The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

When I cast my vote for Carter and regretted it ever since, I am voting for McCain. Obama is Jimmy Carter, Junior. He is not presidential material. I've seen this before.

The fourth group stopped giving to the DNC months ago and will not forget by November.

I'll campaign for John McCain. Anything to teach Obama a lesson.

Voting for McCain will send a signal to the Democratic pary: don't take women for granted. It'll go down in the history books.

LOL Soon we'll be hearing about the "FOX News Democrats" - Clinton voters that got fed up with the media.

Obama has driven many Democrats into the arms of FOX news. That guy is such a winner.

Wow, looks like McCain is gonna win now. Oh well. I'll cheers to that.

Obama supporters are very angry people. Always insulting everyone, acting like they're so smart. McCain is much more laid back. He'll make a much better president.

Obama supporters are very angry people. Always insulting everyone, acting like they're so smart. McCain is much more laid back. He'll make a much better president.

FOrmer Democrat here. Now an INdependent and plan to not only VOTE for McCain, but to actively campaign for him.
obama in the White House is spooky. The meteoric rise from NOTHING of this empty suit
has clearly been carefully staged--but by whom?
Repeatedly, on his own campaign trail, he has never managed o come up with a better pedigree than "I was a prooud community organizer . . ." And THIS wants to run the US?
JEsus, I'd vote for osama bin laden before I'd vote for that vapid superficial lackey. AT least i KNOW what opsama's background and policies are--and he did not drop his pals when they became uncomfortable. Remember obama's famous quote (the one the pundits seemed to have forgot): "I would no sooner renounce my pastor than I would my church or the black community" LOL TWO DOWN, ONE TO GO????
THe man is a sleazy, backstabbing, oily user. BEWARE.
FORMER DEMOCRATS FOR JOHN MCCAIN!!!
John, reach across the lines and go HRC for your VP--you will win hands down

FOrmer Democrat here. Now an INdependent and plan to not only VOTE for McCain, but to actively campaign for him.
obama in the White House is spooky. The meteoric rise from NOTHING of this empty suit
has clearly been carefully staged--but by whom?
Repeatedly, on his own campaign trail, he has never managed o come up with a better pedigree than "I was a prooud community organizer . . ." And THIS wants to run the US?
JEsus, I'd vote for osama bin laden before I'd vote for that vapid superficial lackey. AT least i KNOW what opsama's background and policies are--and he did not drop his pals when they became uncomfortable. Remember obama's famous quote (the one the pundits seemed to have forgot): "I would no sooner renounce my pastor than I would my church or the black community" LOL TWO DOWN, ONE TO GO????
THe man is a sleazy, backstabbing, oily user. BEWARE.
FORMER DEMOCRATS FOR JOHN MCCAIN!!!
John, reach across the lines and go HRC for your VP--you will win hands down

Yeah, stop whining. Break free, leave your abusive relationship with the Democrats. Vote McCain.

Women who support Clinton have to stop whining about how they have been treated badly by the Democrats.

Carly Fiorina is an incredibly successful woman - and a Republican. Cheers to McCain for having her on board.

Obama is losing electorally, even though he's ahead nationally. Most polls show he is behind in Ohio, Florida, Michigan and Nevada. He is ahead nationally, but he is behind electorally.

I agree. Some weirdo pasted this word for word repeatedly: "I am a feminist, and there is no way I will support Obama."

I think the "The Trail" should track the origin URLs of the comments on this post and let us know the results.

I won't be surprised at all if 90% of these comments that claim they'll vote for McCain to "get back at the Democratic party" come from 2 or 3 URLs. The wording is too similar, the reasoning too similar.

Someone is trying to plant a meme.

Obama is already ahead of McCain in the polls. Please don't say older women are for Hillary, you don't speak for me.

McCain is not going to do anything for women but set us back. Why would any woman, or anyone who calls themselves a Democrat vote for that? Doesn't make sense.

Many women will remember the way Hillary Clinton was treated, and they will vote for McCain. Or Ralph Nader.

How sad but true. The Democrats are just continuing a long tradition of sexism.

It's gonna be fun watching the Republicans tear Obama apart. He deserves it.

Looks like McCain will win the election. Not only are women angry at him, but so are seniors. Who else will he anger in his quest to unite us ?

I am a feminist, and there is no way I will support Obama. I would rather see the feminist movement die than see Obama become president. I was really hurt that Clinton did not get the nomination. Now McCain gets my vote. I could care less that Obama is a champion of women's rights with a 100% rating from NARAL. I hope McCain turns back the strides in equal rights for women--as he has promised to do--for all I care.

I could care less that McCain laughed hysterically on camera when someone called Hillary a bit*h or that he has said Chelsea Clinton is so ugly because Janet Reno is her father. My bruised feelings are of primary importance to me and the ONLY thing that matters is ME. Until the Democratic Party BLINDLY rubber stamps all female Democratic candidates for President--no matter what rules they break or how often they lie, cheat, steal, race bait and assassination dream--This is what they get!

We will promise to swing the election but--just like the paltry few who showed up to demonstrate for Hillary's 'suffrage movement'--we won't make any difference whatsoever in preventing President Obama's victory.

The Democratic party treats us like a bunch kids. Nobody in the DNC stood up for Hillary when she was being slandered, and now they expect us to help out their messiah in November? No thanks: my vote is going to McCain.

Obama supporters tend to be young men, who generally have very little experience with women. In fact, they have very little experience with life, other than their Play Stations and Wiis.

Posted by: Janice | June 3, 2008 4:40 PM

WRONG! 2 MIN. SINCE YOU POSTED THIS AND THE FIRST PERSON WHO SAW IT IS AN EDUCATED WOMAN FOR OBAMA!

The sexism that permeates the Democratic party is now so glaringly apparent, that I cannot vote for Obama.

Obama supporters tend to be young men, who generally have very little experience with women. In fact, they have very little experience with life, other than their Play Stations and Wiis.

womenforfairpolitics.com IS A SCAM A GUY SET UP TO GET WOMEN'S NAMES AND E-MAIL ADDRESSES TO PROMOTE HIS CLOTHING LINE. DON'T BE SCAMMED!

The Democratic party has revealed its true colors: it loves women, as long as they shut up and support the male candidate. The Democrats and the liberal media should not be rewarded for their outrageous sexism.

Obama is a girlie man.

Obama supporters threatened to vote for McCain if Clinton was the nominee. Well, guess what ? Now that Obama is the nominee, millions of Clinton supporters will vote for McCain.

I am a feminist, and there is no way I will support Obama. I would rather see the feminist movement die than see Obama become president. I was really hurt that Clinton did not get the nomination. Now McCain gets my vote. I could care less that Obama is a champion of women's rights with a 100% rating from NARAL. I hope McCain turns back the strides in equal rights for women--as he has promised to do--for all I care.

I could care less that McCain laughed hysterically on camera when someone called Hillary a bit*h or that he has said Chelsea Clinton is so ugly because Janet Reno is her father. My bruised feelings are of primary importance to me and the ONLY thing that matters is ME. Until the Democratic Party BLINDLY rubber stamps all female Democratic candidates for President--no matter what rules they break or how often they lie, cheat and steal, race bait and assassination dream--This is what they get!

Michael Hatcher is behind womenforfairpolitics.com so he can fraudulently secure women's names, addresses, ph#s and e-mails for his new women's clothing business. Call the better business bureau and report him and the local media in OH and OUT him.

Domain Name.......... womenforfairpolitics.com
Creation Date........ 2008-05-28
Michael Hatcher
Address. 8226 Wooster Pike OH
Admin Email.......... mokey_p@msn.com
Admin Phone.......... +1.5132572268 Admin

Aeron Rane (California) and Michael Hatcher (Ohio) both 23 year old business partners of the national online clothing business, will be opening their first retail store and releasing the women's clothing and denim lines and skateboards.

"It just seem to fall into our laps at the rights time and we ran with the idea" claims Michael.

Hilarious, Obama likes to fight with girls! Hahahaaaa!!!

Aggreed, a vote for Obama will legitimize the sexism that pervades the Democratic party and the liberal media.

Carly Fiorina is an incredible woman. Let's see, who am I gonna listen to: Obama, who likes pushing girls around? Or Carly Fiorina, a role model for women. Gee, it's so complicated. My little female brain can't figure it out.

Obama is no friend of women. He just wants to be President, and if that means pushing a woman out of the way, he's fine with that. He's a typical "player".

Black people threatened to vote McCain if Hillary was the nominee. Why should women not do the same ? Oh, I forgot, because we should smile like good little girls and get with the program.

I'm so surprised to read ANY woman say that the only way to vote against discrimination of women is to vote for McCain. McCain is no friend of women, and voting for him is voting against feminism.

I am even more shocked that a woman would say she'd rather see feminism and women's rights die than see Obama elected. I'm going to assume that's the emotion of the moment speaking; and will optimistically believe cooler heads will prevail ultimately.

In the end, I truly believe that informed voters will vote based on issues and beliefs, which will keep them allied to the party of their current preferred candidate. That means no matter the outcome of the DNC nomination, those supporting one of the two Democrats will hopefully support the ultimate nominee.

To do otherwise is not only unnecessarily spiteful, it's cutting one's nose off to spite one's face.

If you plan to do this, I'd be interested in hearing you cite five solid platform issues of McCain's that you think better represent your priorities than the other Democrat.

You can also read my beliefs about the McCain campaigns efforts to reach women here:

http://momocrats.typepad.com/momocrats/2008/06/sidling-up-to-w.html

Obama's supporters are too young, and they shout and yell a lot. They are very unmanly. A bunch of kids. Do we want a bunch of kids running the country?

What's the deal here? It's all about a cult of personality - it should have been a women, it should have been a black man. What about the policies. One voted for the war, and both vote to fund it. Both have promised Israel our never ending support and tax dollars, and both are fine with the fact that 1% of the American population is in prison.
But lets just scream about sexism, racism yada yada.
This is how the country ends, this is how the country ends, not with a bang but a "duhhhh"

I am a feminist, and there is no way I will support Obama. I would rather see the feminist movement die than see Obama become president. I was really hurt that Clinton did not get the nomination. Now McCain gets my vote. I could care less that Obama is a champion of women's rights with a 100% rating from NARAL. I hope McCain turns back the strides in equal rights for women--as he has promised to do--for all I care.

I could care less that McCain laughed hysterically on camera when someone called Hillary a bit*h or that he has said Chelsea Clinton is so ugly because Janet Reno is her father. My bruised feelings are of primary importance to me and the ONLY thing that matters is ME. Until the Democratic Party BLINDLY rubber stamps all female Democratic candidates for President--no matter what rules they break--This is what they get!

If Obama cannot even unite the Democrats, how can he unite the country ?

A vote for Obama is a vote for women's submission. Forever after, it will be ok to push female candidates out of the way.
If we don't stand up to the sexism in the Democratic party, we will forever be taken for granted.

Obama is polarizing and divisive.

I agree, liberal men are very condescending. After slandering Clinton and her supporters for so long, they think they can talk to us about "the issues"? Not gonna happen. It's too late - millions of women will vote for McCain in November. The Republicans will rip Obama a new hole, and I'll cheer them on - with whiskey shots.

I am a feminist, and there is no way I will support Obama. I would rather see the feminist movement die than see Obama become president. I was really hurt that Clinton did not get the nomination. Now McCain gets my vote. I could care less that Obama is a champion of women's rights with a 100% rating from NARAL. I hope McCain turns back the strides in equal rights for women--as he has promised to do--for all I care.

I could care less that McCain laughed hysterically on camera when someone called Hillary a bit*h or that he has said Chelsea Clinton is so ugly because Janet Reno is her father. My bruised feelings are of primary importance to me and the ONLY thing that matters is ME. Until the Democratic Party BLINDLY rubber stamps all female Democratic candidates for President--no matter what rules they break--This is what they get!

We at MOMocrats.com certainly appreciate that the McCain campaign was willing to include us on a few conference calls. As my fellow MOMocrat PunditMom said, we wish the Democratic candidates would work harder to include women bloggers in their media events.

That said, we did not come away with a very positive impression of McCain's attitude toward women, or women's rights.

When one of our writers, who also writes for BlogHer, asked McCain a fair, thoughtful, legitimate question about a speech he'd given regarding a time frame for exiting Iraq, in lieu of a real answer, he very condescendingly replied, "Either you didn't read or didn't understand my speech. One of the two."

How's that for respecting strong, intelligent women?

A vote for McCain is a vote against feminism.

http://momocrats.typepad.com/momocrats/2008/05/why-a-vote-for.html

McCain may be a decorated war hero, but he is no champion for women's rights.

I am a feminist, and there is no way I will support Obama. I would rather see the feminist movement die than see Obama become president. I was really hurt that Clinton did not get the nomination. Now McCain gets my vote. I could care less that Obama is a champion of women's rights with a 100% rating from NARAL. I hope McCain turns back the strides in equal rights for women--as he has promised to do--for all I care. My bruised feelings are of primary importance to me and the ONLY thing that matters is ME.

Our voices must be heard, otherwise we will continue to be second-class citizens. Roe vs Wade is just one battle: the war against women is much greater than a single battle. The Democratic party is a sly perpetrator of sexism, and must pay the price. I will vote for McCain in November.

Ah, how condescending, liberal men demonize Clinton, demean her supporters, and now they wish to "educate" them about "the issues". Well, I ain't buying it. Obama must pay for his insensitivity and thoughtlessness. I will vote McCain, come hell or high water.

Joan:
As bad as this admimistration is, my most dreaded thought at the last presidential election was the fact that the Supreme court would be contaminated with cosevative idologists. What do you think the next attack on Roe v. Wade will be?

Nancy Keenan (NARAL):
We expect most of the attacks on Roe to happen in the states, in the form of anti-choice legislation that lawmakers will want hope to use to challenge roe before the Supreme Court. We are very concerned about everything from bans on other safe abortion procedures, to bills (of which we've already seen some) to force a woman to view an ultrasound prior to having an abortion, to new types of biased counseling, to outright bans on abortion. (This year alone, two states enacted near-total abortion bans that would take effect if Roe falls.)

The single biggest threat to Roe, however, is if there is a vacancy on the Court, particularly a seat held by a pro- or mixed-choice justice, and an anti-choice president is allowed to fill that spot. We are likely, at best, one vote away from Roe being overturned. Another Justice, like those Bush has appointed, would provide that critical vote to overturn Roe.

Christine:
Does the Supreme Courts decision to uphold the Federal Abortion Ban truly open the door for Roe V. Wade to be overturned? If so, is there anything we can do to prevent that from happening?

Nancy Keenan (NARAL):
Yes, since the Supreme Court has upheld the Federal Abortion Ban, anti-choice politicians throughout the country are already viewing this decision as a "green light" to interfere further in personal, private medical decisions. Keep in mind that Bush has appointed several anti-choice judges to lower-level federal courts, so the atmosphere is ripe for anti-choice groups to use the courts to challenge Roe.

Carol:
Many people I know educated and not, Republican and Democrat always say to me, "they will never overturn Roe" How do I explain to them without going into great detail, that this is what may very well happen?

Nancy Keenan (from NARAL):
The rights protected under Roe v. Wade are too important to take for granted. Let's take the Federal Abortion Ban decision as an example. Seven years ago, the Court struck down a similar state ban as unconstitutional. What changed? Bush appointee Samuel Alito replaced Sandra Day O'Connor and cast the decisive fifth vote upholding this ban. If another pro-choice justice retires, then THERE'S AN OPENING FOR THE FIFTH ANTI-ROE VOTE ON THE COURT. IT'S JUST THAT CLOSE.

I am a feminist, and there is no way I will support Obama. I would rather see the feminist movement die than see Obama become president. I was really hurt that Clinton did not get the nomination. Now McCain gets my vote. The feminist movement can go into exile for the next 8 years for all I care. I hope McCain turns back the strides in equal rights for women for all I care. My bruised feelings are of primary importance to me.

We will never vote for a bigot and an empty suit. Hillary supporter for McCain !!!! pass it on

"Yes. It IS all about you. Just like it's all about Hillary. Screw the party, screw the nation, if we can't get what we want we are going to pout our way to a Republican victory.

I have heard this sentiment so much it makes me sick. Are you people serious? You would rather have another GOP administration rather than a Democrat who wasn't your first choice?

That is beyond logic, beyond comprehension. If one of you could explain, please, please do, because I am absolutely stumped.

Frankly I think that Hillary is despicable. An obvious over-ambitious phony that I would never vote for as long as there was a decent option, but I would hold my nose and pull her lever if she managed to weasel her way into the nomination.

What is wrong with you people?!

Posted by: whataplace | June 2, 2008 11:37 PM "

I would rather turn it over to the GOP than to let arrogant people like you run the country.
And Obama is just as arrogant as you.
How DARE you browbeat the people who vote principle over Party, little narrow minded, sheeple, jerk.

"McCain will get to pick the supreme court judge who overturns Roe v Wade. By voting for him that will be exactly what the feminist get!"

John That threat is not a good reason to vote for Obama. I don't believe the supreme court will in the next four years over turn Roe v Wade. It is not as easy as some people think it is to overturn a landmark supreme court decision.

Obama supporters always claim that if don't vote for Obama then McCain is worse. I am no fan of McCain's but that logic doesn't fly with me. Even if Obama was elected, don't kid yourself. You won't see all this change. This country has been dug in deep with problems by Bush. It will take at least a decade if not more to dig out of it. And Obama can not change how things are done in Congress. There will still be the same old stuff going on in congress. Stupid bills will be passed and inserted in them will be pork belly items. That will not change with Obama.

The democrats have done nothing since they took over 2 years ago. Look at their new farm bill. Tax money for owners of race horses. What a joke. This country is in so much debt and so many people are suffering and the democrats give more tax money to big corporations who are making millions and to the owners of race horses. This doesn't make any sense.

Candidates from both parties have for decades campaigned on the theme of change. But the truth is, it never changes.

With all the talk of change, why is it that Obama has never specified how is he going to change things. Easy to say you want change but how exactly is he going to change things. He has never said how. It is naive to really believe that he will change the corruption and incompetence that takes place in Washington.

Posted by: John | June 3, 2008 12:19 PM

"Lets apply some basic logic here"

I disagree with you. I don't believe either Obama supporters or Hillary supporters should ever blindly support the other. Power brokers in the party may blinding support the party but I don't believe voters blindly support the party.

Right from the beginning Obama supporters have threatened if Obama was not the nominee that the party would lose the black vote and would take to the streets. That same threat has been given to super delegates. That is playing the race card.

"By the way Hill never played fair, she threw obama under the bus with her "I am ready, Mc cain is ready, All obama has is a speech in 2002.""

That is not a racist statement. It is a factual statement. Obama clearly does not have the experience that McCain and Clinton has. His past in chicago has nothing to do with the federal govt or preparing him to be president. I have a video clip of Obama stating that in 2004. Two years in the senate before he announced that he was running is a short resume. The same was said of Edwards in 2004. So this is not a black white issue.

"And lets not forget the key words electablity and patriot are code words for black man. There are huge racial undertones there, but does obama complain, sorry whine about it. NO way. Rockstars dont cry! "

I don't see those words as racial undertones. McCain talks about being a patriot due to his military background. You can't deny his military background. He has actively been involved in military and veteran issues for years. That is factual.

Electability is not a code racial word. The delegate maps show that Clinton could easily beat McCain and they show Obama can not. The party is suppose to be concerned with who is most electable.

Obama camp has played the race card. Just like the examples you gave, they always claim everything has racial undertones. Obama expects and demands that no one say anything about him. Funny how when the Wright tapes, etc came out, Obama's camp and his supporters did not see those words and beliefs as being hate speech and racist. Blacks don't have a monopoly on racism. I don't see Obama supporters denouncing the racism taking place in Obama's church for the past 20 years. They excuse it. If those type of statements were made about blacks, they would be in an uproar. And I would support them in their uproar. But sadly, I find Obama's supporters disingenuous as they don't have the decency to stand up and denounce what goes on in Trinity.

And what Obama is doing today confirms his chicago style of stealing of the election. He was afraid of again losing the last two primaries and has hounded superdelegates to come forward and announce in advance for him. Clearly this is being done to discourage voters from voting for Hillary today. How transparent.

Obama claims he wants change from the old style of politics. Check out his background and how he has run this campaign. It is old style chicago politics.

Obama gave a statement that he believed Hillary didn't mean anything by her Kennedy statement and we should move on past it but at the same time, his camp was emailing and sending the video to all of the media pumping up the story. How transparent.

Look how Obama won his senate seat. He got the LA times to open his opponent's sealed divorce file and smeared his opponent with sex allegations. Obama's camp masterminded this. But Obama claims he rejects the old style of politics. If you believe this, you will be sadly disappointed in the end.

A blog post that doesn't link to other blogs? That's not good blog practice, Washington Post. I wish you had linked to our site, MOMocrats (http://momocrats.typepad.com), because then readers of this post would not be misguided as to our reasons for participating in the McCain conference calls. We are a site that has always been extremely critical of McCain. The fact that they included us on their calls was at their own risk.

One of our writers sums it up quite nicely with this post:
http://momocrats.typepad.com/momocrats/2008/06/sidling-up-to-w.html

McCain is a misogynist whose anti-woman policies will be the cause of his overwhelming defeat in November.

Sincerely,
Stefania Pomponi Butler
Co-Founder/Editor
MOMocrats

Lets watch Mc Cain in his own words.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=GEtZlR3zp4c

If you are being objective there is no way you could vote for this guy. There is a lack of intelligence here that is troubling. Perhaps age has something to do with it, but i doubt it.

Linda,
McCain will get to pick the supreme court judge who overturns Roe v Wade. By voting for him that will be exactly what the feminist get!

"BREAKING NEWS WATCH FOR NEW TAPES TOMORROW SHOWING MICHELLE OBAMA AND FARAKHAAN TOGETHER RAILING AGAINST WHITES.....STAY TUNED......THE OBAMA TRAIN IS ABOUT TO DERAIL AGAIN...."

I don't think that the tapes will be released that quickly. I believe the republicans will wait until it is closer to the general election to release them to give a sudden death to the DNC. Serves the DNC right. It was no surprise how Kerry was swift boated. His past was well known and it was obvious it would be used against him. The same thing is happening here. The DNC used poor judgment nominating Kerry and they are using poor judgment nominating Obama.

Even without that new tape, which Obama supporters admit exists but they are floating excuses already in advance, anyone doing any research on O's church will quickly see that their white racism is part of their belief. Obama has stated the same beliefs in his own books. Looks like some interesting ads will be forthcoming.

I'm wondering why the media has not discussed O's trip to Pakinstan for 3 weeks when he was in college. No wonder there was such an uproar when his passport was examined.

The DNC deserves this. This should have been an easy election to win but the DNC is responsible for losing this election. Don't blame Hillary supporters. The DNC simply supported the weaker nominee with such baggage that will make people run to McCain.

Yes McCain has lots of shortcomings and some ill logical positions. But when compared to Obama, I think people will end up running to McCain. I don't think americans want the likes of Wright, Farakhaan, etc hanging out in the white house. Sounds like a great ad for McCain.

Not claiming that McCain has been a supporter for feminists but hopefully he will bring attention to what the DNC and the media has unjustly done to Clinton in the name of supporting a man.

Lets apply some basic logic here

If some how Obama was NOT the nonminee at this point..

Black men and women, old and young would be outraged, however they would not vote for McCain.

This same logic should apply to middle aged white women. Or anyone who thinks Hill was treated unfairly.

By the way Hill never played fair, she threw obama under the bus with her "I am ready, Mc cain is ready, All obama has is a speech in 2002."
Also from my point of view; It would seem harder to convice america that a black man is ready to be pres before the hill monster.

And lets not forget the key words electablity and patriot are code words for black man. There are huge racial undertones there, but does obama complain, sorry whine about it. NO way. Rockstars dont cry!

As a MOMocrat and a Contributing Editor for Politics & News at BlogHer, I'm not at all surprised that McCain is trying to reach out to women who blog about politics and the campaign. What surprises me is that none of the Democrats have been willing to do so on a regular basis. Both the MOMocrats and BlogHer have asked, and so far, only Obama has responded to questions. But none of the Democrats have invited women political bloggers to be part of their regular, ongoing press outreach.

If the Dems really want to win and not let McCain dominate this type of outreach, they should do so soon.

PunditMom
http://punditmom1.blogspot.com

Join womenforfairpolitics.com and sign the petition to encourage Hillary to take it to the convention where she can prevail. No one will be the nominee until late August at the convention where the delegates who are not really "pledged", they can vote for whomever they wish will vote to nominate the next Pres. candidate for the Dems. Their job is to nominate the most electable candidate for the general election. That candidate is and shall remain Hillary Rodham Clinton. Call them all and demand they support the better candidate, Hillary Clinton. Obama is unelectable.

The failure of the Democratic party to denounce the rampant sexism, racism, classism and voter disenfranchisement practiced by Barack Obama, his campaign and nasty supporters and the entire MEDIA is at their own peril. We will be voting for McCain in November if the Dems foolishly nominate an unqualified and unelectable Obama.

The Democratic party must learn a lesson. We will NOT stand for sexism,classism, racism and voter disenfranchisement. We will not stand for 1/2 vote for Michigan in Florida, 1/2 a person? It calls to mind the old, unacceptable Jim Crow laws when blacks were considered 3/4 a person. THIS 1/2 person/vote rule is even WORSE!

The Democratic party understands two things, money and votes. We have the power to withhold BOTH. DO SO, NOW. Thank you.

BREAKING NEWS WATCH FOR NEW TAPES TOMORROW SHOWING MICHELLE OBAMA AND FARAKHAAN TOGETHER RAILING AGAINST WHITES.....STAY TUNED......THE OBAMA TRAIN IS ABOUT TO DERAIL AGAIN........

If a woman has to vote for McCain because HRC lost, they are pathetic. When did the race become about whether a woman won or not. Not to mention, just because she lost we will vote for the other guy who will add more supreme court guys to the bench who will overturn Roe V Wade. Give me a break. Are you so stupid you don't realize your statements. Who stole it away from Clinton in the first place? Was it the early voters? Was it the early Caucus states that she did not actively participate in? Was it the 1.2 million internet donors? Was it the newly regiestered young voters? Who stole it from the presumptive nominee from October and November? What you don't realize is while Clinton was a good candidate at the end. Her campaign was not as well organized as her final opponents. For anyone who would even threaten to vote for McCain because of that is really pathetic, sore and petty.

Some of you don't really understand. I am horrified at the treatment Hillary has received by so many, only for being a woman. If Hillary is not the nominee, then I will vote against women's discrimination. The only way I can now achieve this is voting for McCain. It is not shooting myself in the foot. It is voting for something I feel passionate about. I only hope that McCain remembers this when he is taking the presidential oath.

I've supported Hillary to the end, but there's no way I'm voting for McCain. That would be crazy. Obama and Hillary are almost identical on the issues. Those of you who are thinking of defecting to the Republican party should think again -- the policy stances are the real thing and they are more important than any candidate.

My dear Lord, what is it with this specific group of supporters who threat to vote McCain if Hillary is not the nominee. The fact is, this isn't over yet Technically. I encourage you to relax!

Also, I do not doubt for a moment that there has been a group participating or contributing to controversial issues such as sexism, racism, or ageism. Unfortunately, some form of percentage of it still exists. However, I do not find these isms as blown up the way others are mentioning. I am a woman, and trust me I'd be calling it out where and when I see it. Not all of us women were primarily in Hillary's corner (well I was but I wasn't "against" Hillary simply because I switched). What are we to make of this when we see this specific segment of supporters saying and with anger, "I will vote McCain. I wanted to see a woman president during my lifetime (after a whole bunch of excuses or double standards, which I can debate, to explain their reasoning). The bottom line is, the portion where they say, "I wanted to see a woman president," that is the truth in what it's all about. What is that if it is not about Hillary being the first woman president? What does her being a woman have to do with any of the issues? I can make an argument for that, but when we have more than one person with similar stances, what does her gender have to do with anything? This is not "woman world." I'm sorry, but we have an entire diverse population, and with two genders! What is it when we say, "We women will perform protest vote?" What does your gender have to do with the rest of us as a whole? I am wise to wait for the final decisions, so that I can prepare for either outcome and accept it. I am a woman, and I am all about equality for EVERYBODY, and I do NOT focus simply on controversial issues of my own gender. I have problems with a VARIETY of issues, calling it as I see it. I am ticked that McCain voted against Equal Pay. I am ticked that McCain skipped on the vote to increase our significant serving citizens benefits. There's a whole list of issues, pick one, that I am tired of and I'm ready for some different results after nearly eight years.

As a woman, I am voting to help improve this country, and matters of a vast portion of our citizens, instead of myself. I have a passion on these issues, and I will see to it that my vote is a +1 to truly represent what I feel needs to happen. Whether or not Obama or Hillary is chosen, I remain with my purpose for participating in the first place. I know what I believe, what I feel, what I stand for, and I will not stand idle while these people are campaigning to give us the same works.

Reading this article of McCain's campaign, I couldn't help but to think of the free ride to the tenth power that he has gotten compared to these two candidates! They're watching this group, and this article tells me that they are playing into this exaggerated "sexism" complaint. Hillary was favored from the beginning. I'm sure there were men who made their statements, but that is not why Hillary is in whatever this position is. I'm looking at the situation, as a woman, and I do not see this blown to the proportion in Hillary's campaign as some mention. Wouldn't you think the rest of us women would be coming forth with our voices as well? Apparently, just as religious groups are divided, so are feminist segments. It appears that feminists are not all in sync. Some of us think about everyone, and others can't think beyond favoritism of our gender. We will have a woman president, rest assured. I believe we must NOT vote based on anything other than the issues, regardless of whom is running. This has been a long, emotional process. I have become used to seeing both candidates running all over this country. I will miss seeing that, honestly. They will both go down in future history books. It will not be the end of the world. I hope others who think of running for presidency in the future, I hope they see what a great portion of this country is hungry for. I wouldn't mind seeing John Edwards run again, or even Kathleen Sebelius if she decided. This year, I find it of high importance to get a Dem in that White House. I find he/she will be less likely to veto with the rest of Congress and the House. It is past time to bring our people home. It is time for different results. As a woman, I am tired of witnessing what I have these past two terms. I am simply so tired of it. I'm not in this for Obama, but for my country with a passion. The richest being on this planet could transfer to me, all of his or her wealth, and I would not be moved to vote for McCain. I wouldn't be as happy if Hillary were to be the nominee, for reasons, but I will vote for her before I vote McCain.

A woman of my word here, I am in this for my country. Rest assured, I will be a die hard voter For My Country. I don't wear flagpins, I don't have my own flag, but trust me when I say I am totally in to improve our current situation. God bless all.

Congratulations to Hillary. Good job Obama!

Lets do it once more! Come on South Dakota and Montana!

Well wishes for both candidates, and supporters.

To my fellow women with sore behavior: You're not doing a good job representing us women AS A WHOLE to the rest of the public. Don't play into the stereotypes to be further judged, PLEASE!! Women are strong indeed, and we should NOT fall into irrational behavior like this article mentions. Pick yourselves up and stand strong. I encourage you to use your energy and fire, directed instead where it is needed. What Do You Stand For? It will be alright, regardless what the outcome is.

Way to pander McCain! I'm a registered democrat and I've voted republican in the past when I felt the democratic candidate was weak and flawed. IMO Senator Obama is both and then some so if he is the democratic nominee, I will vote republican this November.

There seem to be a lot of Clinton supporters who have been gulled into thinking that she is somehow owed the nomination because she's been standing in line longer. Her contention that she has a larger popular vote ignores all of the states with caucus-type systems. I voted against her because she has shown poor judgment at critical moments, like her Iraq war vote, and more recently that gas-tax holiday nonsense. Since voting, I've watched Clinton try to tear down Obama as an elitist wimp and I'm increasingly glad I voted for a candidate who had enough integrity to avoid the slime-ball negative bit. It's astonishing to me that her supporters are angry about the way she's been treated. At what point did Clinton try to be fair?

Wow. I'm actually surprised that the McCain campaign will admit that MOMocrats has been invited to some of their teleconferences, considering what we wrote. Although I notice that a link to one of our resulting posts is missing from the article. A link that would actually tell people what we really think.

Has HRC faced sexism? Yes. Just like every woman in this country does at one time or another. Is McCain the answer? Hell no!

I've heard nothing from the McCain campaign to convince me that he's anything more that Bush III in slightly older packaging.

http://momocrats.typepad.com/momocrats/2008/05/lets-keep-em-po.html

Go ahead and vote for McCain. But don't expect sympathy from the rest of us if your sons and daughters get sent to Iraq for the 3rd time, the nation goes bankrupt and gas prices go past $7. Go ahead! Cut off your noses!

His tepid condemnation and his political expedience resignation from his church of 20+ years, Obama has yet to apologize to Hillary for the racist and sexist comments made against her by his religious mentor and ally, Father Pfiegler(?). As do the DNC and Democratic party leadership, from Howard Dean, Kennedy, Kerry, to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, all of whom have been frighteningly silent while Hillary is savaged by the media, progressive bloggers, pundits, columnists and in editorials. Not a single one of them raised his/her voice to defend Bill against Obama's false racist accusations. Donna Brazille and Rep. Clyburn, they gave whips to lash Bill and Hillary with! What a party! What a party leadership!!!

While Hillary's landslide wins are being ignored or dimissed, they and the Obama-fawning media have the gall to ask Hillary's supporters to creep to the cross and vote for the media- and DNC-imposed candidate in November - the audacity of insolence and delusion!

Whether self-serving or not, Mccain at least defended Hillary. That, to many a Hillary supporter, means a whole lot.

Election time is payback time.

I will vote for McCain even if it kills me.

I will not vote yes to the MSM control of the primaries.

This country is already fkup, i doubt McCain can do any worst.

MY CALL TO HILLARY'S SUPPORTERS AND TO ALL OF THOSE WHO AGREE THAT THE MSM IS A PROPAGANDA MACHINE FOR HUSSAIN...VOTE FOR MCCAIN.

A VOTE FOR HUSSSAIN IS A VOTE FOR MSM CONTROL OF OUR ELECTION PROCESS.

SHOW THEM YOU KNOW WHAT THEY DID AND WILL NOT GO FOR IT.

NO TO HUSSAIN.

"Such statements appear intended to hit home for women like Gloria Navotny of Clarion, Pa., who last month went to Ohio to protest against the Democratic Party as part of the group Clinton Supporters Count, Too. "If she is not the nominee, I will not vote for him," Navotny said of Obama in a May interview. "I will vote for McCain. I will vote Republican for the first time in my life."

Ah. I see. So tell me, Gloria, exactly what do you anticipate achieving with this brilliant little gem of spiteful bullet-into-foot?

Posted by: It's Not the Sex, It's the Candidate:"Besides, Clinton really is just a man with a vagina. When has she ever truly played a feminine roll? Voted for the war! Votes to fund the war! Votes for the War Against Drugs! She sits on the Committee on Armed Services and hands out the money to Lockheed Martin and GE with gusto!
How is she different? She has a vagina... that's it?"

Yes, her vagina is the difference - and so what? Her vagina doesn't figure into her qualifications - to suggest that it or her ovaries or her hair or her hips ought to is sexist and childish.

Obama is just brown - that's his only difference from all the other men of small experience and handsome demeanor - unless one looks through a racist lens. Or were you suggesting that, because he's not "like" Clinton he somehow lacks the accoutrements of her vagina?

Every time someone brings up Obama's minimal experience, his supporters bring up their disappointment in Clinton's gender-style or Obama's race as trump cards.

For this I spent forty years fighting for equal rights regardless of race, gender, or class. Pathetic.

To you Clinton supporters, please read this. Everyone hates it when their team loses in a sudden death match. It's just natural. She has run a hard campaign and I admire her for it. She has come closer than any other woman. But she lost and you need to get over it. That is why it is called a race.

So you will now vote for McCain, a man who does not share many of Senator Clinton's positions or values. This is not about losing the Stanley Cup or the Superbowl. We are talking about fundamental rights as women.

McCain has promised to appoint conservative judges and will most likely replace a liberal supreme court justice in the next four years (John Paul Stevens is 86). You can kiss our reproductive rights goodbye. The conservative justices are much younger and in better health, so it doesn't matter if Senator Clinton were to become president in 4 or 8 years. Those are lifetime appointments and she wouldn't be able to change them.

I voted for Barack Obama 4 million times, which puts HIM ahead in the popular vote!

What? My votes don't count because I broke the rules?

And HOLD ON! Popular vote can't decide the nominee just because I say so?

WTF! I'm With McCain.

What? RNC has the SAME RULES?

DAMN! This conspiracy stuff runs deep!

Still waiting for ANY VERIFIABLE LEGISLATIVE ACHIEVEMENT FOR SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON

ANYONE? ANYONE?

HOW DO YOU SUPPORT AND TOUT SOMEONE'S EXPERIENCE WITHOUT ONE SINGLE VERIFIABLE LEGISLATIVE ACHIEVEMENT?

Sorry. I didn't mean to triple post that. Thought it didn't go through the first two times...

perhaps you feel that McCain's outburst was not properly documented. Fair enough. Why then, did he decline to answer a direct question about this very subject at a town hall meeting? Rather than say "No of course not, that's ridiculous", he dodged it by offering some meek "that's offensive language" answer.

So perhaps it didn't happen on national television, but it's not like this guy is known for being calm and level-headed in the first place.

And now, good night!

Posted by: Amazed | June 3, 2008 3:05 AM

So, because he has a temper, this HAS to be true.
WOW
And yes, I feel that if it's not provable, then posting such tripe without vetting it IS buffoonery.
You mean you don't?
Riiiight. I bet you are one of the first to cty foul when someone lays a stinker onto Obama.
That's called Hypocrisy and ObamaBabies are full of it. And you can define "it" anyway you like.

How about when someone came up to McCain--on camera at a campaign event--and said: "How do we beat the BIT*H?"

This was obviously referring to Hillary b/c it was back when she was heavily favored to win the nomination in a landslide.

I remember clearly that McCain's response was to laugh...

How about when someone came up to McCain--on camera at a campaign event--and said: "How do we beat the BIT*H?"

This was obviously referring to Hillary b/c it was back when she was heavily favored to win the nomination in a landslide.

I remember clearly that McCain's response was to laugh...

How about when someone came up to McCain--on camera at a campaign event--and said: "How do we beat the BIT*H?"

This was obviously referring to Hillary b/c it was back when she was heavily favored to win the nomination in a landslide.

I remember clearly that McCain's response was to laugh...

How about when someone came up to McCain--on camera at a campaign event--and said: "How do we beat the BIT*H?"

This was obviously referring to Hillary b/c it was back when she was heavily favored to win the nomination in a landslide.

I remember clearly that McCain's response was to laugh...

"It is not my intent to bash Obama and I have not directly done so.

He is the weaker candidate.

He has a lot of explaining to do with his past.

He hasn't even been honest about his own family much less anything else.

You may be able to fool a lot of people who don't know anything about Obama but you will not fool anyone who takes the time to check him out."

Posted by: Linda | June 3, 2008 2:00 AM

Someone should e-mail this to David Letterman. A comedian couldn't write this stuff!

Posted by: | June 3, 2008 2:55 AM

Daily Show or COLBERT for Sure!

Dear Anonymous,

perhaps you feel that McCain's outburst was not properly documented. Fair enough. Why then, did he decline to answer a direct question about this very subject at a town hall meeting? Rather than say "No of course not, that's ridiculous", he dodged it by offering some meek "that's offensive language" answer.

So perhaps it didn't happen on national television, but it's not like this guy is known for being calm and level-headed in the first place.

And now, good night!

Hillary has proven herself to be interested in only herself time and time again. I may well vote for Cynthia Mckinney of the Green Party. If women are so upset why don't they vote for Mckinney instead of McCain? Isn't that sexism?
Besides, Clinton really is just a man with a vagina. When has she ever truly played a feminine roll? Voted for the war! Votes to fund the war! Votes for the War Against Drugs! She sits on the Committee on Armed Services and hands out the money to Lockheed Martin and GE with gusto!
How is she different? She has a vagina... that's it?

Posted by: It's Not the Sex, It's the Candidate | June 3, 2008 2:56 AM

Don't forget about "totally obliterating Iran"

It's like Hillary Clinton and GWB are in stereo!

Oh yes, Hillary should just forget about her own career and back off and advance some man's career. What is wrong with you? When are men ever called selfish and only interested in advancing their own career? When is it wrong to want to advance your own career except when you are a woman?

Who career is she suppose to be concerned about? Obama? This is ridiculous. This is just more of the same sexist talk. How dare you suggest that she shouldn't place her ambitions and career over third parties. Why doesn't Obama stop being selfish and only interested in his own ambitions and admit he is the weaker candidate and for the sake of this country quit and allow Hillary to win the white house for the party??????
Posted by: Linda

WTF?

Hillary has proven herself to be interested in only herself time and time again. I may well vote for Cynthia Mckinney of the Green Party. If women are so upset why don't they vote for Mckinney instead of McCain? Isn't that sexism?
Besides, Clinton really is just a man with a vagina. When has she ever truly played a feminine roll? Voted for the war! Votes to fund the war! Votes for the War Against Drugs! She sits on the Committee on Armed Services and hands out the money to Lockheed Martin and GE with gusto!
How is she different? She has a vagina... that's it?

"It is not my intent to bash Obama and I have not directly done so.

He is the weaker candidate.

He has a lot of explaining to do with his past.

He hasn't even been honest about his own family much less anything else.

You may be able to fool a lot of people who don't know anything about Obama but you will not fool anyone who takes the time to check him out."

Posted by: Linda | June 3, 2008 2:00 AM

Someone should e-mail this to David Letterman. A comedian couldn't write this stuff!

"Oh my God, I just read Gail's comment after I posted. Talk about a perfect example to support my thesis!

Gail, tell me. How does McCain's treatment of his wife or his anti-abortion stance jibe with your "feminist" leanings? When is the last time we heard Obama calling his wife a ?

Oh, and jackstpaul, forgive me for using the same expression as you. I guess this smells about the same to the both of us.

Posted by: Amazed | June 2, 2008 11:02 PM "

To Amazed and other posters that have posted this tripe:
Prove that McCain called his wife that in public.
It has NEVER been documented except by
"Three reporters from Arizona, on the condition of anonymity, also let me in on another incident involving McCain's intemperateness." , blah, blah.
ANONYMITY means there's no proof.
And don't give me that (well Republicans make up stories about...".
That's no excuse for furthering lies, in ANY CASE!
Have some integrity for Crissake.
There's plenty of true things to flog McCain about, but this just makes you look like a buffoon.

"It is not my intent to bash Obama and I have not directly done so.

He is the weaker candidate.

He has a lot of explaining to do with his past.

He hasn't even been honest about his own family much less anything else.

You may be able to fool a lot of people who don't know anything about Obama but you will not fool anyone who takes the time to check him out."

Posted by: Linda | June 3, 2008 2:00 AM

ROTFLMAO!!!

Yeah, the crying episode is when I realised that the media had absolutely no idea how to take a female candidate seriously. Apparently the powers-that-be decided that the women at home wanted to hear about Clinton's emotional state at any given point, ignorant of the fact that McCain is the most emotional and volatile candidate of them all! Oh, I forgot - he's a "maverick".

I can understand becoming disillusioned with the party. I guess my amazement with the whole situation comes down to the fact that people are leaving the Dems despite what the Republicans have done to your country over the last 8 years. Voting for that party again would be like endorsing everything that happened in the last near-decade.

Oh well, I should go to bed. Best of luck in the coming year, and feel free to lend us Hillary for the next 4 years :-)

Oh yes, Hillary should just forget about her own career and back off and advance some man's career. What is wrong with you? When are men ever called selfish and only interested in advancing their own career? When is it wrong to want to advance your own career except when you are a woman?

Who career is she suppose to be concerned about? Obama? This is ridiculous. This is just more of the same sexist talk. How dare you suggest that she shouldn't place her ambitions and career over third parties. Why doesn't Obama stop being selfish and only interested in his own ambitions and admit he is the weaker candidate and for the sake of this country quit and allow Hillary to win the white house for the party??????
Posted by: Linda

THIS IS GIBBERISH

Still waiting for ANY VERIFIABLE LEGISLATIVE ACHIEVEMENT FOR SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON

ANYONE? ANYONE?

"

Why would any women thats not racist vote for a candidate whose campaign is constantly engaged in denegrating women, cheating,lying and charector assasination of the first women who had a real chance of becoming our president ?
Posted by: Jane | June 3, 2008 2:08 AM

Learn how to spell, much, Jane?

Maybe women who have the educational background to have learned how to spell see the obvious truth that Hillary Clinton is the lying, race baiting sociopath in this equation.

Posted by: | June 3, 2008 2:12 AM "

And maybe when the only thing you can add to the discussion is a "spelling police" attack on a person that you don't even know, it just shows what an arrogant a** YOU are.
Pathetic
This why a Liberal candidate will never be accepted by Main Stream America. Arrogance, Ego, and living in LaLaLand.
Don't wake up now, the shock will kill you.

Still waiting for ANY VERIFIABLE LEGISLATIVE ACHIEVEMENT FOR SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON

ANYONE? ANYONE?

HOW DO YOU SUPPORT AND TOUT SOMEONE'S EXPERIENCE WITHOUT ONE SINGLE VERIFIABLE LEGISLATIVE ACHIEVEMENT?

CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS, MUCH?

Being a state senator is a big nothing. Most state senators have a full time job in addition to being a state senator.

"Is because she's a selfish person who cares only about advancing her own career and thinks people can be easily manipulated into thinking Ted Kennedy's legislation is 'hers'?"

Selfish...advancing her own career = Sexist

Oh yes, Hillary should just forget about her own career and back off and advance some man's career. What is wrong with you? When are men ever called selfish and only interested in advancing their own career? When is it wrong to want to advance your own career except when you are a woman?

Who career is she suppose to be concerned about? Obama? This is ridiculous. This is just more of the same sexist talk. How dare you suggest that she shouldn't place her ambitions and career over third parties. Why doesn't Obama stop being selfish and only interested in his own ambitions and admit he is the weaker candidate and for the sake of this country quit and allow Hillary to win the white house for the party??????

Hillary has worked along with many other senators on a number of bills. There is nothing wrong in saying that you were a sponsor of a bill. Kennedy doesn't get all the credit on the bill.

What about Obama. His big contribution was being a sponsor on McCain's bill. That was the biggest bill he was a part of. Wonder if these two guys think alike??? That bill is the biggest joke in washington...transparency...limit the influence of lobbyists. That bill does nothing but bs the public. Why didn't they prevent the do nothing spouses of senators from receiving millions of dollars each year as so called lobbyists who the senators then claim that their spouses and kids don't personally lobby them or influence their decisions. Reid is the worse at this. Great job Obama and McCain. Real transparent.

Actually, Obama has 3 years more legislative experience than Clinton does. 8 years state senate + 3 years US, vs. 8 years US for Clinton. Her "35 years" includes her work as a lawyer and as first lady where, admittedly, she was rather active (if not successful, but it's difficult for a first lady to undertake too much political work without being seen as opportunistic or domineering, so that's a complicated issue)

Posted by: Amazed | June 3, 2008 2:17 AM

I KNOW OBAMA HAS MORE ELECTIVE EXPERIENCE THAN CLINTON. THANKS FOR CONFIRMING THAT.

AND WORKING AS A CORPORATE LAWYER--15-20 YEARS FOR HILLARY--IS NOT PUBLIC SERVICE

AND AS FIRST LADY SHE WAS ONLY 'ACTIVE' IN BUNGLING HER HEALTH CARE INITIATIVE BECAUSE SHE WORKED IN SECRECY WASN'T EVEN CAPABLE OF WORKING COLLABORATIVELY WITH SENATE DEMOCRATS.

BUT SHE'S BEEN MY SENATOR FOR THE PAST EIGHT YEARS AND I'D LOVE TO KNOW WHAT SHE'S DONE--LEGISLATIVELY--FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. NO ONE SEEMS TO BE ABLE TO CITE ANY SPECIFIC LEGISLATION...WHY IS THAT?

"It is not my intent to bash Obama and I have not directly done so.

He is the weaker candidate.

He has a lot of explaining to do with his past.

He hasn't even been honest about his own family much less anything else.

You may be able to fool a lot of people who don't know anything about Obama but you will not fool anyone who takes the time to check him out."

Posted by: Linda | June 3, 2008 2:00 AM

A little self awareness would be nice.

NOT "BASH"?

Or maybe you've lived in the Hillary Clinton world of deception and manipulation a little TOO long.

Your example about the crying is an excellent example. Hillary was not balling her eyes out but she did get choked up and watery eyes. Some of the media made fun of her crying. Some of the media claimed she did it to "soften" her image. Would the media claim that a man cried to soften his image. That was obviously sexist. At the same time of that incident, Bush appeared at some public place and got all emotional with real obvious watery eyes. The media praised him for his emotional reaction. Bush got all misty just a few days ago and the same was said.

And when Hillary won NH, the media spun it that she won due to tears. They didn't say she won it because the voters in NH that she was the better candidate. And the media won't let us forget about her getting emotional that day. Even that priest, phleger was mocking her. Why aren't men mocked for getting emotional or for their tears which I have seen a lot of.

My impression is not that the sexism is being attributed to Obama personally. Although I do find many of his supporters sexist. What I hear and have observed is against the media and secondly with the DNC.

Voters that switch from Hillary to McCain are doing so because one they can't stand Obama and second they are very upset with the DNC especially due to the delegates being given to Obama. Some of these people will not vote at all. But they are not switching to McCain just because of the sexism. They strongly will not support Obama. And they are walking away from the democratic party. Many, many have switched to being independent.

Actually, Obama has 3 years more legislative experience than Clinton does. 8 years state senate + 3 years US, vs. 8 years US for Clinton. Her "35 years" includes her work as a lawyer and as first lady where, admittedly, she was rather active (if not successful, but it's difficult for a first lady to undertake too much political work without being seen as opportunistic or domineering, so that's a complicated issue)

Posted by: Jane | June 3, 2008 2:08 AM

Learn how to spell, much, Jane?

Actually the grammar is a wee bit lacking as well...

Why would any women thats not racist vote for a candidate whose campaign is constantly engaged in denegrating women, cheating,lying and charector assasination of the first women who had a real chance of becoming our president ?
Posted by: Jane | June 3, 2008 2:08 AM

Learn how to spell, much, Jane?

Maybe women who have the educational background to have learned how to spell see the obvious truth that Hillary Clinton is the lying, race baiting sociopath in this equation.

There are three pieces of legislation Senator Barack Obama has passed in two years that I can name off the top of my head: collecting loose nukes, helping the Vets at Walter Reed with regard to their expenses and increasing political transparency while also limiting the gifts members of congress can accept.
Posted by: cgl

What are Senator Hillary Clinton's specific legislative accomplishments and why can no one name a single one?

She's been in the Senate longer--touts it ALL THE TIME.

So where is the legislation to show for it if she is such a 'leader'

If Senator Hillary Clinton is such a leader who will fight for the American people, why can no one name a single legislative accomplishment of hers?

Is because she's a selfish person who cares only about advancing her own career and thinks people can be easily manipulated into thinking Ted Kennedy's legislation is 'hers'?

Well she hasn't manipulated me.

Why would any women thats not racist vote for a candidate whose campaign is constantly engaged in denegrating women, cheating,lying and charector assasination of the first women who had a real chance of becoming our president ?

Sorry, I thought your second-to-last post was a reply to mine.

I completely agree with your points about the media, from the way they describe her and speak condescendingly about her to their assertion that she should quit. The only thing more embarrassing than her contrived crying act was the fact that she felt obligated to do it in order to put on a "softer image" because the media keeps referring to her as an ice queen.

I also can't help but notice that it's McCain and Giuliani and Romney and Edwards, but Clinton and Obama are often Hillary and Barack. I would attribute sexist comments from Obama supporters to our sexist culture...I imagine there are McCain/Clinton supporters who make racist comments behind the scenes as it is less acceptable in public circles these days. Or, just look at the Virginia primaries for somewhat less discreet discrimination. Nonetheless it's a hurdle that is present for both candidates and it is a tribute to their character that they have so convincingly risen above this. Any other year, either candidate would be a run-away favourite.

My problem with this situation is that the institutionalized sexism that is so prevalent in our times is somehow being attributed to Obama, both by McCain supporters and by disgruntled Clinton supporters. Voting Republican because the media discriminates against women is insane and will only lead to more social conservatism and suppression of rights and freedoms.

Ah well. The particulars are different but I think we mostly feel the same way about the situation. I admit that I would vote for Obama, but I would be (nearly) equally happy to vote for Clinton. Of course I am just an interested Canadian observer so I won't actually be voting :-)

Still waiting for ANY VERIFIABLE LEGISLATIVE ACHIEVEMENT FOR SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON

ANYONE? ANYONE?

HOW DO YOU SUPPORT AND TOUT SOMEONE'S EXPERIENCE WITHOUT ONE SINGLE VERIFIABLE LEGISLATIVE ACHIEVEMENT?

CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS, MUCH?

It is not my intent to bash Obama and I have not directly done so. He is not someone I would ever support and he is the weaker candidate. However, I would like to know how some obama supporters can accuse Hillary of lying and not having any accomplishments...when Obama has never accomplished anything. He himself in 2004 stated that he wasn't qualified to even think of running for the office of the president. And I have read his books and conducted my own research on him. He has a lot of explaining to do with his past. He hasn't even been honest about his own family much less anything else. You may be able to fool a lot of people who don't know anything about Obama but you will not fool anyone who takes the time to check him out. His past is pretty short and concise. It doesn't take much to check him out.

So what is your real purpose in going out of your way just to bash Hillary? Looks like your guy will be the nominee. Why aren't you celebrating? Bashing Hillary will not attract any of her supporters to Obama.

What are Senator Hillary Clinton's specific legislative accomplishments and why can no one name a single one?

I am a feminist, and there is no way I will support Obama. I would rather see the feminist movement die than see Obama become president. I was really hurt that Clinton did not get the nomination. Now McCain gets my vote. The feminist movement can go into exile for the next 8 years for all I care. I hope McCain turns back the strides in equal rights for women--as he has promised to do--for all I care. My bruised feelings are of primary importance to me. My name is Linda.

"When has any party not gone with the stronger candidate?"
Posted by: Linda

NEVER. THE STRONGER CANDIDATE WINS--BY DEFINITION. SUGGESTING OTHERWISE IS ILLOGICAL.

Hillary has acted very professionally in this campaign yet she is constantly criticized.
Posted by: Linda | June 3, 2008 1:41 AM

DO YOU THINK IT MIGHT BE BECAUSE OF HER LIES?

Amazed---this is a light weight article on the subject but at least it raises the issue.

I never put the blame on Obama for all of the sexism. (although I have personally noticed some sexist traits with him) I put the biggest blame on the media. I'm sure some people didn't vote for Hillary because she is a woman just like some people didn't vote for Obama because he is black. I'm not talking about the actual voters. Although, I will note that I have read consistently many sexist comments posted on the internet by Obama supporters.

How many times have the media said Hillary was to "aggressive" or describe Hillary's voice as being "shrill". Only women are described as being shrill. There are many adjectives that are only used towards women and the media constantly used them. Since Feb, on a daily basis the media has been saying that Hillary should quit. But they don't say that about a male candidate. Commentators have made jokes about her being like someone's ex-wife or mother. It's OK for the media to discuss Hillary's spouse but when the media made slight mention of Obama's wife, he told them they better back off and they did. The media makes jokes about the Hillary nut cracker. Would the media make a joke out of an Obama doll with a noose around him? Sexism is OK to joke about but it isn't OK to joke about being black. Both Obama and Hillary want to win. But Hillary is said to be Power hungry. When is a male candidate called power hungry. Ugly male commentators on tv criticize Hillary's hair or clothes. Why have there been so many jokes about her pant suits? Hillary's daughter helps out on the campaign and Hillary is accused of pimping our her daughter. Romney had a number of his kids out campaigning for him and I never heard anyone say that he was pimping out his kids. There is such an endless list. Some things are code for sexism like being shrill or power hungry or to aggressive...ie, not ladylike.

The media wanted Obama to win. If Obama farts, he gets media attention. No matter what Hillary accomplishes, she doesn't get the same amount or type of media coverage. That is differential treatment. The media doesn't take what she does seriously and doesn't give it the respect that it gives to male candidates. Idiots like the people here claim she is riding on her husband's coattails. Hillary had more accomplishments than Bill did. Hillary was the breadwinner for all those years. Bill only made good money once he left the white house. Michelle Obama was the money maker not Barrack other than in the last couple years with his book sales. He made peanuts and she was making 100,000 to over $300,000 a year. She made more than he did as a senator. But the media spins it as Hillary is riding on Bill's coat tails. Has the media ever said that Obama's wife has supported him for all these years.

When Kennedy was over 700 delegates short, he took it to the convention floor. But the DNC and the media have all firmly said that Hillary better not consider taking this to the convention. Why was it OK for Kennedy to do it? Why were the rules changed to give Obama those delegates this past Sat? Why are the rules being changed and the super delegates are not being told to endorse the most electable?

I don't care how much you support Obama but the fact is that the DNC is taking a big risk going with him rather than Hillary. Even republicans like Karl Rove who have always hated the Clintons and democrats are laughing at the democratic party not endorsing the stronger candidate. When has any party not gone with the stronger candidate?

Men have protested and are respected. But the women who protested at the DNC meeting are being ridiculed by some people.

Hillary has acted very professionally in this campaign yet she is constantly criticized. The most sexist people on tv like Chris Matthews and hannity raise the issue of sexism and immediately are laughing at what a crazy claim it is. They are not even capable of having an intelligent discussion about the topic. They can't even recognize how sexist they are.

The sexism is a fact and a reality. Denying the sexism in this campaign would be like denying that some people won't vote for Obama because he is black. But the sexism is a much more prevalent problem than the racism.

In her national ad, Hillary says she CREATED State Children's Health Insurance Program.

Complete and TOTAL LIE. Not even partially true. How many people took her at her word and were SCAMMED?

Why has she not worked in the Senate to pass her own legislation?

No, the point of the article is that a traditionally anti-choice candidate who has demeaned his wife in public and who represents a party populated by bigots has suddenly realised that he can court angry Clinton supporters by alluding to her being discriminated against by Obama and the media. And instead of calling McCain's camp out for their deceit, Clinton supporters are willing to support him rather than vote for the candidate who ran a great campaign and who (probably) will beat her.

The superdelegates are supposed to vote for the person they think will win. They were going to support Clinton, but then they switched to Obama, and now that she is losing you want them to switch back? Is it possible that maybe, just maybe, the SDs actually thought about their decision and have decided that Obama is their best bet? Just because it isn't your choice doesn't make it wrong, and it certainly doesn't make it sexist.

I agree that the rhetoric is excessive and unneccesary, but stop acting like it's the Obama camp that's causing this nonsense. Both sides are guilty, and claiming that Obama is responsible for sexist reporting is disingenuous and offensive.

You want the camps to come together and for the fighting to stop, yet you threaten that the Clinton camp will not support Obama if he wins. Why? On what grounds? The entire point of the article is how Clinton supporters will not endorse Obama, yet you go out of your way to say it has nothing to do with C vs O. Your discussion doesn't make sense in light of the article or of your veiled threats (that's a strong word, but you get my meaning).

Clinton role in health program disputed

Hillary Clinton, who has frequently described herself on the campaign trail as playing a pivotal role in forging a children's health insurance plan, had little to do with crafting the landmark legislation or ushering it through Congress, according to several lawmakers, staffers, and healthcare advocates involved in the issue.

In campaign speeches, Clinton describes the State Children's Health Insurance Program, or SCHIP, as an initiative "I helped to start." Addressing Iowa voters in November, Clinton said, "in 1997, I joined forces with members of Congress and we passed the State Children's Health Insurance Program." Clinton regularly cites the number of children in each state who are covered by the program, and mothers of sick children have appeared at Clinton campaign rallies to thank her.

But the Clinton White House, while supportive of the idea of expanding children's health, fought the first SCHIP effort, spearheaded by Senators Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, and Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah, because of fears that it would derail a bigger budget bill. And several current and former lawmakers and staff said Hillary Clinton had no role in helping to write the congressional legislation, which grew out of a similar program approved in Massachusetts in 1996.

"The White House wasn't for it. We really roughed them up" in trying to get it approved over the Clinton administration's objections, Hatch said in an interview. "She may have done some advocacy [privately] over at the White House, but I'm not aware of it."

"I do like her," Hatch said of Hillary Clinton. "We all care about children. But does she deserve credit for SCHIP? No - Teddy does, but she doesn't."

"health care for children"

And why is she claiming credit for Senator Kennedy's health care law for children. He wrote it and passed it. She was First Lady at the time and the Clinton White House initially tried to block it. There is no evidience that she ever supported it--in the public or private domain.

Why did she then--as a Presidential candidate--CLAIM CREDIT for it in National ads and in her every day stump speech. In every state she says X number of children have health care in that state--the number covered in each state--because of her.

This is an absolute lie. As a Yale and Yale Law grad I am disgusted that a fellow Yalie is claiming other people's accomplishments as her own.

I just don't get all of the rabid and not factual vitriol that is being tossed out in these comments. What is the point.

Firstly, it is obvious that McCain is sending out women to acknowledge that sexism is alive and well in America for political gain.

Secondly, name calling is what, divisive, immature and counter productive

Thirdly, I am a life long democrat but I don't know if I can vote for Obama. The Pfleger rant was the final straw for me. I am hopeful that I can adjust my emotional response to Pfleger's bigotry, racism and sexism (despite what he says), and move to a more rational position of voting for Obama since I disagree with so many of McCain's views, particularly the perpetual war in which he seems to wish to engage.

Fourthly and unfairly I think, I am bothered by Michelle Obama. I hate having thoughts similar to the republican neocons and I hate baseless thoughts about her. Fortunately, she is not running for president and shouldn't have consideration in the person for whom I vote. Unfortunately, she is the closest surrogate of Obama and probably has great influence over him.

"But it is ridiculous to deny the fact that Hill