Pelosi on Clinton: 'She May Run Again'

Teri B. · 06-25-2008, 07:59 AM

Quote:

ABC News' Karen Travers Reports: Addressing the question of whether sexism played a significant role in Sen. Hillary Clinton’s failure to win the Democratic nomination, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi wouldn’t say it was responsible for her defeat but acknowledged that sexism is “a given.”

“Is there sexism? Probably so. Is it responsible for the defeat? I really wouldn’t have the scientific knowledge, all of the information to know that,” the Speaker said. “My impression is, ‘Yes there was sexism.’ My knowledge is, ‘Yes there is sexism because there has been.’

“I’m the victim of sexism myself, but I think it goes with the territory. I don’t sit around to say but for that, but for that.”

Speaker Pelosi said that Clinton benefited from being a woman with the strong support she received from women voters and that perhaps she takes another shot at the White House.

“[W]omen are wildly enthusiastic about her candidacy. Not just a woman but this woman, this talent, this intellect, stamina,” she said. "I think her candidacy was a bright bright moment for us and she may run again."

. . .

My purpose in posting this is to hopefully get some of the Obama supporters in the bubble here to realize that if trashing Clinton, or looking the other way while Obama supporters do, is a requirement of supporting Obama - many women will not. If it's time to "unite," then it's definitely time to end the animus, the sexism, and the character asassination. An awful lot of these kinds of views expressed so prolifically on this website aren't mainstream, or even shared by the majority of democrats.

EvilMonkey · 06-25-2008, 08:19 AM

What specifically did Obama do to promote or condone sexism? Please don't say "ran for president" I mean he has ran a pretty damned clean campaign all in all and never once did or said anything to that extent.

With that in mind what exactly does he owe the women who feel slighted by his winning? I mean he's said some pretty nice things about her and is now asking donors to help her pay off her debt. I understand you are frustrated but this "we owe you something because you lost attitude" doesn't seem too fair.

Yes, he has lost the support of some women and he will also never get votes from those who are racist. Some things you just can't help.

julia · 06-25-2008, 09:05 AM

I am an Edwards supporter but I don't feel the need to post about him everyday since he is not the frontrunner.

The other candidates took on most of his platfrom, HC, green economy, civic service credits for college, etc. but I don't sit around and complain about it.

If Hrc supporters are so concerned about unity why don't they do like Hrc and pledge to do everything to elect Barack Obama?

Hrc made a lot of errors and voters started to tune her out. Not many wanted to keep up with her yarns and misspeaks anymore.

Mithrall · 06-25-2008, 09:09 AM

You are absolutely right, there was alot of sexism involved. If you call holding a woman accountable for bald-faced lies about her valor, or lack theorof, sexism. If it is sexist to expect accountability from someone who voted to authorize the use of force which has led to 4000+ soldiers dying and 30,000+ being critically injured, then yeah I'm sexist. You know what? if Hillary Clinton is the example of a female candidate that you are gonna hold up to us than I am gonna let my sexism remain unrestrained. While we are at it, WTF is up Nancy Pelosi? When are the Democrats going to hold the line instead of caving again and again to the Bush Administration under her "leadership"? Isn't it time for the third movie of the trilogy? I'm still waiting for the return of the jedi or king. Hell I'd settle for a hobbit at this point in time. I was gonna say Jar Jar but he is too close to what we already have.

julia · 06-25-2008, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Teri B.

My purpose in posting this is to hopefully get some of the Obama supporters in the bubble here to realize that if trashing Clinton, or looking the other way while Obama supporters do, is a requirement of supporting Obama - many women will not. If it's time to "unite," then it's definitely time to end the animus, the sexism, and the character asassination. An awful lot of these kinds of views expressed so prolifically on this website aren't mainstream, or even shared by the majority of democrats.

If you are so concerned about sexism why don't you look to other woman leaders and support other woman candidates running for office?

Hrc is no longer in a candidate in an election so why not support some women that are rather than be bitter and dwell on Hrc's failures?

I see no constructive position on your part.

Emily's List supported Hrc and they have clearly moved on, why can't you?

Elizabeth Edwards June 24:

Quote:

Health care is an issue that is really close to my heart. And I know it matters to a lot of Americans, particularly mothers. But time and again, Republicans have blocked progress on expanding health care—most recently the expansion of the children's health insurance program—and on so many other important issues.

That's why we need to elect more progressive women in Congress in 2008, to stand with President Obama on healthcare and other key issues.

MoveOn is working with EMILY's List to highlight some great candidates like Kay Hagan, a legislator in my home state of North Carolina who is running for U.S. Senate. It is a race that the pundits and politicos had previously ignored, but no longer: Last week the Washington Post rated it as one of the most winnable Senate races for Democrats in the country.1

With a critical deadline for candidate fund-raising next Monday, can you help support Kay Hagan and other strong Democratic women like Jeanne Shaheen and Rep. Carol Shea-Porter from New Hampshire? All three women are running in key battleground states, and the voters they bring to the polls will also help us take the White House. Click here to chip in $25 to their campaigns today:

https://pol.moveon.org/give/3greatwo...36-gosSN4x&t=5

EMILY's List supports pro-choice Democratic women for office. The organization is a great ally and is supporting these and other strong progressive candidates.

Here's more detail on each of these spectacular women:

After five terms in the North Carolina State Senate, Kay Hagan is ready to move on to the US Senate. But first, she has to beat Sen. Elizabeth Dole this fall. Hagan has led the fight for children's healthcare in our home state. In the US Senate, Kay wants to tackle climate change and high gas prices. Her opponent, Elizabeth Dole, has a $3 million war chest, and Hagan is going to need every penny she can raise in order to beat her and change this seat from one that consistently votes conservatively to one that consistently votes progressively.

When Kay wins, we will be that much closer to building a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. And the odds are in our favor: Republicans are defending 23 seats in competitive races—almost two-thirds of the races up for grabs—which means we'll have an edge as we attempt to build a progressive majority.

We need Jeanne Shaheen to represent New Hampshire—and all of us—in the United States Senate too. Jeanne is the former Governor of New Hampshire; in fact she was the first woman ever elected to that office. Now she wants to blaze the trail again and become the first-ever woman elected senator from the state. The only thing standing in her way is incumbent Republican senator, John Sununu. Jeanne will be a fantastic senator, but we have to get her elected first.

Finally, there is the incredible Representative Carol Shea-Porter of New Hampshire, the best example I know of the kind of women we can elect if we work together from the grassroots. When she was still in high school a counselor told Carol she should forget about trying to make it to college and enroll in secretarial school.2

Instead, she became the first woman ever elected to Congress from New Hampshire in 2006, handily beating a Republican incumbent who was seen as invincible. During her short time in Congress, Shea-Porter has been a vocal opponent to the war in Iraq. This is her first reelection campaign, and she's in a tough race. But Carol Shea-Porter has more than earned our support—we need to keep her in Congress.

Not only can you help make sure each of these women wins in her race, but you will also be helping to turn out more votes in important presidential battleground states. Can you chip in $25 to help elect these three women, each of whom can help us lead the House and Senate in a progressive direction? Click here to donate:

https://pol.moveon.org/give/3greatwo...36-gosSN4x&t=6

Today, out of 435 members of the U.S. House of Representatives, there are only seventy-one women. And only sixteen out of one hundred members of the Senate are women. 3 When will our voices be heard? They will be heard when we act together to get progressive women elected. With your help we can make sure that these progressive women's voices are heard in Washington this fall, voices that will speak out against the war and for health care and other progressive priorities.

Thank you.

–Elizabeth Edwards

P.S. You can learn more about EMILY's List and the great work they're doing for progressive women candidates at EMILY's List

Sources:

1."The Line: When a Small Loss Is Your 'Best Case Scenario," The Fix: Washington Post Political blog, June 13th, 2008
The Line: When a Small Loss Is Your 'Best Case Scenario' - The Fix

2."Carol Shea-Porter's unusual journey to U.S. Congress," Associated Press, November 8, 2006
Carol Shea-Porter's unusual journey to U.S. Congress - Boston.com

3."Women Serving in the 110th Congress 2007-09," Center for American Women and Politics,
Facts on women candidates and elected officials

Teri B. · 06-25-2008, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ericgtr

What specifically did Obama do to promote or condone sexism? Please don't say "ran for president" I mean he has ran a pretty damned clean campaign all in all and never once did or said anything to that extent.

With that in mind what exactly does he owe the women who feel slighted by his winning? I mean he's said some pretty nice things about her and is now asking donors to help her pay off her debt. I understand you are frustrated but this "we owe you something because you lost attitude" doesn't seem too fair.

Yes, he has lost the support of some women and he will also never get votes from those who are racist. Some things you just can't help.

Where did I say anything about Obama promoting those things? I didn't. I'm talking about ON THIS WEBSITE and in the media. And I don't think women feel slighted by Obama. I think they feel slighted by the media, and the loud mouths on the web, but they are TRYING to put that aside and not let what Obama supporters do affect their opinion of him. That would be easier if his supporters would actually stop doing it though.

Nice twist and spin though.

Quote:

Hillary Clinton's legacy to the women of the world
There no longer will be anything abnormal about women running for the top jobs

JANET BAGNALL
The Gazette
Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Hillary Clinton's concession speech, delivered Saturday at the National Building Museum in Washington, couldn't come fast enough for all the male commentators who had been urging her to quit the race for months. Lady Macbeth to the bitter end was how they described her, a narcissist trying desperately, and pathetically, to cling to the spotlight.

Her 17.5 million voters didn't see it that way: The men and women who supported her throughout the most exciting and galvanizing nomination campaign the U.S. had seen in decades weren't in a rush for Clinton to say it was all over.

The public, far more generous than the pundits, were willing to let her have her final moment in a history-making campaign. This was the first time in the U.S.'s more than 200-year existence a woman nearly pulled off winning the presidential nomination for a major party. It was a moment worth savouring - unless the very idea gave you the vapours.

Clinton's loss is not a setback for women in politics or in any other public sphere. By hanging in, by never giving up, by toughing out every obstacle in her way, including the substantial ones she put there herself, she made it easier for other women.

When people think of female candidates now, they'll have an image in mind: A serious-minded, well-prepared woman who wears trouser suits and doesn't always say or do the right thing.

The mystery around how a female president might look or behave is gone. The idea of a woman running for president of the United States, to become de- facto leader of the Western world, is no longer an historic aberration, best buried and forgotten.

A woman ambitious and confident enough to go for the highest seat of power in the world is no longer a bizarre departure that was so hotly denounced by commentators from Rush Limbaugh to National Public Radio's Ken Rudin.

Her concession speech last weekend was worth the wait: "I know there are barriers and biases out there, often unconscious," she said. "You can be so proud that, from now on, it will be unremarkable for a woman to win primary state victories, unremarkable to have a woman in a close race to be our nominee, unremarkable to think that a woman can be the president of the United States. And that is truly remarkable."

As her supporters called out their approval, she continued, "To those who are disappointed that we couldn't go all the way - especially the young people who put so much into this campaign, it would break my heart if, in falling short of my goal, I in any way discouraged any of you from pursuing yours."

She added, "We weren't able to shatter that highest, hardest glass ceiling this time, thanks to you it's got about 18 million cracks in it. And the light is shining through like never before, filling us all with the hope and the sure knowledge that the path will be a little easier next time."

That path should be easier next time - if only because the next woman who comes along to contest a presidential nomination will be prepared for the sexism that pervades some political commentary.

For those who doubt that mainstream media commentators make outrageously sexist remarks on the air as though they were the most banal thing imaginable, the Media Women's Centre, a U.S. women's rights organization, has put together a video clip at: YouTube - Broadcast Yourself. watch ?v=g-IrhRSwF9U&eurl= http://www.salon.com/mwt/bro

On the video are some of the moments that prompted Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, to say recently to the New York Times, "The wounds of sexism need to be the subject of a national discussion ... Many of the most prominent people on TV behaved like middle schoolers" toward Clinton.

It took a long time and a lot of hateful commentary for Dean to react to the sexism Clinton's candidacy unleashed. To his party's shame, he still stands pretty much alone in his condemnation of it.

A lot of ideas filter across our border with the U.S. With luck, one of them will be that there is no longer anything abnormal about women running for highest office. Whatever strategic or other mistakes Clinton might have made, hers is an extraordinary legacy to the women of the world.

Hillary Clinton's legacy to the women of the world
There no longer will be anything abnormal about women running for the top jobs

JANET BAGNALL
The Gazette

Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Hillary Clinton's concession speech, delivered Saturday at the National Building Museum in Washington, couldn't come fast enough for all the male commentators who had been urging her to quit the race for months. Lady Macbeth to the bitter end was how they described her, a narcissist trying desperately, and pathetically, to cling to the spotlight.

Her 17.5 million voters didn't see it that way: The men and women who supported her throughout the most exciting and galvanizing nomination campaign the U.S. had seen in decades weren't in a rush for Clinton to say it was all over.

The public, far more generous than the pundits, were willing to let her have her final moment in a history-making campaign. This was the first time in the U.S.'s more than 200-year existence a woman nearly pulled off winning the presidential nomination for a major party. It was a moment worth savouring - unless the very idea gave you the vapours.

Clinton's loss is not a setback for women in politics or in any other public sphere. By hanging in, by never giving up, by toughing out every obstacle in her way, including the substantial ones she put there herself, she made it easier for other women.

When people think of female candidates now, they'll have an image in mind: A serious-minded, well-prepared woman who wears trouser suits and doesn't always say or do the right thing.

The mystery around how a female president might look or behave is gone. The idea of a woman running for president of the United States, to become de- facto leader of the Western world, is no longer an historic aberration, best buried and forgotten.

A woman ambitious and confident enough to go for the highest seat of power in the world is no longer a bizarre departure that was so hotly denounced by commentators from Rush Limbaugh to National Public Radio's Ken Rudin.

Her concession speech last weekend was worth the wait: "I know there are barriers and biases out there, often unconscious," she said. "You can be so proud that, from now on, it will be unremarkable for a woman to win primary state victories, unremarkable to have a woman in a close race to be our nominee, unremarkable to think that a woman can be the president of the United States. And that is truly remarkable."

As her supporters called out their approval, she continued, "To those who are disappointed that we couldn't go all the way - especially the young people who put so much into this campaign, it would break my heart if, in falling short of my goal, I in any way discouraged any of you from pursuing yours."

She added, "We weren't able to shatter that highest, hardest glass ceiling this time, thanks to you it's got about 18 million cracks in it. And the light is shining through like never before, filling us all with the hope and the sure knowledge that the path will be a little easier next time."

That path should be easier next time - if only because the next woman who comes along to contest a presidential nomination will be prepared for the sexism that pervades some political commentary.

For those who doubt that mainstream media commentators make outrageously sexist remarks on the air as though they were the most banal thing imaginable, the Media Women's Centre, a U.S. women's rights organization, has put together a video clip at: YouTube - Broadcast Yourself. watch ?v=g-IrhRSwF9U&eurl= http://www.salon.com/mwt/bro

On the video are some of the moments that prompted Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, to say recently to the New York Times, "The wounds of sexism need to be the subject of a national discussion ... Many of the most prominent people on TV behaved like middle schoolers" toward Clinton.

It took a long time and a lot of hateful commentary for Dean to react to the sexism Clinton's candidacy unleashed. To his party's shame, he still stands pretty much alone in his condemnation of it.

A lot of ideas filter across our border with the U.S. With luck, one of them will be that there is no longer anything abnormal about women running for highest office. Whatever strategic or other mistakes Clinton might have made, hers is an extraordinary legacy to the women of the world.
Hillary Clinton's legacy to the women of the world

RK77 · 06-25-2008, 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mithrall

You are absolutely right, there was alot of sexism involved. If you call holding a woman accountable for bald-faced lies about her valor, or lack theorof, sexism. If it is sexist to expect accountability from someone who voted to authorize the use of force which has led to 4000+ soldiers dying and 30,000+ being critically injured, then yeah I'm sexist. You know what? if Hillary Clinton is the example of a female candidate that you are gonna hold up to us than I am gonna let my sexism remain unrestrained. While we are at it, WTF is up Nancy Pelosi? When are the Democrats going to hold the line instead of caving again and again to the Bush Administration under her "leadership"? Isn't it time for the third movie of the trilogy? I'm still waiting for the return of the jedi or king. Hell I'd settle for a hobbit at this point in time. I was gonna say Jar Jar but he is too close to what we already have.

The most aggregious sexism spewed in this campaign came straight from the Hillho's own actions and statements!

She is the one who got hyperemotional and teary about 'weally wanting to be president' after losing Iowa (there is NO crying in politics --- NOT about losing--- which was the ONLY explanation for the tears ---'I want these things for my nation and you are not chosing me'.)

She sought credit for being a scorned woman (with all her comments about the trying times she had faced as first lady and her comments on Tyra Banks).

She highlighted her sexuality by trying to get some sort of mother of the year award for having 'raised' (which she has never established she did) a child who LIES on cue to the american public.

She tried to take credit for the work of her husband---STRONGLY suggesting that she had nothing else to her own personal credit!

She had her husband making remarks about 'boys beating up on her' without so much as a simple --- 'ignore the clown in the corner' remark much less a rejection/denounciation/repudiation/condemnation/ of the remarks. AND THAT was among Bill Clinton's MILDER sexist imagery of his wife! His whole damn argument was basically --- "I married her--so that should mean something." A feminist would neither have appreciated those remarks NOR tolerated them!

His remark about NEVER seeing any political candidate soooo disrespected---was the clencher-- reminding EVERYONE of how he disrespected her and she was not woman enough to remove her child from the enviornment!

She made several speeches commenting on it taking her longer to get dressed than the men in the campaign---telling people to think about how much "harder" that made things for her.

She referred to herself as "Paulette Revere" instead of picking any of HUNDREDS of feminist heroines to refer to.

She channeled a nag bag hag by flailing around and screeching "shame on you!" like some crazed Mommy-Bitch-from-hell stereotype!

And all of that does not BEGIN to touch the fact that one can not BEGIN to make arguments about discrimination while they ENCOURAGE ---VIRTUALLY INSIST that discriminatory ideologies can and should be applied by the Superdelegates to GIVE them an election they could not earn!

Yes----sexist remarks were made during the campaign---but bitches who lay down and spread their legs in a gang of men should expected to get fucked! When a woman chooses to place her sex front and center of the her arguments then she has NO business whining.

Feminism is about RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES! They go hand in hand! You can't have it both ways!

A feminist does not compromise herself by playing to every fucking 'I am a weak incompetent' stereotype! She accepts her responsibility to represent those of her sex with some iota of dignity!

The FACT is that EVERY appeal that Hillary made to women was NOT about being a leader or a competent person----it was ALL about we are women so we should stick together!

I work with FAR too many competent women everyday who NEVER appeal to other women on these levels ---- it was NOT necessary! The stereotypes she played too were insulting!

LASTLY---for any woman to CLAIM she has 35 years of experience and is READY on Day One to face the challenges of being president to be so ill prepared to deal with the sexism that was EXTREMELY predictable is the BEST argument for NOT trusting the woman to take herself to the toilet and wipe her own ass---much less run a nation!

The Hillary supporters have done NOTHING but underscore every negative by crying "sexism" and by claiming they would support McCain.

What in the hell could they possibly have been thinking?? If they were thinking at all!

Did they think the nation or the superdelegates were going to say----"Oh, there was sexism and Hillary can't handle it----so we'll punish the sexists by making her a PRESIDENT who can't handle sexism???"

What kind of IDIOTS thought that?

Or maybe they thought that CHAMPIONING party disloyalty was going to make someone trust and depend on their loyalty MORE!

Feminists---real feminists (not just homo- sapiens sporting vaginas) are a shit load more politically saavy than the Hillary supporters have shown themselves to be! They needed to find a pro- Hillary position and run with it! All they came up with was one Anti-Obama/Anti-DNC mantra after another. They let their candidate down----BIGTIME!

NOW -- true to the negative stereotypes for women---they want someone ELSE to be responsible and make it all better for them. It is disgusting! There is NOTHING feminist about it---not at all.

RK77 · 06-25-2008, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Teri B.

My purpose in posting this is to hopefully get some of the Obama supporters in the bubble here to realize that if trashing Clinton, or looking the other way while Obama supporters do, is a requirement of supporting Obama - many women will not. If it's time to "unite," then it's definitely time to end the animus, the sexism, and the character asassination. An awful lot of these kinds of views expressed so prolifically on this website aren't mainstream, or even shared by the majority of democrats.

Quote:

Originally Posted by julia

If you are so concerned about sexism why don't you look to other woman leaders and support other woman candidates running for office?

Hrc is no longer in a candidate in an election so why not support some women that are rather than be bitter and dwell on Hrc's failures?

I see no constructive position on your part.

Emily's List supported Hrc and they have clearly moved on, why can't you?

Elizabeth Edwards June 24:

Thanks Jules! There are about 50 women running for offices this year, I believe. It seems that those who are truly concerned about sexism would be telling us this and providing the information for us. Unless, of course it is yet another attempt to USE this as an excuse to plead to be pandered to until November.

To suggest that ANYONE should hide their thoughts about Hillary, her campaign or her existence on this earth to pander to those who like her is childish! The world does not work that way.

It never ceases to amaze me how spoon fed those who CLAIM to be Hillary supporters based on some feminist perspective expect to be.

It is however, entertaining to see those who have bitched about all Obama supporters being brained washed (drinking the Koolaid, hypnotized, etc) now claiming that we don't hold "mainstream" party line views.

Is that an admission that those supporting Obama here are doing so based on unique and original thought processes that lead them to their choice?
Is independent assessment a "bad" thing in the eyes of a Hillary person?

julia · 06-25-2008, 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Teri B.

Where did I say anything about Obama promoting those things? I didn't. I'm talking about ON THIS WEBSITE and in the media. And I don't think women feel slighted by Obama. I think they feel slighted by the media, and the loud mouths on the web, but they are TRYING to put that aside and not let what Obama supporters do affect their opinion of him. That would be easier if his supporters would actually stop doing it though.

Nice twist and spin though.

Hillary Clinton's legacy to the women of the world
There no longer will be anything abnormal about women running for the top jobs

JANET BAGNALL
The Gazette
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
.....

Oh cmon!!!
Other countries have already had women as heads of government!!

India's PM Indira Gandhi, The Uk's PM Margaret Thatcher, France's PM Edith Cresson all come to mind of the top of the head.

What's up with the Hrc-centric, americo-centric obsessive pov??!!

I apologize to our international viewers.
I am so sorry that so many Americans willingly or not mistake opinion for fact.
That is one of the many reason this country is in such a big mess.

Oh, and not many women of the world would look up to the "leadership" of voting for a war based on un-verified intel, this vote which Hrc refuses to reject or denounce.
Most women of the world are not pro-war.

HarperLee · 06-25-2008, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RK77

It never ceases to amaze me how spoon fed those who CLAIM to be Hillary supporters based on some feminist perspective expect to be.

It is however, entertaining to see those who have bitched about all Obama supporters being brained washed (drinking the Koolaid, hypnotized, etc) now claiming that we don't hold "mainstream" party line views.

I don't think the hardcore Hillary supporters were ever feminists in any relevant sense of the word.

My state has a fine woman Senator who has never once played the "they pick on the girls" card, even when she lost a close gubernatorial race.

I am still at a loss as to how Obama or the MSM played the gender card against Hillary. It is my understanding that the "iron my shirt"
protestor was a Clinton plant. It is true that Carl Bernstein mentioned Hillary's thick ankles in his biography, but how many people, including
Obama himself, have made fun of his ears? (SNL characterized Obama as a dull-witted boob -- and SNL is no longer so cutting edge that it cannot be accused of racial sterotyping.)

Hillary was blatantly dishonest when she played for sympathy in one of the debates when she mentioned an SNL skit and pointed out that she always got the first questions. In each debate, there was a coin toss to see which candidate got the first question. It is my understanding that Clinton opted to be first.

Fortunately, there are many women in office who have moved far beyond Hillary Clinton's brand of whiny, pseudo-feminism. Those of us who have "walked the walk" were painfully aware that Clinton broke every rule that women have had to follow to make the workplace a level playing field. This is not surprising, because Clinton's sense of entitlement came from her ride on her husband's
coattails and her martyr points because of her husband's infidelities.

She blathered about her 35 years' experience until Super Tuesday came and went, and people started questioning the substance of that experience -- 16 years of which was as a token female corporate attorney.

I have my problems with Nancy Pelosi, but I think she was diplomatically saying, "Get over it." She -- and many other successful federal, state, and local female office-holders have shown that you do not have to wear pantsuits and threaten to
obliterate an entire country, play the brave martyr about your husband's serial infidelities, blatantly lie, and play the race card to be taken seriously.

When she finally conceded, Clinton said that there were 18 million cracks in the glass ceiling. I am not so sure. The two female candidates for the highest offices in my lifetime, Clinton and Ferraro, have done no favors for their sisters.

Much is written about the Bradley effect. I am wondering how many white males, good old boys and their more evolved sons, won't cringe at the thought of a female presidential candidate
anytime soon.

06-25-2008, 08:19 AM	#2 (permalink)
EvilMonkey Administrator Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Oregon Posts: 5,905 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 62 Thanked 396 Times in 240 Posts	What specifically did Obama do to promote or condone sexism? Please don't say "ran for president" I mean he has ran a pretty damned clean campaign all in all and never once did or said anything to that extent. With that in mind what exactly does he owe the women who feel slighted by his winning? I mean he's said some pretty nice things about her and is now asking donors to help her pay off her debt. I understand you are frustrated but this "we owe you something because you lost attitude" doesn't seem too fair. Yes, he has lost the support of some women and he will also never get votes from those who are racist. Some things you just can't help. __________________ Barack Obama - Get the facts at BarackObamaWatch.com
	Top

06-25-2008, 09:05 AM	#3 (permalink)
julia Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 3,317 Blog Entries: 7 Thanks: 211 Thanked 218 Times in 129 Posts	I am an Edwards supporter but I don't feel the need to post about him everyday since he is not the frontrunner. The other candidates took on most of his platfrom, HC, green economy, civic service credits for college, etc. but I don't sit around and complain about it. If Hrc supporters are so concerned about unity why don't they do like Hrc and pledge to do everything to elect Barack Obama? Hrc made a lot of errors and voters started to tune her out. Not many wanted to keep up with her yarns and misspeaks anymore.
	Top

06-25-2008, 09:09 AM	#4 (permalink)
Mithrall Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 528 Thanks: 61 Thanked 87 Times in 49 Posts	You are absolutely right, there was alot of sexism involved. If you call holding a woman accountable for bald-faced lies about her valor, or lack theorof, sexism. If it is sexist to expect accountability from someone who voted to authorize the use of force which has led to 4000+ soldiers dying and 30,000+ being critically injured, then yeah I'm sexist. You know what? if Hillary Clinton is the example of a female candidate that you are gonna hold up to us than I am gonna let my sexism remain unrestrained. While we are at it, WTF is up Nancy Pelosi? When are the Democrats going to hold the line instead of caving again and again to the Bush Administration under her "leadership"? Isn't it time for the third movie of the trilogy? I'm still waiting for the return of the jedi or king. Hell I'd settle for a hobbit at this point in time. I was gonna say Jar Jar but he is too close to what we already have.
	Top

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode