re: #42 b.d.

From that post:

dailykos.com

Who the hell knows if it is him or not, I don’t think it is condescending enough to be him.

“Greenwald does us and himself a disservice by accepting the corrosive notion that we can not recognize that racism and sexism impact even the most powerful in our society, while at the same time being able to substantively critique powerful persons of color, women and other members of minority groups. It is not true.

“Greenwald also misunderstands the powerful and reasonable allegiance that minority groups will have towards one of their own who advocates and understands their concerns. Thus Greenwald dismissively writes “women in America are going to be completely invested in her candidacy”—as if Clinton’s longstanding and persistent advocacy for womens’ rights would have nothing to do with it. It was slighting and frankly, sexist. (Of course, this is also true for President Obama and African Americans.)”

This is important, because Greenwald tries to get us into the trap of thinking that no one inside a “group” ever criticizes one of their own.

That is really a condescending, wrong-headed assumption. If he got out more, he’d hear those criticisms. But OTOH, I think he’s being more than just dishonest.