The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: dutch508 on April 14, 2015, 06:31:48 AM
-
jeff47 (15,953 posts) http://upload.democraticunderground.com/10026501865
Why is everyone referring to Clinton by her first name?
When discussing male politicians, we generally use their last name. It's Rubio, not Marco. It's Cruz, not Ted. It's Christie, not Chris. It's Warren, not Elizabeth.
Generally, this only breaks down when there is an especially high level of derision for the person. Like W instead of Bush.
It's generally considered respectful to use a politician's last name. So why are we all using Clinton's first name? Bill Clinton's not in the press, so it's really not confusing. Plus first names can be added as necessary, like I just did.
Sure, Clinton's referring to her campaign using her first name because she's trying to seem more friendly and approachable. But we don't have to follow suit.
ETA: Perhaps a better phrasing of this is "Why do we give Bill Clinton exclusive use of their last name?"
Oh, for ****'s face. :banghead:
Um, could it be because there is already a infamous Clinton? What about everyone saying Jeb, or W?
jeff47 (15,953 posts)
5. And I addressed those two points above. (nt)
arely staircase (11,188 posts)
96. not really. More like you dismissed the obvious.
jeff47 (15,953 posts)
9. We're generally deriding Jeb. Not praising him. (nt)
:thatsright:
Erich Bloodaxe BSN (7,328 posts)
23. You 'covered' it, but people simply disagree with you, and think you're wrong. nt
jeff47 (15,953 posts)
31. Then such a person could post why occasionally using "Bill" is so hard.
There's only one Clinton in the news recently. Not that hard to add "Bill" in the relatively rare cases when he shows up.
and the leftists wonder why we think they are whiney little ****sticks?
PeaceNikki (23,219 posts)
28. I don't get it. Does OP want us to stop because it helps make her feel approachable or because it's disrespectful or...?
jeff47 (15,953 posts)
38. IMO if we should treat her like we treat every other politician. And if we call virtually every other politician by their last name. Even when Obama used Barack during his campaign.
sometimes you really got to wonder if they spend time thinking about what they post or if it is all in the 'spur' of the moment of drugginess...
former9thward (14,190 posts)
13. Why does her campaign use it???
:rotf:
jeff47 (15,953 posts)
43. No, I want to show her the respect I'd show a male politician. (nt)
Oh, **** me... :thatsright:
KittyWampus (48,331 posts)
146. The OP is almost certainly trying to do a "reverse sexism" play here
I don't think its reverse anything.
jeff47 (15,953 posts)
22. Apparently "Pantsuit" means massive misogyny now. Seems reasonable to ask why we strip her of her last name when we generally don't do that to politicians unless we particularly dislike them.
:fuelfire:
PeaceNikki (23,219 posts)
33. Oh, did you get a hide and started this to be petulant?
:lol:
Agschmid (12,578 posts)
78. Yup.
This whole OP is ridiculous...
forthemiddle (280 posts)
51. Honest question.
Is everything going to have a sexism connotation?
I am a woman, and a feminist, yet for a variety of reasons (mainly no more Clintons no more Bushs) I am not a Hillary Supporter.
When I point out that I think her age will be a detriment, will that be sexist? What about if I point out that I thought McCain, Thompson, and dole, and Reagan for that mater were too old?
alerted on as an obvious mole.
yuiyoshida (7,582 posts)
62. Hi...
I'm Yui! or you can call me Yoshida-san.
:o
jeff47 (15,953 posts)
75. Yeah, it's so totally sexist to refer to her in the same way we almost always refer to male politicians. It's far less sexist to strip her of her last name and exclusively use "Clinton" to refer to Bill Clinton.
jeff47 (15,953 posts)
113. Well after we entered the third dozen of posts complaining about people complaining about her clothing, hair and other trivialities, it seemed like we weren't going to get to any important issues. I forget, is this hour the time for the "Swear Loyalty Oath" post, or the "You Don't Have a Declared Candidate So Shut Up" post? I forget which one is on the even hours, and which one is on the odd.
We won't be getting back to important issues for about a year and a half.
::)
William769 (43,989 posts)
114. I have met & talked with Hillary on a couple of occasions.
The first time she was First Lady and I addressed her as such. The second time was at a small private dinner when she was a senator and I addressed her as Senator Clinton & she surprised me & said please call me Hillary which I did. My third engagement with Hillary was at a fundraiser at which time I referred to her as Hillary and we had a great conversation.
That is why I call her Hillary and I suppose why most people do because that's what she prefers.
Is this covered in your OP?
... You said when you met her, "It's an honor to meet you, First Lady Clinton?" I doubt that.
the other two are more believable.
TDale313 (2,949 posts)
123. So, are you implying it's somehow sexist To refer to Hillary Clinton the way she refers to herself and the way her campaign refers to her? That's quite a stretch. People have given you the reasons why they feel it's not that unusual- another president Clinton, it's how the campaign refers to her. You don't like that this more familiar term is being used, so you're dismissing those. I'd also say there aren't a lot of Hillary public figures atm, so when one says Hillary it's perfectly clear who they're talking about (same with Jeb. If Michelle Obama ever ran that might not be the case)
This op seems to be kind of belittling actual sexism that is unfortunately going to be a factor in this campaign to take a swipe at Hillary.
:fuelfire:
-
A little education from the sane world for you Jeff.
No matter how you try to prove your womanhood at the DUmp,the Krazy Klams will still hate you.
-
OK, no more Hillary, from now on it's Hitlery.
-
TDale313 (2,949 posts)
123. So, are you implying it's somehow sexist To refer to Hillary Clinton the way she refers to herself and the way her campaign refers to her?
It's not just the OP that's inferring it...it's the Krazy Klams on the interwebs who are on the look out for even the slighest insult to Her Thighness.
If they really want me to stop saying these things about Hillary, they shouldn't tell me that it bugs her! But we all know how overly sensitive her supporters are about her image. And now, it's her first name that's got their thongs in a knot.
According to this, some of Hillary's supporters are getting all huffy because *cue the nasally naggy voice*"You wouldn't call a man in political office by his first name, would you?"
Maybe. People called George W. Bush by his middle initial (and a lot worse besides). Totally depends on the man.
But as long as you're going to mention it, you could always just call her "Clinton" and end up with associated memories of Bill denying ever have "sex with that woman." Or whatever other distasteful things that the Clintons are known for. Heaven knows there are plenty.
So, don't call her "Hillary." Got it (going to ignore it). Can I point out that she's old and menopausal? 'Cause that's been done.
http://chicksontheright.com/blog/item/28236-don-t-call-her-hillary-you-sexist-pig
-
Oh, jeeeeeeez! Have a gander at the logo for her campaign:
(http://static.ijreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/hillary-logo.jpg.CROP_.promovar-mediumlarge.jpg)
Now, is that the first letter of "Clinton"? Or the first letter of "Hillary"?
And what was it her followers were chanting back in 2007 and 2008? Was it, "Clin! Tun!" Or, "Hill! Uh! Ree!"
DU needs a special "Hide" category for Intended Profundities that are Stoooooopid!
-
Well, all right then. 'Cankles' it is.
-
The jeffnumbers primitive is pantshooting and wiggle-waggling his armpits at his fellow proglodytes.
"How dare you speak the holy name, even as a blasphemer. You are not worthy!"
Advice for the trembling primitives: Whatever you do, don't say her name aloud three times on a moonless night. Cthulhu's got nothing on C'ankles!
-
Greetings, time stream residents. I am The Master, but you may refer to me simply as "The Master."
-
Interesting . . . The British media doing the job that the US media won't do . . .
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3038621/More-2-MILLION-Hillary-Clinton-s-Twitter-followers-fake-never-tweet.html
-
Interesting . . . The British media doing the job that the US media won't do . . .
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3038621/More-2-MILLION-Hillary-Clinton-s-Twitter-followers-fake-never-tweet.html
That's our Hillary, being dishonest to the core.
-
Every time I hear the Hildebeast's name, it reminds me of another Clinton lie.
She used to tell people her name came from her parents' admiration for Sir Edmund Hillary's historic triumph on Mount Everest.
Except...she was born six years earlier.
Democrats lie about everything, whether important or not.
-
Every time I hear the Hildebeast's name, it reminds me of another Clinton lie.
She used to tell people her name came from her parents' admiration for Sir Edmund Hillary's historic triumph on Mount Everest.
Except...she was born six years earlier.
They just wanted to beat the rush.
-
how a Hillary logo is made:
[youtube]http://stream1.gifsoup.com/webroot/animatedgifs2/1219713_o.gif[/youtube]
-
Of course jiffy poo got the idea that it's mean to call her that elsewhere:
http://www.redding.com/decodedc/if-hillary-clinton-is-called-hillary-in-stories-why-not-call-ted-cruz-ted-and-rand-paul-rand
(http://i624.photobucket.com/albums/tt329/foxfing/Hillary%20Describe.jpg)
none of this is what I call her
-
Hellary.
Pillory.
Shrillary.
Killery.
Hillary.
Quillary.
-
First 'Rodham,' now 'Clinton' missing from Hillary's pitch
First the middle name, "Rodham," disappeared, and now the last name, "Clinton," is MIA in Hillary for America's latest email to donors.
Campaign boss Robby Mook's offer to supporters to donate just $5 to become a "founding donor" never refers to his candidate "Hillary Clinton." It's just Hillary.
"Be a Founding Donor of Hillary 2016," it headlines. "Please send a personal check made payable to 'Hillary for America,'" it adds.
Washington Examiner (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/first-rodham-now-clinton-missing-from-hillarys-pitch/article/2563386)
That didn't last long.
-
Washington Examiner (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/first-rodham-now-clinton-missing-from-hillarys-pitch/article/2563386)
That didn't last long.
In the same way she didn't talk to the military and staffers were not allowed to look her in the eye...it's only the unwashed like you and I that are not allwed to refer to Her Thigness as "Hillary".
Onlt the beautiful ones are allowed such an honor.
-
Washington Examiner (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/first-rodham-now-clinton-missing-from-hillarys-pitch/article/2563386)
That didn't last long.
Talking points are incisive insight today, and toilet paper tomorrow. But don't worry, the supply is almost infinite ... the supply of the gullible and credulous is a bit less so ... though dismayingly large.
-
Interesting . . . The British media doing the job that the US media won't do . . .
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3038621/More-2-MILLION-Hillary-Clinton-s-Twitter-followers-fake-never-tweet.html
That is too often the case these days.
-
That is too often the case these days.
In our defense, our news reporting entities have to do the same in reverse.
-
Can we call her a murderous, hypocritical, lying, cunning, lying, rape apologizing, rape enabling, self centered, ****?
Because that is a pretty apt description.
-
Can we call her a murderous, hypocritical, lying, cunning, lying, rape apologizing, rape enabling, self centered, ****?
Because that is a pretty apt description.
Facts are Racist Sexist!