“So one can reasonably assume that you don’t bother to READ anything else that Truthdig even publishes on their site either!! “

Assumptions are problematic by definition. Making assumptions gets us no closer to the truth. In FACT, you do not know how long I have been reading and visiting TD. Maybe I just never posted before this primary election season. Perhaps I only post when no one has stated an opposing view or when feelings and hopes are passed off as fact. Or maybe it is you who have not seen or read my posts on non-Hillary topics. Or could it be you forgot that I have posted on other topics.

As usual you are all sound and fury signifing nothing.

Unfortunately SP, most of the items that you state you will see under a McCain administration have already happened. Go to http://www.streetalker.com to read my rather harrowing experience in the state of Kentucky, one day after George Bush announced mission accomplished. And yes the dollar has plummeted, compare it with the Euro or Pound etc. The EPA has already backed down to political pressure. Watch the recent Oversight hearings in Congress chaired by Rep. Henry Waxman. Behold the EPA officials who completely dummy up when asked about their meetings with the White House.
I am sorry to say, 20-25 years from now, there will be no social security. It pains me to tell you this, but the republic is completely broken. The lies about everything is catching up with us and the reckoning for many will be brutal. Why? Because so many in this land paid no attention, just as long as politicians appealed to their vanity and ignorance. The illusion of empire has squandered an incredible amount of resources, and the people (demos) allowed this to take place. A democratic republic is only good when the citizenry is well informed. So it is not very surprising that there are powerful forces in this country who are intent on destroying public education.
As far as voting democratic, there is a difference between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Senator Clinton’s infamous comment about obliterating Iran, reveals something about her character that should not be casually dismissed. Obama, who is a moderate, not a liberal, has more wisdom than the Senator from New York. The people in his own party who support him, from Kennedy to Robert Byrd, speaks volumes about who the candidate of the Democratic party should be. As a baby boomer myself, I realize that this country can not stand another person from my generation in charge. For perspective, consider this: Barack Obama was 2 years old when JFK was assassinated, and 7 years old for MLK and RFK. So the brutalities that shaped the boomers’ lives are not his.
It should also be noted, a recent poll of people over 65 years showed that over seventy percent thought John McCain is too old to be president.
I hope this is useful,
Peace is a living action
The Beer Doctor

Bert:

“...That is not what TD started out as nonna. But it seems like that is what it has become.”

How would YOU know this???

You haven’t been posting here for that long yourself, and you NEVER post to anything other than stuff about Hillary or to bad mouth Obama. So one can reasonably assume that you don’t bother to READ anything else that Truthdig even publishes on their site either!!

And yet, you continually threaten us with your continued presence here. So I guess we should all be grateful, in a “it could always be worse type minset” that you DON’T have any other interest in this site, unless it’s about HILLARY, HILLARY, HILLAY, and the destruction of the other gender nationwide. Lucky for the rest of us (I guess) that this eliminates your annoying presence from most of the best threads avaialble here.

But, since you won’t go away completely, and since you are incapable of talking about anything other than the politics (and numbers) of personal destruction, tell us why THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ELECTION IN YOUR (ALREADY TOO LONG AND MISERABLE)LIFE.

And, you DID tell us that at some point back. That this was the most important election of your entire life!! Yep, written with all of the true drama of a…fill in the blank.

So, is there something for you to PROVE from this ‘most important election of your entire life?”

Thank you psmealey.

Your very civil, honest, and responsible response here is much appreciated. And, very informative I might add, since you’ve worked with these candidates and have first hand access to those who know others via your associations.

Thanks again.

You obviously have me confused wuth someone else, psmealey. I never claimed martydom or said anyone was being mean to me. Plus I never posted on May 20 @2:01 p.m. I posted two times on this thread: May 19 @6:22P.M. (#157751) and May 20 @ 5:01 p.m. (#157579.)

YOU ARE NOT RID OF ME THAT EASILY. I DON’T INTEMD TO GO AWAY OR STOP POSTING. IN YOUR DREAMS.

I think you have me confused with somebody else, psmealey. With what specific words did I ever claim martydom? I did not claim anyone was being mean to me. Again, cite, quote me the words you claim I made. Plus I have never stated that I would stop posting on TD, although a few have said they would not miss me. I NEVER INTEND TO STOP POSTING SO YOU ARE NOT RID OF ME. Again, you have me confused with some one else.

Well, if your response to every reasonable counterpoint is LA LA LA I CAN’T HEAR YOU, OBAMA IS NOT QUALIFIED, then what’s the point of your posting hear anyway?

SP and others below made some excellent points to address your own charges against Obama, yet instead of engaging in dialogue like an adult, you claim martyrdom and whine about people being mean to you.

Good riddance.

You are right and yes I intend to forget it.  Name calling does me in.  It’s too bad that Truthdig has been overtaken like this.  I used to enjoy Truthdig, but I have had enough.

There’s a saying that I came across.  “Never assume malice when ignorance or stupidity will suffice.”

Why are we not allowed to voice our opinions with out this vitriol.  Insulting us will not likely make us change our minds about your candidate.  It is more likely to have the opposite effect.

I’m not really getting where you’re “not allowed” to voice your opinion on this site.  By my count you have voice THE SAME opinion no less than 5 times on this single topic. 

As for the “vitriol”  (good word… use it once, it makes you sound erudite, but use it 5 times, it makes you sound trite), is this the first time you’ve posted on a public message on conversation board?  If so, I’d advise you to start developing a thicker skin.  If you the milder digs that I’ve seen on this topic “objectionable”, I fear you are in for a very short and sad posting career on-line.

Your crystal ball works no better than mine or anyone else’s.  Let’s try to avoid judging history until it actually becomes, you know, history.

Obviously if you have known and loved her for years and have worked tirelessly for her and for no pay then you could not have found her “deep flaws” and “dictatorial” attitude too disturbing.

That was in 2000 and prior.  I worked on her campaign in upstate New York that year.  Based on her behavior since being elected to the Senate, and particularly her votes for authorizing military force in Iraq (and then in Iran just last year) I had a major change of heart about both her values and her seriousness as a political figure.

Whatever you say of Obama’s inexperience, he seems to have a great mind, thinks well on his feet, does so undogmatically, and is open to criticism and change.

As for your considering a man who has pledged to continue to support the abysmally failed policies of the past eight years as being “more qualified” than Obama, I must seriously question your judgment, not to mention your values.

“If Truthdig is meant only to be a forum for Obama supporters and they are unable to listen to opposing opinions, then it is not for me.”

That is not what TD started out as nonna. But it seems like that is what it has become. No rational discussion. Vitriol and name calling are as far as the search for truth goes here. Opposing oppions are only offered by ‘stupid, Republican war mongering, bitter, uneducated bigots.” Makes no difference what you really are. Opposing opinions goes against annoiting the chosen one, so forget it.

OK, now that is a sexist (and age-ist) thing to say, and I’m saying some of you are stoned out of your everfreaking gourds!  How can I not have some fun though, when someone makes racist comments like Ferraro has done—and then her supporters make comments like Ms. Ruccia in the article says this:
“We, the most loyal constituency, are being told to sit down, shut up and get to the back of the bus,” she said.”
———-UHH, using Jim Crow metaphors to put down supposedly negative treatment of a woman candidate by supporters of an African American candidate?  Can anyone say ironic?
P.S., I’m in love with Cyrena & Louise—and I’m not being ironic.

What is odd about choosing not to vote for a candidate I feel is unqualified to become President? I was raised to believe that as an American I should vote for the person that I believed would be the best president. 

You may know Obama personally, I certainly do not. I can only go on the research that I have done and on the opinions of other people who do know him personally and have written about their associations with him.  Also, the 20 year associations he has had with personalities such as Rev. Wright and Mr. Rezko do not encourage confidence in his judgment which Obama professes to be superior to that of both Hillary and McCain.  His distancing himself from them at this point is quite a bit too late.

I have no intention of defending Hillary. She has a record of accomplishments that can stand on their own.  Obviously if you have known and loved her for years and have worked tirelessly for her and for no pay then you could not have found her “deep flaws” and “dictatorial” attitude too disturbing. I would dispute with you that her experience is “artificially inflated”. That statement does not concur with the research that I have done on her life. 

Your statement, “make a stink, act out, stamp your feet, hold your breath, etc”, “pissed off”,  is exactly what I find objectionable on this site.

If Truthdig is meant only to be a forum for Obama supporters and they are unable to listen to opposing opinions, then it is not for me.  I will not upset the love fest.

“President of America”? I never knew NAFTA had worked so well.

If I shared the observations you have described, I would certainly not vote for him either.  But I believe that you are mistaken, based both on my research of his record, and my knowledge of people that know him in Chicago and have worked with at the University of Chicago, and institution with which I have a long association.

You are definitely entitled to your opinion, nonna.  I don’t think anyone has made any argument to that effect.  I think you have accepted as truth, accusations made against him by people that have their own agenda at work.  I think the unsavory characters that you associate with him, are tangential to his Illinois and national Senate careers at best and not material in any way.  As for Reverend Wright, he’s been painfully clear on that, and I believe that this personal matter being dragged onto the public stage has wounded him.

As for Senator Clinton (for whom I worked in 2000, tirelessly for next to 0 pay), those of us that have known and loved her for years also were aware that she was a deeply flawed candidate.  Somewhat dictatorial, which suspect and artificially inflated experience of her own, and a much longer history of consorting with people that most of us wouldn’t deign to talk to.  But, we all were willing to overlook it.  And then came the campaign and the accusations.

There were the clinton supporters that threatened to vote for McCain if Obama got the nomination.  A shocking revelation, especially when you consider the Sen. Clinton HERSELF said there was very little difference policy-wise between Obama and herself.  Yet, for some odd reason, people would be willing to vote for the candidate who least represented their views to punish Obama.

Very Odd.

It’s clear that you are not going to be persuaded otherewise.  But it’s also clear that you do care that people do not welcome your views.  You have posted here again and again to make a stink, to act out, stamp your feet, hold your breath, etc.

That’s all your right and your prerogative, but you cannot be surprised if people treat you like a pissed off Clinton supporter, rather than a vessel of truth.

You’re right nonna, you are ‘entitled’ to your opinions, and you’re right that they aren’t welcome here, (or so it would seem). So, while you claim not to care, why do you bother?

You want people to stop WHAT ‘vitriolic’ name calling? Help us out here.

Never mind, don’t answer that. You’ve just given us a FEW of your reasons for your disapproval of Barack Obama.

Guess what? Who cares?

My comments are not welcome in this Obama supporter echo chamber but I don’t really care.

My reasons for not supporting Obama are neither sexist nor racist.  I just truly believe that he is the least qualified of the three candidates running to become President.

He has no record to run on.  He has associations with questionable characters and in my opinion you are judged by the company you keep.  He can present a speech with great eloquence but he is not capable of backing up his speeches on a one to one basis.  He is completely lacking in experience compared to the other candidates. He has, during his political career,  avoided casting votes that would leave a trail that could be used against him in his desired political future dreams.  To me that appears disingenuous and lacking commitment.  Even his books are part of his plan to create an image for himself with exaggerations and actual falsehoods in his memories. These are a FEW of my reasons for my disapproval of him as a candidate for the President of America.

If you do not know why people might disagree with you on Obama, at least would you please stop vitriolic name calling. This is still America and we ARE entitled to our opinions just as you are.

Ah! distractions from the real issues, let’s move over to the gay bashing next, then the Mexicans after that.

What war?

Kath,

I can only say, I hope they aren’t falling for it. MOST of us aren’t falling for it. At least the real democrats who aren’t still whining because of Hillary aren’t falling for it.

Still…you’ll see me sooner rather than later if they do.

Is NARAL being sexist when they endorse Obama?

Yep Outraged, I remember him. (the Ty-D-Bol man). And just how long do you think that bowl would be all sparkling and white if Geraldine jumped in there with him? Well, no matter. It would be HER toilet, and she and her Ty-D-Bol man could have it all to themselves.

Meantime, I just happened to read this article, just because it was delivered to my mail box, and I’m avoiding doing my real work.

The guy haters are gonna hate it of course, because they think it’s ‘sexist’ for Obama to give respect to his opponent and his fellow citizens for staying in the race till the very, very end. (somebody’s already complained here that Obama’s comment that Hillary should stay in the race as long as she wants to, is ‘sexist’). In other words, ANYTHING he says is gonna be ‘sexist’ according to them. If he pulls out a chair for her to sit, THAT’S ‘sexist’. Now if he DIDN’T pull out one for ME to sit, (at least if he was standing right there), I’d bong him over the head for NOT doing it. (poor dude, he can’t win for losin’ in the ‘am I a sexist or not category’)

Anyway, I’m particularly taken with the photo included in the piece. It’s a picture of some of my MOST FAVORITE people, escorting him into their community, and well…you’ll have to check it out. It brought a smile from me, even after all of my cussin’ and fussin’ from earlier on.

Besides, it’s also an informative piece.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/20/us/politics/20obama.html?_r=1&th;=&adxnnl=1&emc=th&adxnnlx=1211282064-oLtIYbttrbL20n0hS7bmIQ&oref=slogin

As a woman, I’ve had more than I can take of this shit from those hollering sexism on behalf of Hillary (which is really on behalf of themselves). It is the most superficial and sidetracking thing that couldn’t be more out of place, and at a more urgent time. THESE are the REAL SEXISTS! Yep, I’d list them all, but we all know who they are, and they know who they are as well.

For them, NOTHING ELSE MATTERS, than that a woman be president. Never mind if she doesn’t have the qualifications, and never mind if she’s as much a loose cannon as ANY MAN, and spends all of her emotional energy trying to PROVE that she’s as ‘tough as any man’. Based on these supporters, we should just put up with all of their bitter life experiences about being mistreated because of their gender, and instead of them just going to counseling or something, to deal with THEIR PERSONAL ISSUES and insecurities, they would subject US and the rest of the world to strong arm Rodham. And, is Hillary gonna just fix that all up for them? All of their grievances about being born women instead of men, or all of the harassment that they’ve suffered at the hands of evil men?

I’m just really curious about that. I’m curious that these women would be so out of the box about this, because it can’t possibly be that they actually expect her to correct decades of gender discrimination overnight. (or at all) And there’s an irony here…I’m a woman who has been subjected to gender discrimination in employment, (always earned less than my male (and white) co-workers doing the same (actually better) job.) AND sexual harassment, AND racial discrimination, blah, blah, blah. But guess what? At least HALF of all of those offenses have been perpetrated NOT by men, but by my fellow ‘sisters’! AS RECENTLY AS LAST WEEK!

But, after reading comments from these hard-core women who are so determined that THERE MUST BE A FEMALE IN THE WHITE HOUSE BEFORE THEY DIE, I just have to say ‘fuck ‘em’. This election is not a one-day sale, and life goes on. (at least I hope it will) We’ve had a more than a few superb female leaders/politicians, and they aren’t going anywhere. There will be a female president, WHEN it’s the right person for the job. Hillary is not. Timing is everything, and she missed it.

I should also add that none of these women that do all of their ranting and raving on this blog have any clue to the fact that there are those of us out here who are NOT sexist, or racist, and look ONLY at the qualifications for the office, and needless to say, we look at the history/the record/resume. And I’m not looking at Hillary’s record side by side with anyone else’s, I’m looking at it as a STAND ALONE collection of information. Hillary raised her OWN hand to vote for the war on Iraq, and the only complaints she had on that decision until a year ago, was that WE HADN’T SENT ENOUGH FIREPOWER, and/or enough men and women to do the job securing the oil sooner! (she’s got HER/corporate “American interests” to secure across the world)

She’s been on the Senate Armed Services Committee for 5 years, and she hasn’t done DIDDLY SQUAT for any of our troops. Nothing for all of the women being raped, (and in some cases murdered to cover it up) Nothing for ANY of them.

And then of course she’s gunning for Iran as well. And no, we didn’t JUST FIGURE out that HRC was a flippin’ HAWK, and we don’t want a HAWK in the White House, REGARDLESS of what gender they are. We have no desire to keep sending our most precious resources to be wiped out so that HRC can think she’s playing with the big boys.

Meantime, I have to go put on my dress and my high-heeled moccasins so I can bust some more glass ceilings, and I damn sure don’t need any help from the likes of Hill or Geraldine. Ya’ll can cut off your OWN noses, to spite your OWN faces, but not mine.

Anyone remember the Ty-D-Bol man..?  The way I see it, this would be Geraldine Ferraro’s “dream date”.  Remember… he was the guy floating in that rowboat, blond hair and dressed all in white in the toliet bowl….

LOL…  There’s just something about that scenario that…well..is perfect.  I think she belongs IN THE TOLIET with the Ty-D-Bol man and all his sparkling “whiteness”.

Ah Louise…

This is absolutely another one of your best works!!

(I know, I know…I always say that, but hey…it’s true, you just keep outdoing yourself)

Anyway, this is such a keeper. It think I’ll print it out, and attach it to my hobo bag that has my “Women for Obama” pin already on it. I would pin it to my shirt that has the same thing written on it, but I could wind-up looking really stupid. I mean, a 55 year old woman with a note pinned to her chest could look a little foolish. They might even confuse me with somebody who’s wandered away from one of the many old folks’ homes around here.

Opps, I meant the ‘assisted living facilities’ (ha ...wish I COULD afford to live in an ‘assisted living facility)

But alas, I’m still not finished busting through glass ceilings, and we’ve got WORK to do. Hell, we’ve always got work to do, ‘cause SOMEBODY has to do it. My daddy always told us, if ya want somethin’ done RIGHT, get a WOMAN to do it.

So, ya’ll just get out there and get that man into the White House…YES….BARACK OBAMA is who I’m talking about, or just plan on keeping your asses barefoot and pregant, or barefoot and bitter..whichever applies.

The rest of us have work to do. (and I’m not talkin’ about scrubbing floors. You can hire a man for that..they do it better than I can anyway)

Why do women want power, especially political power?
It can’t be because they want to make the world a better place, because Hillary threatened to annihilate an entire nation with nuclear weapons.  Apparently it’s just the same old lust for power that men have.

nonna:

despicable - definition:
Deserving of contempt or scorn

Yep! That’s how I feel about racists. Especially racists who use the pretense of being an offended woman suffering from discrimination. They are indeed deserving of contempt and scorn.

By the way Louise is my full name:
Leilani Ownah Usoa Isabella Santana English

You can call me Toby.

I’m kidding of course. Only my very closest friends call me Toby.

I’ll say it again…

All of you people who call yourself Democrats…or even “real” Democrats…who then talk about voting for McCain are beyond any kind of help available: professional, pharmaceutical, religious, or otherwise.

You may be a brand new demographic: the i’ll shoot myself in the foot on purpose demographic.

I’m not a Democrat, so this isn’t a call for “unity” or “loyalty”.  Vote as you wish.  But you should stop calling yourself Democrats and start calling yourself Clintonians or something.

Have you been so cowered and fear ridden by your electile dysfunction that fear is all you know?  Is that why you try to scare your fellow Democrats with vague threats of voting Republican?

P.S. I know full well that none of you have the guts to pull the lever for McCain…you have way to much fear for that.

I sent in my Oregon ballot for Obama several days ago. Obama’s expected to rout Hilary here, thanks to antiwar voters of both sexes who haven’t let themselves be distracted by race and gender red herrings.

Vitriol? How do you get through to someone who accuses you of being sexist when you oppose Hilary based on her support for war crimes against Iraq and Iran? We’re talking about a million innocent Iraqis that might be alive right now if Hilary and other warmongers had shown a shred of integrity and decency. Ditto on Iran. How can we talk about torture, mass murder and crimes against humanity without using some vitriolic, insulting language? Both Hilary and McCain deserve to go to prison, not the White House.

And if the shoe were on the other foot (i.e. Clinton was going to win the nomination), would you respect all the people who said, “I cannot vote for her for X, Y, and Z.”?

Or would you be telling us all how we need to unite to defeat McCain?

Wow, that’s a lot of genuinely venemous hatred (not to mention unsubstantiated accusation and slander) in a few short paragraphs.  I might suggest that you try and find some religion, because the not being very religious thing doesn’t seem to be working too well for you.  Just some friendly advice.

Wow, that’s a lot of genuinely venous hatred (not to mention unsubstantiated accusation and slander) in a few short paragraphs.  I might suggest that you try and find some religion, because the not being very religious thing doesn’t seem to be working too well for you.  Just some friendly advice.

Principled, as in being morally opposed to torture, and then changing his mind about it when it was politically expedient to do so?  Or principled in calling Falwell and “agent of intolerance” and then going to his University to speak when it was clear he’d need support from the Religious Right to support his candidacy?

You and I clearly disagree on what constitutes principle.  I’ll go with the guy who won scholarships and worked to put himself through school and excelled there, worked at the lowest level of politics in community organizing and then came up through the ranks of local and state government to be elected to the US Senate instead. 

I’ll take that over nepotism, too.

To be fair, the only people that have experience to qualify them for the office of the President are former Presidents.  No other experience qualifies.

You can hope that the person that will inhabit the office is of high moral calibre, great intelligence and compassion, but mentally very tough.  Nothing a person has done in the Senate or in a Governor’s Mansion will prepare him or her for that highest of offices.  Based on what I know of Obama, the people I know in Chicago that have worked with him personally, and what I have read by and about him, I believe him to be very able to inhabit this office. 

I would vote for Clinton if she won the nomination, but would have felt much more uncomfortable with the political machinery that supports her, her tendency to test market every statement she makes before she opens her mouth, and that she still has never recanted her support for an unnecessary, immoral, and very likely illegal war.

Obama’s “negatives” are mere blemishes compared to the criminal associations in the Clintons’ past.  His associations with Reverend Wright, Ayers et al are innocuous compared to the thugs that have long been associated with Bill and Hillary, like Ursultan Nazarbayev, Alvaro Uribe, and all of Bill’s Wall Street buddies that benefitted from the erosion of Glass-Steagall, presided over by his administration.

Unless there was some egregious offense not mentioned here or elsewhere in the media (hard to believe given the non-story stories that have ruled the airwaves), those are some pretty weak charges of sexism levied at Obama.

Citing the “likeable enough” remark (which was undeniably snarky, but not essentially linked to gender) and holding her chair for her at one of the debates (probably regrettable, but something that I might have reflexively done in that situation given my own upbringing), are hardly examples of playing the “gender card”.  As for challenging her experience as First Lady, I have difficulty seeing what’s either wrong or sexist with that. HRC repeatedly claimed that experience as an essential part of what made her “ready on Day One”. If she’s not to be taken to task for it, that seems like another example of her wanting to have her cake and eat it too, a theme which resonated time and again throughout her campaign.

As for the dogwhistle racism used consistently by Clinton’s surrogates and the patently absurd charges of elitism, Clinton has a lot more to answer for than Obama does.  That said, it was a close race, and some feelings were bruised on both sides.  We should try to get beyond this and start planning for the general election in the fall.

As for Marguerite Gualtier’s comment, it is a damn shame that she cannot overcome her personal bitterness to help prevent a further erosion of the social advances made during the last 40 year, but so be it.  We will soldier on without her.

My mother, Ms. era feminist that she is, always warned her sons about cutting of their nose to spite their face.

Personally, i really don’t care who you vote for (or against).  If there is something serious that you disagree with Obama (or any candidate) on, then you probably shouldn’t vote for that candidate.

But if you are committing the political/civic equivalent of throwing yourself on the floor in the middle of the grocery store and having a tantrum because mom/dad won’t buy what you want, then you deserve whatever you get from a McCain administration.

You’re right though, i won’t be laughing when Obama loses to McCain…but i might snort and chuckle when the McCain SCOTUS overturns Roe v. Wade or decides that your precious children are a necessary sacrifice for his imperial ambition.

Do what you will, but don’t expect me* to have any sympathy for the effect of your pigheaded stupidity.

*I am not an Obama supporter…just a concerned and ironically bemused citizen.

I don’t know who I will vote for if Obama is the D nominee. I cannot in good conscience support someone who has such little experience and such a thin resume for President of the United States of America and leader of the free world. His negatives make it worse.

I have too many misgivings about McCain. Third party? I just don’t know. It is a conundrum.

nonna, you missed one - ‘cranky.’ This is the ultimate sexist word men use against women. The campaign against Hillary has been one of the most sexist campaigns I have ever witnessed anywhere in any profession. It is terrible.

Recently both the Chicago Tribune and the Baltimore Sun ran excellent pieces on just how bad the sexisn has been in this campaign:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/features/lifestyle/chi-fempower-0518may18,0,4333714.column

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.women18may18,0,3121832.story

But don’t expect much if any sympathy here on Truth Dig. This is an echo chamber where Onama supporters come to cheer lead themselves on how smart they are to support Obama. They don’t let the truth or facts get in the way of their belief system.

I had a college psychology professor who always said that people do what they want to do and make their excuses up afterwards. Many on this blog are blatant sexists. Period. All their excuses are simply made up afterwards as a salve for their conscience.

Louise, do you realize how despicable you sounded in that post?  Or doesn’t it matter to you. How about putting your whole name on your post so that people who know you can better judge your character.

And what did Ferraro CLAIM to stand for because beyond hope and change I really can’t say I know what Obama stands for.  I don’t recall Ferraro mentioning anything about issues so please clue me in.

Who’s laughing? I despise Hilary because of her support for war crimes against Iraq and Iran, not because of her gender. Of course war criminals, sexists, and racists will vote for McCain if Hilary bites the dust. It’s scary as hell, not funny.

Marguerite, we are not laughing.

Nice people do not laugh at someone else’s handicap and misfortune. And not being able to understand the consequence of bad choices is definitely a handicap and misfortune.

To be sure, a lot of innocent hard working people are hurt by the bad choices of others, but in a free society, not to smart people are free to make not to smart choices.

Fortunately there are enough really smart people out there, who have overcome their handicap and misfortune to offset the not to smart ones.

And of course the smart ones will vote democrat, no matter who that candidate is.

Oh my, how do you call someone dumb without calling someone dumb?

Poor demented out of the loop out of her mind Geraldine Ferraro.If you do not give me what I want I am going home and hold my breath.Forget what is good for the country.Forget that a McCain Presidency would be disastrous for this country.You did not get the bicycle this Christmas play with the trains and maybe next Christmas you will get what you want.

You don’t appear to understand my point Aegrus.  What I am saying is that I resent Hillary supporters being subjected to vitriolic name calling because we disagree with Obama supporter opinions.

Even in your above post, using the “world being flat” as an analogy to indicate what you believe is the level or our opinions is calling us ignorant and uneducated.  Personally, I find this very objectionable.

It certainly does nothing to raise the level of the discourse of these postings.

No one is stopping you from stating your opinion Nonna, but when someone starts talking about the world being flat when it has been accepted we live on a round planet we are entitled to our opinion regarding the level of information you allow yourself to perceive.

I won’t speculate as to the motive for your opinion, but Ferraro is a sexist and racially biased because she refuses to acknowledge why Obama is in the lead. It’s not because people hate women. It’s because Hillary can’t make good decisions as a person.

90% of Obama supporters voted for him because they disavowed Hillary for voting for the Iraq resolution and the Iran resolution. It’s an ISSUE, and it’s the reason people vote for Obama.

While Pollsters continue to ask whether or not race is an issue in the reason people are voting for Hillary, no one asks whether gender is an issue in voting for Barack Obama. You know why? Because the true progressives have backed Obama, and there isn’t any other group who supports equal rights and civil rights more than the Left-Progressive Democrats other than the really Left and Pure Progressive Pacifist groups.

Ms. Ferraro’s comments only reinforce the disdain so many citizens feel about politicians, regardless of gender. Mrs. Thatcher immediately comes to mind. Was she a good leader for Britannia? Her privatization of social services, her war in the Falklands, her friendship with Pinochet… I wonder if Geraldine Ferraro, or for that matter Hillary Clinton, admired Margaret Thatcher as a world leader?
Women should be equal on the different platforms of life: equally good or equally bad.

I didn’t check the posted times. It should read “previous posts”

I reread all the above posts and this is what I found.  Those of us who feel that Obama despite his charisma is not in our opinion the most qualified candidate to become President have been called…..sexist, racist, childish, unaccountable, irresponsible, immature, lousy thinkers, crude, tone deaf speaker, narrow minded, “blindered” (?), mindless, clueless, prejudiced, and juvenile. 

Why are we not allowed to voice our opinions with out this vitriol.  Insulting us will not likely make us change our minds about your candidate.  It is more likely to have the opposite effect.

“They are proving that idiocy is an equal opportunity inflictor.”

Great line!
Thanks for the chuckle!

Crawl back under your rock darlin’ Darlene, before someone or something of color comes close to touching you ...

We wouldn’t want anything of value catching your disease.

Some things are so obvious, the only comment necessary is ... duh ...

Those women who are claiming they will campaign against Obama when he wins the nomination are proving the truth in every bad label women have gotten over the centuries! And apparently they’re too stupid to figure that out.

Women don’t like being portrayed as submissive or second class, yet submit to pressure from a person of authority and willingly accept putting themselves in second place to prove something, as in this case.

Geraldine will turn her back on the party, because the authority figure in this scenario isn’t getting her way. I guess she has something to prove.

Lord only knows what!

Seems she is willing to risk four more years of George W. Bush policy, rather than accepting the other guy won. Getting behind him and trying to regain control of our collapsing country.

I find that absolutely amazing!

Women like Geradline are the greatest enemy of equality! Because in their determination to prove they are equal all they can do is put down the other guy! She has not got a clue what equal rights for all means! She’s simply STUCK in a sense of entitlement that is absolutely incapable of recognizing to be equal ... you have to behave equally!

This is a hard reality to explain, because sometimes it’s almost more a feeling than definable. But every woman who has had to go out there and succeed, based on her OWN merits can understand, if they think about it.

While there may be a sense of real accomplishment to being “first”, being first doesn’t mean squat if you cant bring significant meaning to the position. Nancy Pelosi is the “first” woman Speaker of the House. Has the House changed a great deal?

Obama has touched a real need in the American people. And it’s not about “first,” it’s about CHANGE.

Everyone knows there has got to be a better way if we want to overcome the bad habits of the bad leadership that has become synonymous with Republican.

Hillary can see the result of Obama’s being able to touch peoples need for change. What she cant understand is what the word “change” means. It doesn’t simply mean “woman.” I guess that sums up her and her supporters problem better than anything else.

Supporters like Geraldine have cost Hillary the nomination, because they need to prove something! Problem is in proving what they think they are trying to prove, they are simply proving every negative attachment given to justify gender discrimination!

Their blind prejudice defines the blind prejudice that they claim to want to do away with! And they don’t seem to be able to comprehend that simple truth!

Millions of women have already broken that glass ceiling ... by themselves. Woman like Hillary and Geraldine had husbands who built a stairway to the ceiling, making it a lot easier for them. What on earth have they proved?

Go figure ...

Ladies! Get your butts in gear and go out and fight to put a democrat in the White House! In other words, put up or shut up!

We don’t need another pack of negative whiners muddying up the next election. The repubs are perfectly capable of doing that without your help!

Dear Geraldine,

From one woman to another, I’d like to pass on some advice from a woman who described early on why a lot of women would not be voting for Hillary Clinton:

“Enough. Enough triangulation, calculation and equivocation. . . Sen. Clinton is apparently incapable of taking a clear stand on the war in Iraq, and that alone is enough to disqualify her” (Molly Ivins, 2006)

^ thing, it’s just that gender is attached to one of the terms.  Hillary has lost for many reasons; but all of those reasons boil down to who she is.  It’s about her.

From the NYT article:
“Over the course of the campaign, Jennifer Rogers, a film producer in Los Angeles, came to agree. She voted for Mrs. Clinton, in part because she hoped to see a female president, but she recently lost enthusiasm over what she called a lack of truthfulness on the candidate’s part. “Her problems are about who she is and not her gender,” said Ms. Rogers, 28.”
“Amy Rees, a 35-year-old stay-at-home mother in San Francisco, agrees — most of the time. She said she agonized between the two choices, finally voted for Mr. Obama and did not regret it. Mrs. Clinton lost on the merits, Ms. Rees said.”

So there it is.

You don’t think. It’s more than obvious given your comments about Obama. You’re the sexist.