Feminist leader sides with Obama over Clinton

The key word that was used was "equality". I don't believe that Clinton would be fair & equal. With there position on "organized labor" & being puppets for them I don't believe her ! ! ! ! !

Okay, so we're supposed to be all up in arms that a feminist leader is voting for Barack? Um, are we freaking out every time a guy votes for Hillary?

Get a new headline already.

OUR TIME TO BE TREATED EQUAL IS NOW"
Women deserve to make the same salaries as men, the same opportunities as men!
LADIES LETS MAKE HISTORY FOR OUR GRANDMOTHERS, MOTHERS AND DAUGHTERS!!!
Mrs. Ladybird Johnson Former First Lady, United States of America. Women can move beyond the struggle for equal status and for material goods to the challenges and opportunities of citizenship. I always hope that the very best of our people will go into politics and some of our best are women. So, I say: "Don't hold back. Don't be shy. Step forward in every way you can to plan boldly, to speak clearly, to offer the leadership which the world needs. To pluck out prejudice from our lives, to remove fear and hate where it exists, and to create a world unafraid to work out its destiny in peace. Eleanor Roosevelt has already made her own splendid and incomparable contribution to that foundation. Let us go and do likewise, within the measure of our faith and the limits of our ability. Let Eleanor Roosevelt teach us all to turn the arts of compassion into the victories of democracy. Eleanor Roosevelt taught us that sometimes silence is the greatest sin. VOTE CLINTON 2008

What I could never figure out is why feminists would support the Clintons, period. Bill Clinton abused and used women throughout his life. He has been accused of rape, sexual harrassment and sexual intimidation by a host of different women, from campaign workers to women he just met at wherever. And, all that time, Hillary looked the other way and appeased it. And to top if off, Hillary has used him to get to where she is at in life. So, she enabled his sexual predator behavior and she fed him off him to gain power. Seems to me both of those attributes fly in the face of what the feminists are allegedly all about.

I just can't believe all of the people trying to prevent Hillary Clinton from becoming president. How can you possibly call yourself a "feminist" if you can't even back a woman who is very much qualified, MORE qualified than any other candidate out there? I don't understand it at all. It's like they look at her personal life and decide she is not good enough to be president. That's ridiculous. Are they scrutinized on a daily basis about their personal lives? The only change Barack Obama is going to make is being the first African American president. Other than that, he is not going to change politics, hell he's doing the same crap everyone else has been doing. He's not changing anything, no more than what Hillary would be changing. Matter of fact, he's a hypocrite. I don't see how you can be "feminist" and not see that this woman is working her behind off and is going up against some pretty heavy forces and she's not backing down or giving up. If you watch her debate and listen to the things she says, there is no way in hell you would possibly listen to nonsense from Barack Obama and come to this very disturbing conclusion. I'm just in shock. I realize the Clinton's have baggage, but there are two of the smartest people in politics, sure they want power for themselves but they have also dedicated their lives to helping people. Barack Obama is scary in that he appears arrogant and fully in this for the power trip. Now that gives me a chill to think everyone is overlooking these obvious traits and jumping on that bandwagon. Including women? What? Whatever. As for the war vote, he was not in the Senate to vote. I commend him that he had the insight to be against the war, hoorah for him. But is he really the best equipped to get us out of the war? To condemn Hillary for one vote that many people made back then is just ridiculous. Who knew the President, the person you're supposed to trust, would misuse his power? NO ONE really knew. So for women to use that one tiny little wedge against Hillary just makes me disgusted. You're not feminist.

And one more thing, this group sounds to me like a group of Hillary haters that just flat refuse to back her as they had been supporting John Edwards. This article is a useless piece of trash. Just to let ya'll know.

Well put, Kate Michelman. I agree with you. Washington defenitely needs to be shaken to the core.

"Every now and then a generation is called upon to do something great".

Nelson Mandela

GO OBAMA IN 2008!!!!!!!

I am a FREE WOMAN who is able to make up my own mind despite my gender. I must follow my heart and conscience and that leads me to OBAMA. That is what the movement was all about!!!

FREE WOMEN FOR OBAMA

I like Obama, he's a nice guy, but:
NICE GUYS FINISH LAST!

The GOP plays hardball. The right-wing media is just waiting for Obama to be nominaed so they can marry him to Rezco and compare his military experience to McCain's.
The right can't beat the Clintons. They even tried to impeach one of them and failed.
Before we can start to "bring America together in shared purpose, prosperity and, especially, equality" we have to drive the GOP out of politics. Hillary can do that, Obama can't.

its not surprising that feminists wouldn't support hillary. her base is not exactly the educated type

So what? I am a feminist and I've never heard of her...because I have nothing to do with the horrid organization of NARAL. These endorsements are just BS. If anyone casts a vote for a candidate simply because of an endorsement they don't deserve to have the right to vote.

Poor Illinois GOP,ready to bring in Alan Keyes to face Dick (Turbin)?????

Illinois GOP feels eclipsed by Obama
By Rick Pearson

Tribune reporter

February 4, 2008

Despite a vigorous national fight for the GOP presidential nomination, some of Illinois' leading Republicans fear turnout of their voters on Tuesday could be dampened by a Democratic race featuring a popular favorite son.

That's a far cry from the thoughts among Republicans in June when the state's Democratic-controlled government moved Illinois' primary to Feb. 5 from its usual mid-March date to help boost the presidential bid of first-term Democratic Sen. Barack Obama.

Back then, Republicans figured Illinois would become a major battlefield for the GOP presidential nomination as candidates competed for the state's highly prized convention delegates while Obama's Democratic rivals wrote off the state.

But with more than 20 states holding primaries and caucuses on what has become Super Tuesday, Illinois has become largely an extraneous commodity on the campaign circuit. Candidates trying to stretch their time and dollars have largely competed in other states where the Democratic outcome is less certain and where Republicans see an easier time capturing delegates.

Most Illinoisans aren't seeing the staples of a full-fledged presidential campaign.

"With Chicago and the other huge media markets out there, there's no way the campaigns are able to afford these with Super Tuesday and states like California and New York also in the mix," said state Rep. Jim Durkin (R-Western Springs), the Illinois chair of Republican Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign.

"It's as grassy a grass-roots campaign as you can ever imagine," he said.

No on is trying to prevent Hillary from becoming president. You say that like it's her birthright.

People are backing who the like best; and that's how it should be. People voting for Hillary because they want to see a woman as president are sexist. Simple as that.

I agree with the poster asking how feminists could EVER support Mrs. Clinton. Now that Bill has degraded himself even more with the Rovian tactics thrust on Obama, my disgust is such that I will never support her or him. When this sexual predator pointed his finger at us and said "I never had sex with THAT WOMAN" I turned away. And that made me so sad because I had really supported them in his early presidency. It's sad to say but it's true.

Hillary is experienced and politically mature. She is intiment with the pressures the position presents and very comfortable managing them.

Barack is inexperienced and lacks political maturity. He will cave in from the political pressures of the likes he has never seen nor felt before.

Logic and facts, not opinions and personal feelings should drive your voting decision.

HILLARY CLINTON FOR PRESIDENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

***WATCH HILLARY CLINTON AT 8:00 PM ON THE HALLMARK CHANNEL***

HILLARY CLINTON IS THE MOST QUALIFIED, MOST EXPERIENCE, MOST INTELLIGENT, MOST POLITICALLY SKILLED WITH THE BEST GRASP OF DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL ISSUES OF ANY CANDIDATE IN THE RACE OF ANY PARTY!!! THE DEMS ARE LUCKY TO HAVE HER.

BARACK OBAMA IS NOT QUALFIED TO BE PRESIDENT. IT'S THAT SIMPLE.OBAMA IS WRONG TO ATTEMPT TO SULLY THE REPUTATION OF FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON. OBAMA SHOULD SHOW SOME RESPECT! REALLY, WHO DOES HE THINK HE IS? WHEN THE MEDIA CIRCUS AND OPRAHLOOZA KENNEDY SHOW IS OVER AND THE REAL SCRUTINY OF OBAMA BEGINS, AND IT WILL, HE WILL BE CRUCIFIED IN A GENERAL ELECTION. THE RIGHT WING NUTS AND THE LEFT WING NUTS WITH THE MEDIA HAVE A 24/7 VILLIFICATION OF HILLARY FULL ATTACK MODE IN GEAR. IT'S UNFAIR AND UNWARRANTED. ASK YOURSELF WHY?

VOTE SMART, VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON FOR PRESIDENT! THE CLINTONS ARE WINNERS! THAT IS THE POINT ISN'T IT?????

Hillary supporters are like the parent of a truly rotten kid. Little Johnny bites, kick, and hits all the other children w/o provocation and when the other parents complain, little Johnny's parent accuses the other children of provoking him - or of being liars. Report after report of bad behavior streams in and Little Johnny's parent refuses to budge - the fact that so many reports are coming in just mean that there is a vast right wing conspiracy out there. Little Johnny is an angel and if you would just suspend rational thought for long enough you too will be convinced.

What good is experience if it leads you to the wrong conclusions?

This is why the question of support of the war in Iraq is an important one.

Clinton showed that she was experienced in politics. Obama showed forsight. You decide for yourself what's more important.

I'd rather have a thoughtful president than an experienced one.

This has more to do with who is right for the country than with keeping Hillary out. Obama will bring this country together, Hillary will divide it. Hillary will owe corporations and special interests because they finance her campaign, Obama will not.
Obama cares about our country, Hillary cares about money and control.

I urgently ask all of you to please go to an article published January 16,2008 "Obama Rally at Catholic College "Irresponsible".

In the article under comments it states that the The Racist Black Panther Group is endorsing Obama.

It also states that if you go to another website(just click on Barack Obama on that site and it will take you to that site.

I urge all of you to check it out.

Will the real Obama please stand up.

I was an Edwards endorser too.

But unlike some other voters undecided, I check out the candidate I wish to vote for.

At this time, I am undecided.

But I defintely will not vote for Obama>

Also, the site is(where I read this article)is:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1955014/posts

I don't see where this "Hillary is more qualified" stuff comes from. Is "more time in DC" the qualification they are so impressed by? Well, that qualification doesn't have any connection to the attributes we need in a president, attributes like good judgment and the ability to bring people to our progressive causes. Obama has a better track record of getting things right the first time, an essential quality on day one, and he is much more effective in communication and persuasion. Repeating "35 years of experience" ad nauseum without ever connecting it with positive attributes doesn't make sense.

I love South Austin's metaphor for Hillary supporters. They always have an excuse for her. They claim that Barack will fold under, "pressure he's never seen before" like Hillary's ever seen it... But what they fail to realize is that they project all of Hillary's potential "Issues"...like donors, husband, and already existing independent and right wing hate of themselves on Obama. In short, just because the Clinton's have experienced pressure hate and politics of destruction in the past does not mean that Barack will or even try to address it in his presidency. The Clintons give this negativity in politics life. Which makes her fully unsuitable to even address a true, unfettered presidency. Furthermore I find it laughable that she has seen nearly as many pressures in life as Barack. Many people know and are aware that she was raised with every opportunity to succeed. She can't even be and has never been bothered with the true pressure of being wrong. Everything in her life has been poll driven, and everything without it has not shown the backbone of an independent thinker. She has, time and time again shown the affinity of a crowd follower and bet hedger. All somewhat admirable traits but not that of one considered presidential.

Oh and have you noticed a tendency of the most ardent Hillary fan to use ALL CAPS in their posts...What gives with that? I'm sure a shrink could write a cyber-psychotic thesus on that...

"The GOP plays hardball."

Do they now? Well we have seen the corrupt clinton's in action and they play "THE POLITICS OF PERSONAL DESTRUCTION"

As for your comparisons, the corrupt clintons have far more skeletons in their closet than Obama does. The corrupt clinton's even have ties to Rezko.

As for military experience, the corrupt clinton's also don't have any military experience.

Last time the corrupt clinton's were put into office in 1992, they made such a mess of it that the REPUBLICANS got control of the Senate, a major 8 seat swing, just two years later.

the REPUBLICANS also got control of the house, FOR THE FIRST TIME IN 40 YEARS on a gigantic 54 seat swing.

the REPUBLICANS also gained 12 Governorships and thousands of state seats.

The only reason 'impeachment' failed was because the Senate Democrats put 'party' over 'country'. The end result of that fiasco was PRESIDENT BUSH instead of PRESIDENT GORE.

So far from 'driving Republicans out of office', the corrupt clinton's have a PROVEN record of bad judgment that ends up PUTTING REPUBLICANS INTO OFFICE.

Obama, while is politics are as reprehensible as the corrupt clinton's at least has a truthful and good reputation to start from.

For all of you Hillary fans, thinking she will do fine in the general election- wait till the Repubs bring up Bill's issues with Cozecstan- it will remind the world of all of the drama with Bill Clinton and the dual presidentacy. Remember how Al Gore had problems with Hillary, wait till the new VP gets stepped on by Bill.

Also she still has not said how she would enforce her mandate of healthcare.

"The GOP plays hardball."

Do they now? Well we have seen the corrupt clinton's in action and they play "THE POLITICS OF PERSONAL DESTRUCTION"

As for your comparisons, the corrupt clintons have far more skeletons in their closet than Obama does. The corrupt clinton's even have ties to Rezko.

As for military experience, the corrupt clinton's also don't have any military experience.

Last time the corrupt clinton's were put into office in 1992, they made such a mess of it that the REPUBLICANS got control of the Senate, a major 8 seat swing, just two years later.

the REPUBLICANS also got control of the house, FOR THE FIRST TIME IN 40 YEARS on a gigantic 54 seat swing.

the REPUBLICANS also gained 12 Governorships and thousands of state seats.

The only reason 'impeachment' failed was because the Senate Democrats put 'party' over 'country'. The end result of that fiasco was PRESIDENT BUSH instead of PRESIDENT GORE.

So far from 'driving Republicans out of office', the corrupt clinton's have a PROVEN record of bad judgment that ends up PUTTING REPUBLICANS INTO OFFICE.

Obama, while is politics are as reprehensible as the corrupt clinton's at least has a truthful and good reputation to start from.

Hillary is tried and true, not shiny new. She's a total policy wonk/wonkette, knows the issues backwards and sideways, she's the one who tried to get universal health care for everyone back a zillion years ago, PLUS she's already been slimed and swiftboated. The thing about Obama is that he's shiny and new. Well, I'm not buying a car, so I don't give a crap about shiny newness. I want a car that runs.

Barack is not a change...he is another man. Kate's not MY feminist leader! I'll put my trust the woman.

Leave it to a Hillary plant to site a Free Republic article. Since 99% of their traffic hate the Clintons one could only assume they'll dredge the bottom of the barrel to find a fringe hate article on Obama.

I over heard some conservative garbage talk at work. This simple person said Hillary Clinton is a communist and will ruin the country. Conservatives loathe Hillary but I think a lot of them are neanderthals that can not accept a woman as president. I believe there are conservatives that are trying to prevent Hillary to become president just because she is a woman and also a woman they can't stand.

I've already voted for Obama. But if he does not get the party's nomination I will revel in the pleasure of voting for Hillary just so I could see the terror on the faces of conservatives when she would become president. At this point Hillary is my number 2. And that doesn't not make me any less a feminist.

Go Obama!

Hey Ellie - it's not about denying "the woman" the Presidency! It's about voting for the candidate most likely to represent average Americans (especially working-class women). It's about voting for the candidate most likely to fight against the status quo to protect our basic rights. Hillary has shown us sooooo many times that she is willing to throw us to the wolves, if it's politically convenient. Her vote to authorize Bush to invade Iraq was just one very public example of this. Most of the country isn't aware of the many other examples. Like her support for an anti-flag-burning amendment to the Constitution. Like her statement a few years back that Dems need to begin to compromise with Repugs on the issue of abortion. Like her taking gobs of $s from endless lobbyists, and ignoring the needs of working class people. Pay attention to what she's doing, not just to Hillary's gender, for goodness sake! I'm a constituent of hers (I live in NY), I'm a WOMAN, and I've been paying attention. I'm not crazy about Obama (really wanted Edwards), but I support him over Hillary, hands-down! She's a lousy sell-out. Let's at least give Obama a chance to show us what he's made of. Hillary's already had her chance, and what she's shown me is NOT very pretty.

Do you realize that Hillary has not gotten one piece of legislation passed through the regular process. Not ONE! All she has done is get earmarks for the state of NY slipped into appropriation bills. She is indeed the "Queen of Pork."

And she will be barb-e-que for John McCain.

I am a woman and would love to have a woman as president. But I do agree with others who ask: HOW COULD HILLARY STAY MARRIED to someone who is a sexual exploiter of women? How could all you who say you are feminists explain her decision to stay with this user of women? It seems hypocritical to be for women's issues yet be married to someone who uses women at the basest level.

Dear Manamongst:

For your information I am not a Hillary plant.

You just cannot believe that someone as myself would do some investigation on a candidate that I am going to vote for to lead this nation.

A candidate that has ties to a church that endorses Farakahan for his beliefs and a candidate that has eliminate the 11th and 12th commitment from his church doctrines (at a perfect time before election)should be investigated.

This is not all hear say..these are facts. The only problem is,is that you Obama supporters refuse to identify your candidate with negatives about his past and his voting record in the senate .

I will tell you, if he is our choice, I will vote republican, because tht's how most of us undecided voters feel.

Oh! and by the way the 11th
and 12th commitment from his church "The Trinity United Church of Christ are:

11. Pledgev allegiance to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System.

12. Personal commitment to embracement of the Black Value System.

Oprah belongs to this church also, and again, the Black Racist Black Panther group is endorsing Obama...it is on his website...go look.

DO Some homework Obama plant!!!

Also, their church is very anti-israel and supports divestment.

steve m. please keep posting your rants. You just convinced me to give Obama a donation. It will be the second time in my life I've given money to a political candidate and I'm in my late fifties.

Actually just check Media matters for yourself...and his whole line of haterade will sound familiar:

Carlson also stated that Trinity's "Black Value System" "calls for congregants to be 'soldiers for black freedom.' " In fact, Trinity encourages parishioners to be "soldiers for Black freedom and the dignity of all humankind [emphasis added]." The Tribune said that the church's "value system" was adopted in 1981 to hold "black Christians accountable for taking care of their own and for continuing to fight oppression." Further, the Tribune reported that according to Melissa Harris-Lacewell, a professor of politics and African-American studies at Princeton University, "the 'disavowal of the pursuit of middleclassness' is simply an argument against materialism and the pursuit of the American standard of wealth. Many white Christian churches also preach against materialism."

http://mediamatters.org/items/200702090009

"dear Teddy" did I read. If I were running for President, I would not want Teddy's endorsement. It would be the kiss of death. OK, bad pun. I don't know why Caroline weighed in but her father was not exactly a knight in shining armor, sad to say...a horrific womanizer as is/was most of the Kennedy's. I don't know why HRC stayed with Bill and it's none of my business. Does it diminish her? No. I respect her privacy and whatever her reasoning even if it was self-serving. OK, that's enough.

your comments manamongst on The Racist Black Panther organization endorsing Barack Obama.

Explain to people on this website why your not addressing this issue and we want your views on this endorsement.

Everyone look on Obama's website...you'll see it there plain and clear.

KAMENWATI: I DOUBT IF YOUR IN YOUR 50'S AND IF YOU'VE EVER GIVEN OR GOING TO GIVE, ANY MONEY TO ANY CAMPAIGH. YOUR PROBABLY A NEW WAVE COLLEGE KID WHOM THINKS OBAMA IS A 'ROCK STAR'.

More than ever, we all need the belief of hope from the below:

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3376&id=12036-6917360-czm1sG&t=1048

I am a southern man almost sixty, white, and am voting for Obama and will tell anyone I am so doing. Why? because he makes me believe that my hopes that America can find her place again to lead the world in a positive and hopefull manner just might be about to come true. Because Obama appeals to the hope and the spirit of all people who want great things for our children and grandchildren.. to make the WORLD a better place.

Geez, we have folks giving us links to Media Matters for UnAmerica and moveon.org?!?!? Talk about people allowing themselves to be brainwashed by liars, distorters, haters and BS artists!

Well since it's the 11th hour (just about). I thought I'd take a shot at explaining why the New Black Panther Party's endorsement is on Obama's website.

At first I was taken aback by the "any means necessary" I saw in their objectives. But I see their endorsement of Obama as just that, using peaceful political involvement as a means to obtain their objectives.

I too share their concern for African-Americans. I too would like to soon see them overcome the effects of slavery, bigotry, hatred, discrimination, etc. I'm sure they see Obama as some one who shares their concerns and will address these concerns as president.

I too see how the color of one's skin determines the content of their education. In no place in the US is this more true than in IL.

When Obama says yes we can change, part of that change he calls us to do is to not see things so black and white: me good, black pather bad, end of story. He challenges us to put aside past differences (and current) and recognize our similarities and all work together for change.

So why is the New Black Panther Party on Obama's website? Because it is consistent with Obama's message that all Americans must work together to improve our nation: black, white, liberal, conservative, independent, traditional, radical, etc.

I commend the New Black Panther Party for recognizing that Obama is the the leader our nation needs to better the lives of all Americans.

I'm just sorry that I didn't recognize all this right away. I'm a life long Democrat. I consider myself progressive. I usually see it as me trying to find a leader that is progressive enough to hear my voice but now I find myself aspiring to be as progressive as Obama. It's a weird situation for me. I'm not used to being lead. It's humbling.

Go Obama!

Bottom Line:

Like all of you. I know that health care is the most critical, and important issue facing the American people. Now, and in the coming elections. And like the vast majority of the American people, I want HR 676 (Medicare For All) passed into law NOW! "Single payer, Tax Supported, Not For Profit, True Universal Health Care" free for all as a right. Like every other developed country in the world has. See: http://www.house.gov/conyers/news_hr676.htm

“HR 676:
For church goers: less money to insur. companies and more to the church- lots more.
Srs on Medicare: save way over $100/wk. Because no more medigap, long term care & dental insur. needed. No more drug bills.”

But if we the American people fail to bring enough pressure on our current politicians to get HR 676 passed into law before the elections. We will have to identify, and replace all the politicians standing in the way of passage of HR 676. And, I think the best first place to start is with the politicians that blocked the bipartisan SCHIP bills for the kids. Passed by congress twice.

But what about the President. It was Bush after all that blocked the bipartisan SCHIP bill passed by congress to assure more health coverage for Americas kids. So which of the presidential hopefuls do I think will be most supportive of implementing the demand of the majority of the American people to have HR 676 (Medicare For All) passed into law immediately!

We have some very fine presidential candidates who would make good presidents. But none of the top Presidential candidates directly support HR 676, the only true Universal Health Care plan. So I am supporting Hillary Clinton. She is the only top candidate that has ever actually fought for universal health care before.

I have enormous admiration, and respect for Hillary Clinton. She fought a pitched battle against overwhelming odds back in 1993. To prevent this disastrous health care crisis that is now devastating the American people, and America. She fought so hard for the American people that she risk almost completely destroying her husbands presidency. I haven't forgotten her heroic effort. If any Presidential hopeful for universal health care deserves my support, it's her.

Also, if we the American people fail to bring enough pressure on our government to give us HR 676 which we all so desperately need NOW! Then we will need the most skilled politician we can get on our side to broker the best health care plan for the American people that we can get. Though it will be less than we need, and less than we deserve. The politician I think to best do this is Hillary Clinton. The Clinton's are probably the most skilled politicians in American history.

The insurance industry, and medical industry that has been ripping you off, and killing you has given Hillary Clinton so much money because they fear her. They have also given Barack Obama so much money because they fear Hillary Clinton. They think they can manipulate Barack Obama against the best interest of the American people better than they can manipulate Hillary Clinton. There is no race issue with Hillary Clinton. The Clinton's are the poster family for how African Americans want white people to be towards African Americans.

As always, African Americans are suffering, and dieing in this health care crisis at a much higher rate than any other group in America. The last time there was any significant drop in the African American death rate was when Bill Clinton was president.

My fellow Americans, you are dieing needlessly at an astounding rate. In higher numbers than any other people in the developed world. Rich, and poor a like. Insured, and uninsured. Men, women, children, and babies. And we the American people must stop it. And fix it NOW! Keep Fighting!!! Never! give up hope. There are millions of lives at stake. Bless you all... You are doing great!

It is really disturbing to see so many Sen. Obama supporters personally attacking Sen. Clinton supporters, citing lack of education, worrying about one's use of capitals, etc. Does anyone remember Sen. Clinton's book 'It Takes a Village: And Other Lessons Children Teach Us'? Democrats in general follow a certain creed and should follow Sen. Clinton's lessons from her book...we're all in this together. Postings should include useful comments and opinions, not name calling. If Sen. Clinton stayed with her husband out of love or in pursuit of her own self interests, who cares? That is the power of feminism...to give women a choice to live their lives how they choose, not how society chooses it for them. Personally, I'm O.K. with either candidate because I believe they have the same ideals. I do think Sen. Clinton has a better chance in the presidential election. A Clinton/Obama ticket would be awesome!!!

Here is something to think about...Sen. Obama sat proudly next to Sen. Kennedy at the President's State of the Union address...yes, Sen. Kennedy, one of the most obvious womanizers in politics. Why would he allow such an endorsement from such a womanizer?! Oh, yeah, the womanizing bit is Sen. Kennedy's personal business. Just like any employer, I want to know how my employee (or tax paid politician) benefits my company (or the taxpayer)...I could care less about his/her personal life.

Hillary Clinton the most qualified? She never held elected office before 2000. Before then all she did was ride Bill's coattails and serve on the board of Walmart. Bill was president in 1990's not her. He was a naturally gifted politician with intelligence, charisma and empathy. Hillary is brilliant but she has the charisma and leadership of a wet paper towel. And before any of you Clintonistas play the sexist card. I'm not saying she's unqualified because she's a woman. I'm saying she's unqualified because she is unqualified.

Hillary Clinton is a polarizing figure who leaves democrats cold and fires Republicans up. Obama inspires the young, independents and even republicans to come and vote for him. If democrats want to win Obama is the best chance.

SteveM,

As you know anyone can endorse anyone...why am I wasting my time addressing a troll? You've gotten your attention and your quota of ALL CAPS as well LOL...now scram to a DLC site or something.

Diane, abetter of mistreatment of women. I'm still trying to figure out why so many "feminists" accept unacceptable behavior by liberal or far left men. Rape a woman? That's OK according to many feminists because the guy is a liberal. Kill a woman? That's OK according to many feminists because that guy is one of us, a liberal. Attack and fondle a campaign contributor and then threaten her by killing her pets and other means of intimidation? That's OK according to the feminists because that guy is a liberal. He's one of us. What he does in his personal life makes no difference to me. I'd be willing to bet if Drew Peterson or Scott Peterson were far left political activists, most "feminists" would be OK with them because, after all, they'd be one of them: a liberal! Killing and abusing wives is OK, it seems, according to many "feminists," if that person is a liberal.
Feminist BS, I say!

Classic!

"I'm not saying she's unqualified because she's a woman. I'm saying she's unqualified because she is unqualified."

Harsh but true, I don't think anyone hates her...except maybe the usual right-wing fanatics...but we just can't afford her right now.

"The party is far more united than in the past. And yet there are important distinctions between Obama and Clinton—and not simply in the broad, almost gassy talk of inspiration versus experience. They come to today's challenges from very different places.

Consider Cuba policy. Almost anyone who is being honest will acknowledge that America's approach toward Cuba is brain dead. No one even remembers why we've imposed a total embargo on the country. A policy that was put into place at the height of the cold war, when fears of Soviet missiles and communist penetration were at their peak, has been maintained even though the threat that prompted it has collapsed. What exactly are we afraid this moth-eaten island will do to America today?

Our policy has the additional burden of having failed, by any measure. We've been trying to force regime change in Cuba for 45 years. Instead Fidel Castro is now the longest-lived head of government in the world. Every tightening of the Cuban embargo has resulted in further repression and isolation. And yet the only changes George W. Bush has made to our Cuba policy have been to impose more restrictions on travel and trade, a cruel and futile doubling down on a bad bet.

Obama has advocated easing the Bush-imposed ban on Cuban-Americans visiting the island and sending money to their relatives. He makes a broader case for a new Cuba policy, arguing that capitalism, trade and travel will help break the regime's stranglehold on the country and help open things up.

Clinton immediately disagreed, firmly supporting the current policy. This places her in the strange position of arguing, in effect, that her husband's Cuba policy was not hard-line enough. But this is really not the best way to understand Clinton's position. In all probability, she actually agrees with Obama's stand. She is just calculating that it would anger Cuban-Americans in Florida and New Jersey.

This is the problem with Hillary Clinton. She is highly intelligent, has real experience and is an attractive candidate. But she is terrified to act on her beliefs. In fact, she seems so conditioned by what she sees as political constraints that one can barely tell where her beliefs begin and where those constraints end."

Don't get me started about NAFTA. She didn't agree with Bill on that triangulated piece of corporate giveaway, so for the past decade she's had to defend a stand she truely doesn't believe in. And like with her defense of the Authorization for War in Iraq she defends the undefensible...you'd think she would learn but she personifies the paralysis born by the corporatist-lite of DLCers and the frustration caused by the likes of Reid and Pelosi. she breeds fear hence her condescension of HOPE.

"There's never been anything false about HOPE"

In short, we don't have time to nurse her through her small-time thinking.

I like Obama but I don't think he is ready. He has had a Cinderella-style whirlwind career, being a virtual unknown within Illinois just four short years ago and then catapulted to national attention for one great speech at the 2004 convention! This qualifies him to be president, along with being telegenic? I don't THINK so.
If Obama gets the nom, an experienced pol like possibly John McCain, who has been campaigning since the Stone Age, will eat him alive in the general election. Our chances of getting a Democrat into the White House are much, much better with Hillary. It's too risky to take a chance on an unseasoned pol like Obama, sorry.

I am saddened and ashamed of so-called leaders like Kate Michelman and Karen Mulhauser who have thrown their feminist principles aside to support Obama.

This isn't polemics. For weeks the answers provided by the Obama and Clinton campaigns to a questionnaire on sexual and reproductive rights distributed by RH Reality Check have been posted online.

Compare the answers given by both candidates question by question, which you can do here: http://thelurkingcanary.blogspot.com (includes links back to the original documents on RH Reality Check). You will see some key differences in terms of experience, breadth of platform and issue framing.

And you will also see this, a most troubling is Obama's answer to this question: "Does (the candidate) support any restrictions on abortion, or does (he or she) believe it should be entirely up to women?"

The Obama campaign's response is:

Obama supports those restrictions that are consistent with the legal framework outlined by the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade.

Those of us with even minimal experience in these issues know what that means. To date, every restriction the Supreme Court has approved has been deemed compatible with Roe v. Wade. This answer indicates that Obama wants lots of wiggle room on choice, most likely to appeal to religious conservatives (see his response to the 2nd question for a hint about that).

I am quite frankly disgusted by the feminists who have lined up to kick Hillary in the teeth without once thinking about the impact this could have on real women here and abroad. I don't believe they have done due diligence on the issues upon which their credibility as leaders rests.

If they want to support Obama because of other issues, fine. But to call yourself a feminist and not support the first politically feminist candidate for president - a candidate who has a track record of working on women's rights, and who has detailed plans for what she will do for women's rights in the future - is simply absurd.

Dear John,
I pray that you'll have the heart to endorse Hillary. She merits all of your goodwill now. I dislike Obama for his smug and proud posture hehas taken which showed his true self in the last debate,with all of the Kennedys throwing themself only to show dislike to Prez. She deserves more. I am a Democrat but will vote for Republican if
she is not the one.

John D, An enlightened woman's decision to work on her marriage with her straying husband is not our business. Convicted rapists/murderers are not in the same category. You're comparing apples to oranges. Sarcasm was being used concerning Sen. Kennedy...Im not a 'liberal feminist', in fact, I'm not a liberal but I am a believer in equal rights, and I have a hard time understanding you people knocking Sen. Clinton for staying with her husband but ignoring the relationship of Sen. Obama and Sen. Kennedy. To further compare these relationships to a man who murdered his pregnant wife is a display of tunnel vision. You are correct that there are boundaries not to be crossed. Unfortunaley, we live in a society where a convicted rapist/wife beater could still draw a crowd in the name of sports! You're response indicates that if a man cheats on his wife, he should be meted out the same justice as a convicted rapist/murderer. Yikes!!!Good thing glass houses are not too popular!