Stop Insulting My Mother

by: Chris Bowers

Fri May 09, 2008 at 17:22

A diary that spent several hours on the recommended diary at Daily Kos today contains the following passage:

It seems that the vitriol will continue and the new targets are super-delegates. Clinton supporters are now emailing them threatening to vote for John McCain if Obama is the nominee and further are emailing debunked, or meaningless political and personal attacks on Obama.

While some of the Super's said they've been receiving emails like these for some time, they have said it seems there is a concerted effort on the part of Clinton supporters over the past few days as they have been deluged with these types of email.

I just have to ask, whose supporters are not "real democrats"? Whose supporters are being vitriolic and nasty?

Oy. Am I the only progressive bothered by making all the members of an entire group of people speak for the actions of all members of that group? Why is it acceptable online now to characterize all Clinton supporters, or all Obama supporters, as having identical political and personality characteristics? Even now, only two days after Obama has been proclaimed the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party and it is time to start building party unity, why are supporters of the winning candidate still stereotyping supporters of the losing candidate?

Even though I can't find the numbers at this time, I have heard it said that the number one determining factor in whether or not someone supports LGBT equal rights is not partisan affiliation, not religious affiliation, and not even age, but whether or not someone can count a member of the LGBT community as a family member or close friend. In this vein, when I read generalizing rants about "Clinton supporters" or "Obama supporters" online, I wonder sometimes if the people making those rants actually know any of the supporters they are stereotyping. Personally, I tried to take a hard line against such stereotyping on Open Left a few months ago, largely because my personal connections to many Obama supporters and Clinton supporters made such stereotypes nothing more than personal attacks against family members.

For example, here you can see two faces of hateful Clinton supporters--my mother and my grandmother:

More in the extended entry.  

Chris Bowers :: Stop Insulting My Mother
Yes, these are indeed nasty, vitriolic, bad Democrats. My mother is so vitriolic that when she was fired from her job as a middle school English teacher in 1972, simply for being pregnant, she sued the school district, won the case, and set a the legal precedent for all public employees in (I believe) New York State. Further, she is such a bad Democrat, that that she voted for McGovern, Carter (twice), Mondale, Dukakis, Clinton (twice), Gore and Kerry. And they will both vote for Barack Obama, even though she supported Hillary Clinton in the New York primary.

When I called my mother last night, she was pretty broken up. She asked me if it was true that Hillary Clinton didn't really have a chance anymore, and wanted me to tell her that there was a way Clinton could still win, or at least become President in 2016. In fact, even though she had not contributed to a political campaign in thirty years, my mother said that when Clinton asked for money after winning the Pennsylvania primary, she felt compelled to do so. The last time my parents contributed to a political campaign was when, in 1975, at the age of 27, at the urging of my mother, my father attended a $15 a plate breakfast fundraiser for Jimmy Carter in Rochester, NY. More than thirty years later, Hillary Clinton brought my mother back into the activist process. Truly, these Clinton supporters are horrible, vitriolic bad Democrats.

My grandmother voted for all of the same candidates my parents voted for above, plus Humphrey, LBJ, JFK, Stevenson (twice), Truman and FDR (twice). Back in October of 2006, I stopped by to see her during my tour of Update New York House districts. When I arrived, I brought in her mail, which included a piece of direct mail supporting Tom Reynolds' re-election campaign. As soon as she saw the word "Republican," on the mailer, she smiled at me, said "Oh, a Republican? I won't be needing this," and threw it out. She ended up voting for Jack Davis, of course, just as she had done in 2004. Beyond any of our losing candidates that I have listed so far, you really have to be a strong, ultra-partisan Demcorat to suck it up and vote for Jack friggin' Davis. Until last year, at the age of 88, my grandmother still served as a Democratic judge of elections for her local precinct in Batavia. This year, she had to step down for health reasons.

I know some other Clinton supporters too, including the woman I have been dating for the past six weeks. If you read Open Left, you might have heard of her, since her name is Natasha Chart. Three weeks ago today, we attended an Obama rally in Philadelphia, where she took the following photograph:

Now, as you can see from the rest of the photographs Natasha and I took at the Obama rally, most of the people there were happy, friendly, and diverse. Many of them even brought their children. However, as is inevitably the case whenever a large group of people congregates (35,000 people attended the Obama Philadelphia rally), there are bound to be some assholes. The key is to not make all of the Obama supporters who attended the rally responsible for the offensive tee-shirt one guy was wearing.

And so the same can be said of Clinton supporters, too. Individuals are responsible for their own actions. Individuals, especially those who do not occupy leadership positions, are not responsible for the actions of groups to which they belong. The typical Clinton supporter is actually more like my family members than the stereotype that has been created online. They march against wars. They fight for equal rights. They work to build inter-faith cooperation. They work as local judges of elections. They grew up in the 1930's and 1940's when times were tough, and support a fair economy that works for all Americans. They are true blue Democrats and vote even for the lamest of all our nominees. They should not be held responsible for everything other Clinton supporters do, just as Obama supporters like myself should not be held responsible for everything other Obama supporters do. And really, since when should progressives stereotype anyone, anyway?

There is a saying that goes "the problem with war is the winners." Hopefully, that won't become apt for the end of the Democratic nomination campaign, now that even the national media concedes it is effectively over now. We need to be building coalitions and a more progressive America, not stereotyping our most obvious and immediate allies to include in that coalition. And it isn't even just Clinton supporters who we anger with broad generalizations, since stereotyping Clinton supporters feels like a personal attack on these family and friends of mine. I get angry when I hear about Clinton supporters being attacked.

I mean, seriously, don't talk about my mother that way. That just isn't cool.

Tags: , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Happy Mother's Day (4.00 / 8)
to those pictured, and to all Moms who vote, no matter whom for.

Yeah (4.00 / 1)
The whole Argumentum Ex Angry Email thing was kinda nonsense when Michelle Malkin did it, it was kinda nonsense when Paul Krugman did it, and it's kinda nonsense here too. You can get the Internet to hate anything.

The fact it does not necessarily reflect on the totality of Clinton supporters doesn't make HillaryIs44 any less funny, though.

Wow (4.00 / 4)
An Openleft romance, nice. Good thing cause Natasha's got a much nicer camera.

That sucks. (4.00 / 2)
I have a lower UID. Chris oughtta be dating me.

[ Parent ]
Woooooooo! (0.00 / 0)

"Don't hate the media, become the media" -Jello Biafra

[ Parent ]
ARGGGH! (4.00 / 5)
if I had seen that guy with the shirt I think I would have flipped the fuck out.

I am not generally a violent person, but when I see horrible stuff like that I see red and want to inflict serious damage.

But taking the picture and exposing the mind-numbing misogyny is probably a lot more effective - you are a better woman than I, Natasha.  

Come on, it's a pretty funny shirt (0.00 / 1)
And I say that as someone who likes Clinton almost as much as Obama, which is a lot.

[ Parent ]
no. it is not (4.00 / 12)
its incredibly offensive and demeaning.  

We are supposed to keep our mouths shut about the first woman to have a serious chance at being President, being called a "hoe"?

No, it is fucked up.  Women are objectified daily on  TV, computer, radio, magazines. etc.

Its not funny, it is incredibly depressing and demoralizing.

[ Parent ]
Lots of things are both funny and offensive (0.00 / 0)
For example: most comedy.  

"Don't hate the media, become the media" -Jello Biafra

[ Parent ]
Yeah (2.00 / 2)
I happen to like pretty much anything that people find offensive. Sorry if that offends you (really).

[ Parent ]
Maybe you don't get it. (4.00 / 8)
What that shirt says is, "at the end of the day, no matter who you are, no matter what you have accomplished, you are just a woman. Nothing you do will ever matter."

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
Rethink your humor (4.00 / 1)
I could see it potentially bordering on slightly funny if the terms were an equal degree of pejorative, but they're not.

"Bro" is a generally term of affection and inclusion.  "Ho" is demeaning.

The opposite of "Bros before Hoes" (minus the rhyming) might be something like "Women before Niggers."  I don't find that particularly funny, do you?  Would that be okay with you for someone to wear on a shirt?

Just because something rhymes and is edgy doesn't necessarily mean it's funny.  I have an incredibly high tolerance for edgy satire that flirts with inappropriateness, but this is just offensive, and not even funny.  IMHO.

Republicans can't fix our country; they're too busy saddlebacking.

[ Parent ]
This is not one of them. (4.00 / 9)
Demoralizing is not funny. A kick in the teeth is not funny.

Would it be funny to call Obama the n-word? It would certainly be offensive, right?

This is no different, except that people like you, on blogs like this, somehow feel it is acceptable.

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
I was about to ask (4.00 / 3)
whether South Park would give you heart attacks, but after considering, the two aren't actually the same. South Park is funny because it's pretty obviously meant as parody. This shirt, on the other hand... I wouldn't rule it out entirely, but if it's not obvious that it's parody, I would assume that it's meant seriously. Which is not funny.

[ Parent ]
yep (4.00 / 1)
I love South park (athough not so much this season).  I also love Lil Bush.

What I hate is having to endure the "Girls Gone Wild" commercials during the shows.

To me, there is a difference.

[ Parent ]
The shirt is offensive... (4.00 / 3)
because it's demeaning to women.  Calling any woman in any context a "ho" is wrong.

Now, Chris, if you can just get Hillary Clinton and her surrogates to stop categorizing people, we'll be set.  Today I was phonebanking for Obama in Lexington, KY, and a lot of working, hardworking white people are supporting him.

[ Parent ]
I agree (4.00 / 3)
I'll second the incredibly offensive part -- and I say that as a guy rooting for Obama -- and someone who has liked Hillary for years but is somewhat pissed at how she's conducted her campaign.

I don't find insulting about half of society for no real reason to be terribly funny, and given the situation, it's likely to make things worse, not better.

[ Parent ]
actually (4.00 / 1)
calling a woman a "hoe" might be funny....a "ho" notsomuch

see how mad it makes me, I can't type straight.

Seriously though, I understand the humor in breaking down what is considered "appropriate" or "polite".....but there are some things that just reinforce oppression and dominance in a subtle (or not so subtle) way.  Its not funny, it sucks.

[ Parent ]
In my slice of the world (4.00 / 1)
"Ho" is a hip thing for girls to call themselves.  Admittedly that's what I glean from the 20-something young women I hang out with.  I'm 40-something so I'm pretty much out of the loop.

Anyway, it's possible that the T-shirt was meant to be offensive.  But it's also possible that it was more in the vein of the "bitch is the new black"; "black is the new president, bitch" SNL exchange.

I'd like to think that the younger generation is just over the "I'm so offended by words" syndrome and is in the business of fighting against 'hate' words by co-opting them.

At any rate, we really need to get out of the business of assuming we know what other generations/slices of the electorate mean by certain words.  Obama says McCain has lost his bearings, which in Obama's usual usage just means that McCain isn't adhering to the high road very firmly.  But I learn from older people that "losing one's bearings" is a way of referring to senility.  I wouldn't have known that.  Had I used the term and then gotten slammed for ageism, I'd have been seriously falsely accused of intentions I didn't have.

Here's hoping that this campaign is going to give our overly sensitive sensibilities a firm jostle and we can get back to the business of cutting each other a bit of slack.

[ Parent ]
Except that the (4.00 / 5)
shirt is anti-Hillary?

That seems like a pretty big piece of context to me. I seriously doubt the shirt is meant to say "Hillary is a hip, young person like myself."

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
I still wouldn't judge so quickly (4.00 / 1)
If you took the second part of the SNL exchange by itself it wouldn't sound so good, either.  But it was a back and forth between Tina Fey and whoever the guy was who gave the reply.

In this case you have to know whether 'ho' is considered more derogatory for women than 'bro' for black is.  Maybe it is.  But like I said, the girls I know wouldn't hear 'ho' as an insult.  So what's this guys experience with the word and the way it's usually received?  You don't know.  So why get all angry about it before finding out?

[ Parent ]
"Bro" means brother. (0.00 / 0)
How can that be demeaning? In what obscure subculture is "brother" an insult?

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
In some right wing circles (0.00 / 0)
to refer to the 'brothers' is a pretty dismissive thing to do.  It all depends on the underlying attitudes of the community.  And it depends on whether the word is meant as a direct slur, or whether it's meant as a joking way of trying to undermine the slur.  

Try it this way, I rather doubt that it means that Hillary is a whore in the sense you seem to be taking it to be.  The urban dictionary that you cite below shows that the word has a wider range of meaning -- and that the phrase is really just a way of saying that the guy should hang out with his buds and not go out with his girl.  In this case the main meaning would be that he's standing in solidarity with the guy he perceives to be one of his own and not with the girls.  If you want to be offended by that, fine.  Lots of Hillary supporters would plainly prefer to be in solidarity with one of their own and not with the black guy.  I don't see how the underlying stances are any different.  And I would no more ascribe sexism to the former than racism to the latter.  

And the rule of charitable reading -- which would greatly elevate our discourse -- would say that if there is a benign way to read such words we should take it.  There's enough real hatred out there without us having to parse every utterance for its potential offensiveness.  

[ Parent ]
The picture was taken at an Obama rally. (4.00 / 3)
So obviously, the young man in question must be a rightwinger!

Seriously, would you twist yourself into such pretzels defending someone who called Obama the n-word?

If not, why not?

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
I thank you (0.00 / 0)
for your post.  You said what I wanted to, in a much better way than I would have.  You are spot on.  By being able to claim racism, sexism, etc., it gives politicians the ability to ignore the issue that was presented to them in the first place and quickly gets people arguing about who said what and what it meant, instead of the issue of Hamas, for example.

[ Parent ]
??? (4.00 / 1)
I am an Obama supporter.  I do not think the Obama is sexist.

The issue that was presented in the first place was that the shirt was offensive and sexist.  That is what we are arguing about.  Sexism was the issue.

[ Parent ]
I agree (0.00 / 0)
the shirt was offensive, just to be clear.  I wasn't trying to be critical of anyone here.  I just think that we spend so much time talking about what offends and is distasteful to some and not to others that it takes away from other issues.  Take McCain's statement about Obama and Hamas.  Obama replies saying McCain has lost his bearings.  McCain claims ageism.  Now people are talking about ageism and if that is what Obama meant, instead of McCain's original statement and what Obama said as his reply that he and McCain's position is identical on Hamas.  Is this not a distraction?  

[ Parent ]
What are there (0.00 / 0)
30 some posts discussing whether the shirt was offensive?  Exactly what point does it serve?  I'm not trying to ignore sexism or any other ism, I just believe that politicians have learned to throw out an ism and let people argue about it and hope they forget what the other issue was to start with.  

[ Parent ]
Basically, yeah. (0.00 / 0)
Maybe you really are in the weeds here and can't follow what's going on. I'll catch you up.

This is not a thread about Hamas, or McCain.

It is about the Democratic primary, and how supporters of each candidate have been demonizing each other.

To illustrate how unnecessary and counter-productive this is, Chris Bowers posted a picture of a couple of "evil" Clinton supporters, his mother and grandmother. He also posted a picture of pro-Obama asshole, wearing a shirt that calls Senator Clinton a whore.

The point being, there are nice people who are pro-Clinton, there are nasty people who are pro-Obama. Therefore we should not jump to conclusions about someone character just because of the candidate they support.

Hope that helps.

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
Gee thanks. (0.00 / 0)
I got all that.  You said one Chris's point is how unecessary all of the demonizing is.  You aren't demonizing this guy for his shirt?  Do you know him?  I don't like the shirt, but I don't know the guy and won't call him an asshole for wearing it.  You say we shouldn't jump to conclusions about a persons character based on who they are supporting, but it's ok because of some stupid shirt they wear?    
My point on Hamas was to say that often times all the discusion of isms, leads us away from other issues that are just as important and it is used by politicians to distract us from those issues.  

[ Parent ]
Any man (4.00 / 1)
who calls women whores is an asshole.

It's not complicated.

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
did you ingore the posts (0.00 / 0)
about the younger genrations use of that word.  I don't agree with it, but it appears to me that the younger generation uses the word.  Much like younger AA's use of the n word.  I find both examples in poor taste, but I don't know that they are intended to be hateful or harmful to others.  You are well within your rights to be offended by it.  To my other point, do you disagree that these discussions can distract us from other issues, that our government might actually be able to do something about?

[ Parent ]
Okay (4.00 / 1)
I have said this three times, in three different ways, and still no one has answered me.

You say "the younger generation" likes to use the word ho.

Well the "younger generation" also likes to use the n-word.

Does that make it okay?

If a WHITE Hillary supporter wore a tee shirt calling Obama the n-word, would that be okay?

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
I didn't say I agreed with it (0.00 / 0)
I'm just pointing out the fact, that they use it and for the most part seem to be ok with it.  You want to educate them on the negativity of those words and tell them why they shouldn't use them, have at it.  I just don't think you can label them assholes for using words that many others in their generation don't seem to find offensive, even when it offends you and me.  What if the HRC supporter was wearing that shirt and was also black?  

[ Parent ]
Why would a Clinton (0.00 / 0)
supporter call Clinton a whore?

You stopped making sense a long time ago.

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
Sorry (0.00 / 0)
I wasn't clear on that.  You had stated something about a Clinton supporter wearing a shirt that had the n word on it.  What I meant was, what if that supporter was a young  black man.  Better yet, what if the person in Chris's picture was a female?  My point is, maybe to that person the word hoe (or the n word) doesn't carry the same negative conotations for them as it does to you and I.  

[ Parent ]
Yes, this is very helpful: (0.00 / 0)
"Most used as a trump card by your bros when they feel you are becoming whipped or that your hoe is a slut and a bitch"

By whipped I assume they mean pussy whipped? That is the complete expression, yes?

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
Who's calling who? (4.00 / 1)
I get the point you're making, but it makes a big difference whether the young women call themselves a ho or whether someone else calls them that.  Same with the N word; it's a different thing if a black guy chooses to call himself that or if I (white woman) choose to do it.  Context matters.

I'd say, check with Hillary and see if she feels comfortable having people refer to her as a ho.  

Republicans can't fix our country; they're too busy saddlebacking.

[ Parent ]
The shirt... (0.00 / 0)
Is a mockery of the term

Bros before hos doesn't mean "African Americans before women," or "men before women."  Instead, it's a saying to show that your good friendships (your bros) come before any women who might be in your life (the hos).  The terms, despite their original gendered meaning, can really be used by men or women.  

Any "humor" the shirt has is based upon, as far as I can tell, Obama being a "bro"!  Thus, Hillary must be a ho.  But it loses any connection to its original meaning.  

So yeah, this shirt sucks balls.  

[ Parent ]
There is no level of interpretation (4.00 / 1)
at which this is okay.

Even if "bros before hos" means "friendship with men should come before the women in your life" what is that saying?

It displays a very arrested development view of gender relationships, it says that men must stick together AGAINST women, because women are WHORES.

Do you really believe women are whores? And if so, how on earth can you self-identify as a progressive? It just makes no sense.

The best I can figure is, the young man in the picture is one of Obama's famous Republican voters, but what I can't understand is why so many Obama supporters on this PROGRESSIVE site are eager to embrace him and justify his hateful message.

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
I'm not saying... (0.00 / 0)
That I've personally used this term, but I've heard it used by a fair amount of friends over the years, even avowed leftists/socialists, though often at least slightly tongue in cheek.  I don't think any of them would wear a shirt like that though.  It's essentially fratboy humor.  

[ Parent ]
This is the same way (0.00 / 0)
That people who feel it's okay to appropriate black culture (Yadda-yadda Is My Homeboy, or ) or that using the word "gay" is an acceptable word for a joke or insult of another still feel like they can call themselves progressives. The same way people feel like they can defend Obama having anti-GLBT ministers with him on his campaign or they can defend Clinton's more, er, incendiary campaign tactics and still call themselves progressives. To me, they're all one in the same. There is a stretching of the definition of progressivism that is moving away from anti-racism, anti-sexism, anti-heterosexism and moving in the direction of economic justice and reformist policies in lieu of fundamental, societal change.

[ Parent ]
Sorry (0.00 / 0)
When I said appropriate black culture, I had another example of what I meant, but I forgot to paste it in. Try...hmmm, use of blackface on blogs or at parties.

[ Parent ]
"Ho's" (4.00 / 6)
is funny? Calling a US senator a "ho" is funny?

We have got a long way to go in this country.

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
It's not pretty when we're fed the old "feminists are humorless" (4.00 / 6)
schtick even in the netroots.

[ Parent ]
What's really rich is (4.00 / 3)
the point of the photo was to demonstrate that Obama supporters can be assholes.

So then a bunch of Obama supporters pipe up ... in defense of the asshole.

How clueless can you get?

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
Yeah (0.00 / 0)
Just like if there was a shirt that said "Keep Obama out of the house" and a picture of Obama in overalls, right? How hilarious. Wow, my sides are splitting now...**sigh**

[ Parent ]
It boggles my mind... (0.00 / 0)
that anyone thinks the guy wearing that short has something against women. It's clearly too funny to be meant seriously. Message to people who can't detect subtle humor: if something seems outrageous, it's probably not serious.

[ Parent ]
Then I repeat (4.00 / 3)
would it be "subtle humor" to call Obama the n-word?

If not, why not?

Montani semper liberi

[ Parent ]
In America today? (0.00 / 0)
It just may be considered ironic to say something like "Obama is my n*gga". It's disgusting and wraps itself in the self-congratulatory drapes of "un-PC"-ness, but I think it's not nearly out of the realm of possibility. In fact, I would not be surprised to hear the same gentleman say something to that effect.

[ Parent ]
I found it funny (4.00 / 1)
But then again I have an offensive sense of humor.  

The argument that it isnt sexism is stupid though.  Young guys are taught to hate anything feminine or womanly about themselves so it is unsurprising when some take the next logical step in those teachings.

The liberal wiki
Send an email to

[ Parent ]
Agreed about the DKos diary. (0.00 / 0)
I wish someone would write what you just wrote on the front page of DKos.

Here's to that (4.00 / 1)
No purpose is served by fighting a battle that's over with. It reminds me of William Faulkner's South, or confederate clubs still fighting to put their flag in the faces of the victors.

Polarization. (0.00 / 0)
This primary has become very polarized online, and there's a lot of people acted very poorly on both sides of the fence, and in ways I doubt (and hope) that they never would were it "in person".

I have good friends who support Hillary in this race. We kinda thrashed it out then moved on, agreeing to disagree.  They're good, solid Democrats, they'll vote for him in the Fall.

Hopefully that's true of the majority of Democrats out there. I think it likely is.

Here, here! (4.00 / 3)
I wrote in a similar vein this morning that a vote for one candidate is not always a vote against the other: "Voting for and against: Clinton / Obama edition."

I've been really dishearted by the lazy stereotyping I see creeping into coverage of the W.Va. (and KY) primary. Clinton supporters in West Virginia as covertly or, even, overtly, called racist. It's an false, counter-productive, and condescending attribution.

I want to turn out as many of Clinton voters as possible for Obama in November. Declaring all Appalachian Clinton voters racist is not only untrue, it also doesn't help that cause.

They call me Clem, Clem Guttata. Come visit wild, wonderful West Virginia Blue

Aren't you being a little picky here? (0.00 / 0)
I agree that we should not put all of HRC's supporters into a group that will not vote for Obama or are even highly disgruntled about Obama winning.  However, aren't you upset about the absence of one four letter word:  some.  Had they added some to 'Clinton supporters' would that have been enough to not be stereotyping.  I don't know the real intentions of this person's post, but I for one didn't have any trouble deciding that not all of the 15 million people that have voted for HRC are writing to SD's to tell them Obama can't win the general.  I also agree that the candidates themselves should not be held responsible for the actions of many of their supporters, however, Hillary herself is making similar arguements publicly.  Does that not give the green light to her supporters to do the same?  

I don't believe (0.00 / 0)
the Clinton campaign organized anything.  I think people are that pissed off, all on their own.  

The Economic Populist

I'm not sure I see the problem (0.00 / 0)
with the emails to the superdelegates.  They're big boys and girls.  The Party leadership is largely responsible for the debacle that is Michigan and Florida.  People can vote any damn way they please.  And they can petition their masters at Democratic headquarters any way they please as well.  If they act like jerks, it will surely be counterproductive.  

Today (4.00 / 4)
I will see my mother for the last time at the last viewing and funeral.  She died suddenly late Tuesday night. She was also a lifelong Democrat who voted "D" in every election since she turned 21, in 1947.  I learned a lot about life and values and politics from her.  I've sort of inherited her penchant for watching our government at work on C-SPAN.  I valued her opinion.  She supported Hillary, long before I did.  She was a good and decent person who treated people well and wanted truth and fairness in this world.  

My father was the same way, a man who was an IBEW union member in Philadelphia all his adult life, along with his brothers, his father, my brother and cousins.  All of these people have worked for our party for decades and continue to do so.

My condolences (4.00 / 1)
Your mother sounds like she was a wonderful person.  It's a shame the best among us cannot live forever.  Our mortality is a reality, but at least we can do our best to keep alive, and pass on, the ideals of truly civilized people such as your mother.


Keep your mind free and clear, Donna Edwards, and don't sell your soul.

[ Parent ]

Open Left Campaigns



Advanced Search

Powered by: SoapBlox