


Betty (Con't): There are two reasons we wanted this song included -- besides the fact that C.I. and I love it.  The first other reason is that Ashley Judd expressed her disappointment over Elizabeth ending her race for the nomination.  "Is This What Feeling Gets?"  That's a question some may be asking.  It's very hard when your candidate doesn't get the nomination.

Marcia: Right.  I was destroyed in 2008 when Hillary didn't get the nomination.  And people who sold her out then are people I still honestly don't forgive.  Crazy Ass Marjorie Cohen going around saying that Hillary was asking for someone to assassinate Barack Obama?  Oh, no.  I don't forgive that.  Keith Olbermann did the same thing and I don't forgive him either.  So if anyone's candidate has dropped out -- I don't care if your candidate was Pete -- I do understand your disappointment and, no, it doesn't fade overnight.  Whether I liked your candidate or not, I do understand your sorrow and/or anger.

Trina: And this is life.  We need to get honest.  It's not about a gold star for everyone.  In life, every day, there are winners and losers.  As such, we are all going to be losers at some point.  Our candidate of choice will lose.  We need to realize that.  That doesn't mean that you put yourself into an envelope, get someone to lick it and mail it away to nowhere.  Feel your pain, honor it.  I'm thinking about how all of us in this roundtable are supporting Bernie Sanders -- except Ann -- and how we may not get our way.  If that happens?  We just have to fight harder next time or figure out a better way.

Dona: And maybe that way is becoming a member of a third party -- whether it's the Party for Socialism and Liberation, the SEP, the Green Party, the Libertarian Party, what have you.  If you feel you are repeatedly denied a voice in your own party, it may be time to think about moving on.

Rebecca: Or time to stop thinking that electoral politics is the be all and end all.  There are many, many ways to participate in the political process, let's stop pretending it's just casting a vote on election day.

Elaine: Bernie not getting the nomination?  That will be awful if that happens.  Medicare For All is so sorely needed.  It is a need.  We've never been as close as we are now.

Trina: I can't believe that Joe Biden and the media have managed to pretend he's a real candidate.  I have no respect for Joe and I have no need to vote for him.  Do not come to me if Bernie doesn't get the nomination whining that it's my duty to defeat Donald Trump.  That's not my duty.  I'm a nurse, I know the healthcare system.  Medicare For All is the issue I have stressed at my website since I started it back in 2006.  No, I'm not selling out Medicare For All.  If Joe Biden gets the nomination and wants my vote, he'll have to earn it and the only way is to support Medicare For All.  Not ObamaCare which is garbage and which my state knew years ago as RomenyCare.  That's garbage.  We need Medicare For all.  It's not incumbent on me to bend.  I'm not asking for Joe's vote.  If he gets the nomination, he's asking for my vote and if he wants it, that's how he gets it.  I'm not voting for people who don't agree on basic needs.

Betty: Support!

C.I.: Let me play like I'm a debate moderator, "Ann, your name was invoked, would you like to speak?"  Trina mentioned Ann, and I'm joking about "invoked."  Trina didn't say anything against Ann.

Ann: No, she didn't.  First, I'm a Green.  I'm supporting Dario Hunter.  I've said before that if Bernie got the Democratic Party's presidential nomination, I would have to seriously think about it because I think he is a game changer and I think I would be seriously leaning towards voting for Bernie.  In terms of what Trina said about the issue, she's right there as well.  We can't afford to continue to pretend that corporate bulls**t named ObamaCare is serving the American people.  The coronavirus has just made people realize even more how much we need a real universal healthcare.  And it's not our job to bend to politicians.  They serve us.  They're supposed to bend to us.  They're supposed to serve us and meet our needs.  Elaine's "The unintelligent and bossy Chaunce DeVega" is so right.  I don't anyone -- especially not some entitled piece of male crap -- telling me who to vote for, ordering me who to vote for.  Who does Chaunce think he is?  Norman Solomon's mini-me?  My vote is my vote.  It's not Chaunce's and I don't need his tantrums or his bullying.  It's really past time that people started respecting the right of others to vote as they see fit.  2016's election has still not been accepted by a bunch of cry babies who have forced us to endure Russian hoax b.s and other nonsense to avoid addressing why Hillary lost.

Rebecca: And the refusal to address why Hillary lost is the reason Joe Biden's in the lead right now.  The party leadership refuses to learn.  And that may cause people to bail on the party.

Ruth: One of the big issues about Joe, that the press ignores, is how people are bothered by the fact that his fifty-year-old son Hunter is a Deadbeat Dad who refuses to pay child support.  And I am wondering why Bernie's campaign has not advanced that issue?

C.I.: They won't.  At some point, the 80s?, Bernie wasn't paying child support as well.  So it would strike some as glass houses for them.  I don't see it that way, Ruth.  Child support is a battle that was fought over many years.  It took a lot of work to drag our country to the point where we agree that fathers have to pay child support.  Point being Hunter in 2020 is not the same as Bernie decades ago.  Our society has evolved and wised up.  That Hunter and Joe haven't is shocking.  And we're talking about Hunter spending thousands a month -- renting a fancy car, paying $12,000 a month for a mini-mansion -- while not working and while insisting he's too broke to pay child support.  Broke is the new excuse, please remember. Prior to the DNA results, Hunter insisted that not only was the child not his but also that he had never had sex with the mother.

Ruth: I did not know that about Bernie.  It does go with what I have said in my commentary on Hunter at my site.  Like you just did, I draw a line between what happened in the past before society woke up and what is going on right now.  And Joe has raked in over $15 million since he ceased to be Vice President of the United States but he has not rushed to help his grandchild either.  That is not the past, that is not three or four decades ago, it is right now.  I do not believe in 2020 that I could vote for any candidate who refused to support their grandchild and who went around offering nonsense defenses of their hideous child who refused to pay child support.

Rebecca: Agreed.  That is hideous especially when Joe keeps trying to pimp himself as someone who will help families and help children.

C.I.: Betty, did you want to talk about the second reason for "Is This What Feeling Gets?"

Betty: Yes.  Trina started up in 2006 online.  Kat, Rebecca, Elaine and I in 2005, THE COMMON ILLS in 2004.  It's a very different online world now then it was then.  It's different than when Marcia started or Ann or any of us.  We make the world we live in.  I give C.I. huge credit for this community and for creating a space where women do matter.  That wasn't the case online years ago.  Women ran sites where they curried the favor of men.  That was the most important thing to them.  They worked in shout outs and references to this or that male artist or male bonding movie or other nonsense.  We have a responsibility to leave behind something better than what we found.  That's why we need Medicare For All.  That's why we need to address climate change.  It's also why our sites need to include women.  As late at 2008, we had PUMA sites -- supposed to be pro-women, right? -- doing Saturday blog posts about movies and those were always movies that either had no women in them or had women as minor characters.  And, let me be clear, this wasn't a post about "Go watch POSSE and check out how hot Blair Underwood is!" or something like that.  This was about living in a male defined world and passing those defined terms of male is better on.  That's toxic.  We are the only ones who can change our world.  And if we support inclusion, we start making inclusion real by the actions we take in our own lives.  Which brings us to our third and final song C.I. and I wanted to include in this roundtalbe, India Arie's "Get It Together."

Betty (Con't): That's a great song period.  It's also a great song about the power that we do have if we choose to use it.  If we want to live in a world where women matter, we need to be creating a world of our own where women matter.  And that's bringing us to the last section of our discussion.  C.I.?

C.I.: I'm glad Elizabeth Warren sees that she has impacted little girls around the country.  I think all six of the women have done that.  But I think sometimes we miss other aspects and I shared this with Betty, these six women impacted little boys as well.  In the case of what we traditionally recognize in the behavior of boys, these women have established in the minds of tomorrow's men that women can run for office, that women have every right to be leaders.  But there's another thing to.  Now if it helps you to think of a young gay boy, do so.  But grasp, that not all gay males are going to feel the same or think the same nor does this just apply to gay males.  There are boys -- of all kinds -- who are impacted by women.  They're not in need of a male character in the story to pay attention.  And I think we dishonor these progressive male children when we act as though Elizabeth or Tulsi or Amy or Kirsten or Kamala or Marianne only impacted little girls this go round.

Elaine: That's a very good point.  Certainly, the efforts of all six women will have major ripple effects over the next years.

Marcia: Yes.  And I think we can, "Get It Together."  Great song, by the way.  I like India but I wasn't familiar with that song.  And I love her new "Steady Love."

Betty: We talked about noting that one too because she just hit number one with it and it is a great song.

Marcia: It is a great song.  But, yes, we do have a responsibility to make the world better and, in our own worlds, to make sure that there is better representation.  For any reading this roundtable who don't know, I'm an African-American lesbian.  And I'm really not in the mood, please grasp this Norman Solomon and the rest, for any man to tell me how to vote this year.  Trina made some important points about winning and losing.  And learning.  And I think that if a woman artist -- Diana Ross, Joni Mitchell, Allison Anders, etc -- can't get acknowledgement from other women, how are they ever going to be acknowledged?

Ruth: Agreed.  And Marcia, at your site this year, you've covered the TV shows EMERGENCE and BATWOMAN which are shows with strong women and look at what's been covered in the past and covered currently, TV wise, at the sites of some of the women participating: THE NEW ADVENTURES OF OLD CHRISTINE, REVENGE, COMMUNITY, SMASH, SCANDAL, HOW TO GET AWAY WITH MURDER, WILL & GRACE, INDEBTED, CHARMED, THE EVENT, etc.  Or in 2018, when all the sites were covering books -- one community site would grab a book each week.  The most books by any single author was Alice Walker.  And you had books about Dusty Springfield covered, and books about Joan Rivers and Judy Garland, and just this wide range.  I do think we all make an impact -- every person on the planet --  and we need to be aware of that and honor that because our conversations -- at work or at home or out to eat -- are part of creating the world we want to live in and the world we want to leave behind.

C.I.: Those are all excellent points and I wish we could continue but I know everyone has to get on with their Saturday and I know we've spent some time on this roundtable already.  Ava, let me throw to you for any closing thoughts.

Ava: Sure.  I would just build on what was said by noting that women need to recognize other women.  That doesn't mean that you love Joni Mitchell so you can't like Ben Harper.  It does mean that you are just as likely to mention Joni as you are Ben.  It doesn't mean that you have to vote for a woman running for office.  It does mean that you take her seriously -- and taking seriously may result in harsh criticism.  That's fine.  It also means that you support the rights of female candidates to participate and, in terms of right now, that means you agree Tulsi should be at the debate.

"Iraq snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):
Friday, March 6, 2020.  Senator Elizabeth Warren drops out of the race for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination, some try to play feminist in response and just sport sexism, while, in Iraq, protests continue.

Starting in the US where the Democratic Party's race for the presidential nomination is now a three-person race.  Yesterday, Senator Elizabeth Warren dropped out.

Our work continues, the fight goes on, and big dreams never die. From the bottom of my heart, thank you.

That means only three people remain in the race: Senator Bernie Sanders, Iraq War veteran and US House Rep Tulsi Gabbard and War Hawk Joe Biden.

Exactly how much Elizabeth Warren's gender affected her run will be the stuff of months — or years — of study. There's already some analysis showing that sexism hurt women candidates in this Democratic field.

Don't talk about Elizabeth's gender if you're not serious about gender discrimination.  If you're serious about it, you'll be defending Tulsi from it.

If you're serious about ending it, you'll defend any woman who is targeted with sexism.

Was sexism at play?

Some don't believe so.

I would love in my lifetime to see a woman president but Elizabeth Warren did not fail to get votes because of gender... she was front runner until she had huge problem paying for her healthcare plan and then poll numbers hit the skids w/ that;women can win nominations:HRC

And Greta's got some good points.  There's also the Native American issue.  Elizabeth, once she realized she was wrong and was not Native American, could have made a joke to let everyone laugh together and end the whole thing.  Instead, she remained on the defensive about it.  That wasn't smart politics.

But, unlike Greta, I do see gender issues at play.  I see Joe Biden, for example, cutting her off in the debates, dismissing her, distorting her.  He did that with Amy Klobuchar as well and certainly with Kamala Harris.  This was a gendered response that he had and he should have to answer for it and so should the moderators who allowed it to take place.

Of the moderators, the worst were Norah O'Donnell and Gayle King who elected to dismiss Elizabeth and dismiss the discussion of harassment in the work place.  Yes, women can be sexist to other women and Norah and Gayle were an embarrassment.

Tiny Pete was condescending to Bernie, yes.  But that was nothing compared to the way he sneered at Elizabeth and Amy.  And he wasn't called on it by the press.  No, a day after the debate, he was seen as someone who'd really 'scored' by ripping apart a woman.  Contrast that with Chris Matthews attacking Elizabeth for asking about Bloomberg's history of harassment.  Elizabeth did not invent those charges, nor was she exposing them.  The harassment had been well documented by THE WASHINGTON POST.  But somehow, when Elizabeth is using that report, it's time to question her and attack her for believing a woman over Michel Bloomberg, as Chris Matthews put it.  First of all, THE POST had corroboration from others.  Second, a large pattern of harassment had been documented and it was not just one woman.

Sour Grape Girls?  They are sexists.  Here are two examples of filth and trash who ensure that gender discrimination will take place in future campaigns.

2016: "I'd vote for a woman--just not Hillary Clinton." 2020: "I'd vote for a woman--just not Kirsten Gillibrand Kamala Harris Amy Klobuchar Elizabeth Warren."

Thank you to Hillary Clinton, Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar and Elizabeth Warren for showing the world what it looks like when strong, qualified, tenacious women run for President. The world is a better place because of all of you. So grateful.

Do you get the problem?  Yes, I know Victoria Brownworth is a perv who thinks it's okay to look at the genitals of the underaged.  That alone should have had her evicted from the public square.  But notice what else she and Andrea are doing.

They're saying 'these women are good and deserve defending, the others don't.'

They pick and choose their personal favorites: Kirsten, Kamala, Amy and Elizabeth.

They ignore Tulsi and they ignore Marianne Williamson.

Marianne has built a business and she did that with brains.  You may want to dismiss her, you may want to insult her, but the reality is she is a very smart woman.  She used her campaign to highlight serious issues.

Tulsi?  I don't think any other woman who ran had a more equal division of supporters when it came to gender.  Men may have even supported Tulsi more than women did.

Six women ran for the nomination.  Only one remains.  In different ways, every woman who ran made a difference.  It's shameful and, yes, it's bitchy to act as though Marianne and Tulsi weren't in the race.  And don't pretend you give a damn about gender discrimination if you're not willing to recognize that Marianne and Tulsi brought something real and valid into this race.

Though not how I would word it, the next Tweet is a feminist Tweet.

I applaud Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, and Kirsten Gillibrand for running & continuing the fight for women presidential candidates. I will acknowledge Marianne Williamson & Tulsi Gabbard despite my disagreements with them on several issues.

This is a sexist Tweet.

Shirley Chisholm Carol Moseley Braun Hillary Clinton (actually won) Elizabeth Warren Kamala Harris Amy Klobuchar Kirsten Gillibrand They all deserve to be recognized for the many barriers they have broken and paving the way for the first woman President. It will happen one day

I believe Tulsi, the first female combat veteran to run for the party's presidential nomination, broke barriers and did so long before 2019.  Who the f**k asked you for your take on women, Jack from Boston?  Maybe just shut the f**k up from now on.    You don't know anything about anything and you have a Little Golden Book synopsis of women.  So just shut the f**k up.

If you're not getting how obnoxious and ignorant Jack from Boston is, you may be just as stupid as he is.  Where's Pat Schroeder on his list, for example?  Huh?  Blowhards who know nothing think they can discriminate against Tulsi and Marianne but throw out a few names and we won't notice?


And let's not forget our lefty men who harmed women this go round.  Let's stay with Elizabeth Warren.  It's sexism for Norman Solomon to attack her the way he did -- and he's still doing it with his latest garbage which reads like a warning to Elizabeth.  It was sexist garbage for him to propose months ago that she drop out of the race because she'd make such a nice vie president.  Others offered that garbage as well -- including David Swanson.  It's strange, isn't it, how these men never felt the need to offer the same advice to any of the men who ran for the nomination.

But when it's a woman's life, when it's her career, well the sexist pigs think they know best.  DICKWAD KNOWS BEST starring Norman Solomon.

I'm sick of it.

Unlike Greta, I do believe gender played a big part in the way female candidates were seen and the way they were Tweeted.  When Kamala Harris dropped out, for example, we noted that Michael Tracey did one Tweet when Steve Bullock dropped out but that he Tweeted nonstop with glee about Kamala.  That's nothing but hatred of women.  You can try to dress that up, but the reality will always be that his obsession and hatred shined through in that moment.

In Iraq, the protests continue.  And looks who's back.

Sadr calls on his supporters to resume protests in Iraq on Friday

Yes, Moqtada al-Sadr wants the protest to resume.  This after he wanted them stopped.  When the cult leader found out that he couldn't command Iraqis from Iran, that the protests would continue, looks like he decided to try to save face and pretend like he was on board.

BREAKING: Number of victims of protests in Iraq rises to 19

Violent attacks on the protesters haven't stopped the protests, coronavirus fears haven't stopped the protests and cult leader Moqtada wasn't able to stop the protests.

Protests continue in Iraq despite the use of violence to suppress them

The following sites updated: