RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

Misogyny is the Willie Horton of 2008

My boss this morning greeted me with a “Happy New Year,” and, “I am sorry about Hillary.” It was odd that he chose to acknowledge my disappointment about Hillary’s loss only after Obama won the presidency. I told him that it is indeed a new day for the country but that the Democratic Party will have to examine its conscience on the misogyny directed at Hillary and Sarah Palin. For a moment, his eyes literally welled with tears.

Just as the first Bush won the election with the racism of the Willie Horton ad, Obama’s presidency has been purchased at the expense of women. The elder Bush’s craven victory allowed Bill Clinton to enter the scene with momentum. The flagrant use of sexism and misogyny in Obama’s campaign has marred his victory and you can be certain that there will be consequences.

Dr. Socks asks of women: “Is there any other oppressed group of people on earth who are expected to excuse any and all injuries to themselves as long as someone else benefits?”

The answer, of course, is no. Obama received the benefit of doubt no woman would receive.

Obama enters the national stage as a product without experience and without policy proposals. Can the image live up to the hype? Will the media and Obama’s supporters’ frenzied misogyny be employed as part of the permanent campaign of governing? Did my boss subtly acknowledge the expense of Obama’s victory? As George Herbert Bush “bought” his victory by exploiting Willie Horton, Barack Obama bought his victory with sexism and misogyny.

Heidi Li Feldman asks President-elect Obama:

Having won the Presidency, will you, Senator Obama, prove that you are going to join us in the greatest civil rights battle of our time, the fight for full political and economic recognition of women both in the U.S. and abroad?

It remains to be seen if the country will acknowledge and recoil from the sexism of this election. It’s possible, but unlike racism, I think we’ve seen that sexism and the hatred of women continues to be a strategy, even among those who profess to “progressivism.” We can only hope that there will be a rising tide of dissension against the use of sexism.

It remains to be seen if Obama will reject sexism, a prejudice which was corollary to his victory. The first step is for Obama to acknowledge that he benefitted from it.

Trackback URL

RSS Feed for This Post339 Comments »

Comment by benny | 2008-11-05 15:16:27

as I stated earlier: after the fall of hillary and palin, I sincerely doubt any woman will be allowed to be pres or vice-pres. Is sexism in americas collective genes or something? women are atleast 50% of our population. but the MSM, general citizens somehow look at it as a joke for a woman to run for office. both the dems (clinton) and repubs (palin) tried, but the MSM made fun of them and influenced the general publics perception. This is sad for america. even the europeans and asians have no problem electing women as head of state. for such a modern powerful country, this anti-woman stance is pathetic. all this talk about equality is exactly that - talk.

The damage obama has done is almost irreparable

Comment by Katherine B. | 2008-11-05 15:32:09

I agree that the MSM was horrendous in its efforts to trash both Hillary and Sarah Palin. However, we must look at and figure out why women are so unwilling to support other women. My female boss told me during the primaries when Hillary was still a very viable candidate that she couldn’t stand to listen to the sound of Hillary’s voice. She said it with such disgust! I had another woman become almost livid at the thought of Sarah Palin as Vice President. As long as most women believe and act as if it is in their best interests to identify with men as their heroes, their protectors, their meal tickets, we will never turn this around.

Comment by Five Thirty | 2008-11-05 15:35:58

I’ve seen the same thing from women at my workplace - a rabid *hatred!* of both Sen Clinton and Gov Palin.

Comment by Pennsylvania Red | 2008-11-05 15:49:44

How are the gals at your workplace liking Wall Street’s response to 0bamanomics:
Ah yes just the panacea a nervous investment community was seeking…

NOT

Comment by Pennsylvania Red | 2008-11-05 15:51:23

A case of post-election nerves sent stocks lower Wednesday as investors worried about recession began questioning what impact a Barack Obama presidency will have on business and the overall economy.

Comment by Tuppence411 | 2008-11-05 16:58:59

When it comes to the economy, Barky=Carter.
Period. You can’t grow the economy from the bottom up, wishing it was true will not make it so. I can’t believe so many otherwise rational middle-class people fell for his hopey/changey promises of crumb subsidies.
To do so will send this country into a great depression. Let’s just see if has the spine to forego a second term and break all his false promises for the good of the country. I am not holding my breathe, one thing I think he really believed was “wealth distribution”. Get ready to re-visit the 1970’s.

 
 

Comment by Five Thirty | 2008-11-05 15:54:49

I am waiting to see what the future holds.

There’s a lack of self-awareness in these women I mentioned. Their eyes can well up about Obama’s victory but they will also say spiteful and ignorant things about HRC and Palin.

Comment by Newly Independent | 2008-11-05 18:21:41

I want to slap the dogs— out of every stupid female Obama supporter out there.

Although there are other factors that caused this election to be lost (justified Bush hatred, for example), definitely irrational hatred of women cost both Hillary and McCain this election.

America is a woman-hating society - despite the phony PC tolerance image it tries to portray. Just like the fake ass Democrat party.

Comment by tinfoil hattie | 2008-11-06 09:05:35

I want to slap the dogs— out of every stupid female Obama supporter out there.

Nice. Because beating up women is the only thing that teaches them anything. Good one!

 
 
 
 

Comment by Woman Voter | 2008-11-05 16:37:07

Misogyny the is AMERICA’s BOOGIE WOMAN…they use it to turn out the vote like having Jessica Alba all tied up, naked and gagged. They use it to tell men, they will be castrated if women are in charge. They don’t like the ankles, the cackle (CNN’s women reporters said this too) or looking old. They said of Palin they would like to F@@@ before doing her in and that she should have aborted Trig, and took joy in attacking her children.

I remember Katie looking at her daughter and saying she didn’t know she was going to be there, of course that is because she too wanted to help out and ambush Palin. No one saw the full interview with Charlie Gibson, they chopped it up so she would look like a vamp! Good going!

How many Obama supporters were told by our media/press that Obama supported Odinga who signed on to Sharia Law and lost the support of the Christians in Kenya? NO, you don’t but should should have. One of my employees laughed when he told me I should order my burka, when Obama wins.

Women and children are the canaries in the mine, we saw that with the TALIBAN before they attacked. I hope you Obama supporters know you were born from the womb of a WOMAN, and that we are HUMAN BEINGS TOO!!!

The irony of the MISOGYNY BOOGIE WOMAN IS:

Every minute of every day all over the world, women are harassed, attacked and even killed just for being women, daughters, Sisters, mothers, children.

It doesn’t have to be this way. Amnesty International is working to stop it. Making a difference is easier than you think. The first step is making your voice heard, make some noise to stop violence against women.

Comment by Geo | 2008-11-05 19:25:27

How many Obama supporters were told by our media/press that Obama supported Odinga who signed on to Sharia Law and lost the support of the Christians in Kenya

?

I am amazed that something so outrageous as the Obama-Odinga connection. While a US senator Obama went to Kenya to support his Muslim cousin Odinga who had lost the election against a Christian. Odinga incited his enraged supporters to riot. They went on a violent rampage where Churches were burned and people were massacred.

The MSM buried the story.

 

Comment by Tess | 2008-11-05 20:55:02

“Women and children are the canaries in the mine.”: Astonishing post! Thanks so much - I will remember this forever.
PUMA still, regardless of whether that guy likes it.

 
 
 

Comment by The BHORM (The Barack Hussein Obama Resistance Movement) | 2008-11-05 15:50:17

Party before gender, plain and simple. Obviously it didn’t bother the Clinton’s because essentially the did nothing about it. I will never support the Clinton’s again on anything.

 

Comment by C.S. | 2008-11-05 15:54:03

It is safer to hate women. Women were even worse at condemning rape because if they acknowledged that it wasn’t the woman’s fault, then they were all vulnerable so rape victims had to “deserve” it.

Men had, and has, all the power and sometimes they allow women into their sandbox and sometimes they don’t. Women who feel safer playing by “men’s rules”, like the female suck-up at work, will always attack those they feel are the weaker victims. To change that attitude, you have to change society’s mores. And that will be done with our sons and daughters, not the “old boys network”, and their handmaidens, running things today. It wasn’t so much about Soertoro/Obama, who can’t even prove he’s a citizen, as it was protecting the “no girls allowed” government.

P.S. Pelosi was chosen to focus blame on her and to reinforce the weak female stereotype and she was more than willing to go alone to get along.

 

Comment by candy | 2008-11-05 23:07:48

I found all the trashing of Palin about her being dumb to be a totaly joke. What crap. We had Hillary, who was without a doubt the most intelligent, smartest candidate of ALL of the candidate of every party running, and yet being the smartest didn’t make an eon of difference. Then all of a sudden Sarah’s intelligence is the issue? Hillary pretty much proved that being intelligent is irrelevant when it comes to a woman. If Palin was just was smart as Hillary it would still make absolutely no difference. They can’t win. And that’s the truth.

Think about it, with Hillary they say men don’t like her being smarter than they are. Then they turn around with Sarah and say they don’t like her because she’s not smart enough.

That’s why when Sarah was nominated, I didn’t give a $hit anymore. Being smart was obviously not going to get a woman elected. So if there’s even a faintest realistic chance that Sarah can get in by some other reasons, then so be it. BEsides, she’s not the moron they make her out to be. This is a smart woman and she is no Dan Quayle.

 
 

Comment by sandi78 | 2008-11-05 15:34:18

Women constitute about 52% of the population in the US.

Comment by Amazon Queen | 2008-11-05 15:35:17

yeah we could do things if 90 percent of us weren’t trying to tear each other apart for the affection of men

 
 

Comment by Kal | 2008-11-05 15:37:45

Absolutely right about the misogyny, but I think it is unrelenting coldblooded misogyny plus a gigantic dose of corruption. Here is why I think this:

Remember 2000 and Bush v Gore? There were more pushbacks available, and the right people were in place to do just that. But all of a sudden, Daley (Chicago) announced that the DNC was dropping all its various legal and election challenges, and was walking away.

At the time, that did not sit right with me. I lived in Chg at a crucial time in my life. Met some of the wrong kinds of people, including some Daleys. They always push back. If they don’tk, they are pursuing another plan. So I felt then and I still feel now that something was wrong with that picture.

It took until March or April this year for me to figure it out. BO is the pushback. The DNC realized right then and there, back in 2000, that if the repubs could steal cheat bully and generally bulldoze their way to the presidency, so could the dems. The lowest common denominator had gotten even lower with the 2000 election. And certainly no Chg dem worth his (or sometimes her) salt would get squeamish about using repub tactics x 10, even if the rest of us find them repugnant.

BO’s area of legal expertize, if it could be called that, is election law/’planning.’ All of the pieces we have seen playing out got put into action back in the aftermath of 2000, and you just know they had been percolating through Ill. politics since 1968. The ‘distractions’ caused by 9/11 were just frosting on the cake to these guys. Who knows, maybe they egged the mortgage mess along for exactly the same reason, for sure all the same players were involved, weren’t they? And pulling the pin on the market at just the right moment? Not hard, when you know the people who run the gigantic pension fund investments etc. Think about the number of state-run pension funds in Illinois alone. Then start thinking about all those lap-dog govs in BO’s pockets.

But the ultimate reason for going ahead with BO now, rather than later? First, Blago (Ill gov) came under the Rezko cloud of suspicion, so the Chg gang was losing its designated weapon. Second, and we should realize that this would have been the plan all along, neither Blago nor BO and their gangs of thugs would ever have any qualms about trying to use Hillary as their path to success. How? Just totally steamroller her and come in over her back by unrelentingly using corrupt tactics in the background and running misogyny in the foreground to give people a reason to not mind what was happening.

I think this picture has been getting more and more obvious since we all sat up and went ‘what?’ after the first round of demands that Hillary drop out for the good of the party. Now that we have seen more of it, I think we are right: The plan was always to use misogyny to take it away from Hillary, and to do it by any means possible.

Now, the big question for the future: Are the boyz going to be content to pillage etc. for 4 to 8 years, or are they going to look for a way to make it permanent? And, where are the female BO’s? Or do women even want to play that way? Personally, I’m with Heidi Li — lets see if we can start creating a vision of politics that goes in a different, more caring, respectful direction, and builds an unstoppable political momentum — even though women don’t have the same control over states, billions, the legal process, etc.

Hmmm. Sounds like women’s age-old problem to me.

Guess we’d better get busy here real quick!!

Comment by Tess | 2008-11-05 15:59:51

Bravo post, Brilliant analysis. I think too “the damage to women is irreparable”. It’s always been bros before hos with these guys; that’s vulgar, but succinct. It works better than “race trumps gender”. But/and I’ve also had it with JudasFems - anyone have a better name?
PUMA still.

Comment by Herschel Greenspan | 2008-11-05 16:15:51

PUMA my ass

Comment by Tess | 2008-11-05 20:56:49

That’s redundant.

 
 
 

Comment by Northwest rain | 2008-11-05 16:08:40

There is that big picture that helps us understand the details.

I keep going back to the fact that the Chicago School of Economics is the home of the “free market” dogma and that many of O-zero’s economic advisers are part of the Chicago boy’s club.

Women are also women’s worst enemies — always have been.

Comment by Kal | 2008-11-05 17:05:56

Yes, as is Cass Sunstein, probably BO’s pick for the SCC. Hardcore ‘new’ left, and exclusively focused on male privilege except for the highly decorative ones.

 

Comment by tinfoil hattie | 2008-11-06 09:10:25

Women are also women’s worst enemies — always have been.

This would be true only if women had any power. We don’t. Make no mistake: Women’s worst enemy is patriarchy. We would have no reason to compete with each other for crumbs were there more than crumbs to compete for.

 
 

Comment by C.S. | 2008-11-05 16:09:35

I’m sure you know more about the involvement of the Judicial Branch of government than I do, but not one case against Soertoro/Obama could get beyond the filing stage. NOT ONE; even though his citizenship was in question, the single most important qualification to run for president before even seeing a ballot. Not one charge of fraud, not one case of voter intimidation, not one case requiring verification of voter status in states like Ohio. And at least two of these have gone to the Supreme Court, whose fundamental duty is to protect and defend the Constitution.

Oh, we have lost more than this election these past 8 years, we have lost Our right to have our grievances addressed by Our government. We have only 41 days to fix this and it will take more perseverance and courage than it has taken to fight this stacked ballot box for Soertoro/Obama.

 
 

Comment by Ani | 2008-11-05 16:15:18

Bud,

Amazing post. That, too, is all I have been talking about today as I congratulate the ‘winners.’ I remind them how Obama got here.

It is also shocking to me how many women both spoke against their own interests and voted against them as well. They are bonding with their offenders.

Comment by memi | 2008-11-05 16:47:59

Ani

Yes! Women voting for Obamarama were Ennablers! God save their children from harm…

 
 

Comment by mary | 2008-11-05 16:16:11

Thank you Bud!

Great post! The cost of the Obama Election:

MISOGYNY

whether he promotes it in his POLYGAMOUS HOMELAND of Kenya by donating thousands of dollars for Odinga’s woman-murdering thugs and gets told by the then president to “stop interfering and inciting hatred and revolution” — or whether he directs it at Hillary or Sarah….it’s Sexism this anorexic resume should thank for his ignominiously fraudulent victory!

McCain’s speech left me in tears….far superior to the teflon-obamyopic speech…..

WE SHALL OVERCOME! FOR THE NEXT 4 YEARS, THOUGH, HEAR THE BARITONE SCREAM…

“BACK TO THE END OF THE BUS, LADIES”!!!!!

 

Comment by DAB | 2008-11-06 08:36:40

Also the South Americans who I believe have two women Presidents right now (Argentina and Chile)/

 
 

Comment by IronMan | 2008-11-05 15:18:36

Speaking of Hillary Clinton, Obama just stabbed her in the back…again!!

The lady on my radio just informed me…

“Rahm Emanuel has been asked to be Chief of Staff and John Kerry, Secretary of State.”

Well, Ladi Freakin’ Da!!

Rahm Emanuel, the turncoat has no shame!!

Comment by hadenough | 2008-11-05 15:30:48

Rahm Emanuel, the turncoat has no shame!!

The kossacks at the giant orange stupid hate Emanuel. They hate him. He was on the top of the list of people that had to go. Now msnobama says Emanuel was offered and has excepted the job. The election is just hours old and obama has already taken the first swing at his followers.

 

Comment by Docelder | 2008-11-05 16:29:29

John Kerry, Secretary of State

I guess if “throw my medals” can be Secretaty of State… then “stand on the flag” might as well be Secretary of Education. That’s change.

 

Comment by tek | 2008-11-05 19:26:32

OMG! Are you serious? John Kerry for Secretary of State! Well, that proves my theory. These D. C. Dems committed corruption to get Obama in the WH so they could run the government. They are all power mongers–didn’t want a strong president.

 
 

Comment by helmut | 2008-11-05 15:20:25

[Admin. Sexist comments removed]

Hillary had the opportunity to hire Axelrod but she went for Wolfson (who has NEVER ever won a political campaign he ran).

Don’t blame every setback on misogyny: it just makes you look a little stoopid and unsophisticated. Of course, I expect you to now call me a misogynist. Oh well

[Administrator Suggestion: Go to http://www.freerepublic.com -- they will need your advice, and will welcome you warmly. We're just not interested here.]

Comment by NOBAMA2 | 2008-11-05 15:26:01

Palin is no bimbo and is very deserving.
She’s done more with higher accolades than 0bama.
How dare you skip along with what the evil media maliciously painted? You’re awful!
Even Huffington Post called Palin “presidential material” before her VP pick, so did Time and USA Today. So you stand out as a post-facto hypocrite as do they all!
This WAS misogyny down to its ugly core, and 0bama never called it out for what it was along the way and he in fact contributed greatly TO it. He was dispicable. Lipstick on stinky pig fish!
0bama outspent McCain EIGHT FOLD and he lied and cheated and did his usual nefarious schtick to win. The media had 85% positive reports on 0bama and only 14% on McCain.
Your after-the-fact analysis is so illogical as to make any thinking person become nauseated.

Comment by helmut | 2008-11-05 15:29:03

[Admin. Sexist comments removed]

Comment by benny | 2008-11-05 15:31:56

PLEASE BAN this person. Its highly offensive.

 

Comment by Woman Voter | 2008-11-05 17:11:50

The interesting thing about feeling safe at these sites is, it is only due to the moderators. At RD, one day the tr@lls were out and I actually saw some of them. It truly frightened me and a couple of days later I came back.

I never could understand all the misogyny and hate these individuals had while chanting HOPE/CHANGE/

Truly shocking. Thanks you for letting us feel safe.

 
 

Comment by benny | 2008-11-05 15:29:58

relax. helmut is just plain stupid, although he himself doesnt know it.

Comment by memi | 2008-11-05 16:24:00

BENNY

HELMUT IS WELL-KNOWN CHILD OFFENDER.. OBAMA VOTED IN FAVOUR OF SEX SHOPS NEAR SCHOOLS AND CHURCHES IN CHICAGO and this creep is the owner!

Don’t bother with this assholian imbecile. he’s an Obamabot!

Comment by benny | 2008-11-05 16:37:26

memi, thanks for the advice

 
 
 

Comment by carr50 | 2008-11-05 15:40:11

“This WAS misogyny down to its ugly core, and 0bama never called it out for what it was…” Of course not - he was promoting the misogyny.

 

Comment by tek | 2008-11-05 19:27:57

I read that Palin was on a morning show this morning and the host asked her if she thought she was to blame for McCain losing! It never stops. She gave an excellent answer.

 
 

Comment by benny | 2008-11-05 15:27:45

no, you’re just plain dumb. but maybe you cant help it. palin a bimbo, yeah right. cant help yourself, can you? dumb and dumber. lol

 

Comment by JJR | 2008-11-05 15:38:32

You are telling us not to cry misogeny and yet you use the word “bimbo”????? I don’t understand how you can belittle our legitimate concerns so disrespectfully.

 

Comment by mary | 2008-11-05 16:21:42

helmut the obamabot

Do bist ein schwein.

Go tell this to some dumb obamyopic lackey like yourself, you sexist pig!

Why did Obama support Odinga to murder and rape and leave homeless 100,000 women in Kenya, you jerk?!

Remember:

“Obama Gives Hillary the Finger” — doing his rapper JayC wannabe act after losing the ABC debate:

Then he says…

“Periodically, HIllary feels down and starts launching attacks to boost her appeal…”

OBAMA’S WIN WAS PAID NOT ONLY BY SPENDING 8X AS MUCH AS MCCAIN, BUT, WORSE, WAS MADE POSSIBLE ONLY BY MISOGYNIST MEDIA FRAT-BOYS AND THE OBAMBI HIMSELF WHOSE DISGUSTING MISOGYNY WAS THERE FOR ALL TO SEE.

OBAMA LET HIS 2 GIRLS WATCH THE PORN-ON-THE PULPIT BY REV. WRIGHT ALL THESE YEARS. GO WATCH HIS SIMULATED SEX ACT YELLING ‘BILL CLINTON DID TO US WHAT HE DID TO MONICA’—GO WATCH, YOU MORON!

 
 

Comment by tillthen | 2008-11-05 15:20:58

Do ya think he did it to piss her off? Naaaaaaaaah.

 

Comment by tillthen | 2008-11-05 15:22:58

Helmut, I’d love to see your male ass wearing a birka. Whaddya think?

 

Comment by pm317 | 2008-11-05 15:23:16

Bud, as usual, you capture the social injustice of the moment in this insightful blog. Did your boss tear up because of misogyny or his winning?

Here is what I wrote at RD this morning:
Given a choice between a woman and a man, the corporate democracy chose the man and used his race to promote him and it did not hurt that he was a shiny, palatable Black (though a bi-racial looking black) man for all the Blacks and Whites alike. This is not an authentic victory for either the Blacks or the nation — for AAs he was black enough and for the majority he was not too black — this was not an authentic embrace of the race. That would have come if he had been subjected to the same scrutiny as the other (woman) candidate and him triumphing over objective standards. The symbolism can only take you that far. The fact that it was achieved on the backs of two women and that the majority of the voters and the party establishment rejected that option for the glossy corporate male candidate is nothing to celebrate. This is another death blow to women’s progress.

Comment by fluffy bunny | 2008-11-05 15:27:12

And another death blow to decency, and honesty.

Comment by Pennsylvania Red | 2008-11-05 15:56:32

This is another death blow to women’s progress.

I don’t know if I consider it a death blow, it certainly was a kick to the curb.

AND importantly it revealed the misogynists - of both sexes - in media and entertainment. Ladies, the power of the boycott is in our wallets.

 
 
 

Comment by Alice Paul | 2008-11-05 15:26:31

Maybe she didn’t hire Axelrod because of the tactics he wanted to use. He’s a psychopath who ran the dirtiest campaign I’ve ever seen in my life.

Thanks for this article. We’ve no need to “blame every set back on misogyny” we saw what happened with our own eyes. No excuses for caucus fraud, voter fraud and the media making the relentless comments they have that they couldn’t have got away with against any other group of people.

And you defend that? And deny. Minimizing the affect of misogyny is very telling.

Obama is going to continue to show who and what he really is on without the free ride in the media from now on. I for one am going to enjoy watching the pack of tigers tear him apart and expose his divisive hatred of my gender that was indeed a meme of his campaign ala Axelrod.

Comment by Just_Saying | 2008-11-05 15:43:03

Alice Paul, I hope you’re right: “without the free ride in the media from now on” but I have real doubts.

I expect the media to continue to give him a free ride. The media no longer has journalists, but fairly well-packaged fawning parrots and lovebirds.
.

 

Comment by memi | 2008-11-05 16:52:53

Alice Paul

Thanks! Great read. Hope you’ve seen IRON-JAWED ANGELS with Angelika Huston PBS movie. Great…

Now, do you really think the misogynist media frat-boys will take off their kidObama gloves and stop giving him a “pass”? I doubt it! Let’s see if Matthews and Olbermann get a promotion from their recent demotion….

The trickle down effect will mean that HIP HOP MISOGYNY WILL BE A SACRAMENT AND THE BOYS IN WASHINGTON WILL BE PLAYING LUDICRAS AT THE GOLDEN HOOPS IN THE WHITE HOUSE BACKYARD WHILE SNORTIN’ THE GOOD STUFF THIS TIME!

LARRY SINCLAIR WAS BOUGHOUT OFF BY AXELROD! that’s why you don’t hear him raving against his former CLIENT OF THE NIGHT LIMO!

 

Comment by Scout | 2008-11-05 17:00:53

We said as soon as Obama was given the nomination that his “free ride” with the media was over, but it was not.

I doubt it’s over now, either. Now they have to protect their investment.

 

Comment by Woman Voter | 2008-11-05 17:27:10

Alice Paul,

NObody knows what went on, some Republicans did and then started to mobilize but it was too late. The next president will be PRE-SOLD OUT or OF THE BUSH elite.

The MEDIA/PRESS died for me during this election. They were part of his campaign while claiming to be reporting.

 

Comment by tek | 2008-11-05 19:29:07

Axelrod specialized in advising black male candidates.

 
 

Comment by Wisewoman | 2008-11-05 15:26:47

People get a grip. I am a 63 yr old black female Hillary supporter. It would be the most stupid thing in the world for Hillary to become a part of Obama’s cabinet.

Comment by Arabella Trefoil | 2008-11-05 16:11:27

Amen, sister!

She belongs in the Senate where she shines like polished gold.

Comment by LandOLincoln | 2008-11-05 17:01:12

As vindictive as Obama is, as much as the Republicrat party hates everything Clinton, I think Hillary will be lucky to be allowed to serve out her term in the Senate.

I also look for McCain to be forced into retirement as soon as his current term is up.

Could be wrong about this, but I doubt it.

 
 

Comment by Northwest rain | 2008-11-05 16:19:29

Agreed — we need Hillary in the Senate. And as Senate majority leader — Reid has got to go.

Comment by JS Ruby | 2008-11-05 16:46:10

HRC wouldbe a great senate majority leader. Harry is such a wuss. I would also like to see Sarah replace Stevens of Alaska when they toss him out.

Comment by LandOLincoln | 2008-11-05 17:10:01

Yes, HRC would be a great senate majority leader, but I would be very, very surprised if that were allowed to come to pass.

 
 
 

Comment by memi | 2008-11-05 16:26:09

Wisewoman.

right on! Hillary’s gold and why should it be tarnished in the OBAMA TITANIC PRESIDENCY…it’s sinking already.

He only won on the backs of women, black, white, latinos. And didn’t give a flying stool about the Kenyan girls under Sharia Law thanks to the cousin Odinga whom he actively campaigned for in ‘06!

OBAMA-ODINGA ‘12

 
 

Comment by DeniseL | 2008-11-05 15:27:46

How can someone call a married mother of 5 a “bimbo?”

Comment by helmut | 2008-11-05 15:35:03

[Admin. Sexist comments removed] [UPDATED Admin comment: Too bad that state funds in California are aiding this dolt's education -- clearly the money has not been put to good use. Courses in Ethics, Sexism, Feminist History as well as RET (Rational Emotive Therapy) would help as well.]

Comment by benny | 2008-11-05 15:39:51

try and not insult your mom by saying that she is a bimbo, cos she had 5 kids, including you. have a little self-respect. :)

 

Comment by Buzz McLatte | 2008-11-05 15:41:01

Obviously your mother is a bimbo. She raised you.

 

Comment by KarenG | 2008-11-05 15:53:23

What proof do you have that she is a bimbo….she graduated from college with honors. She was a
straight A student in High School. She began educating herself as a young child prefering newspapers which she read cover to cover and non fiction reading to Nancy Drew, because as her teachers said about her…..she had a thirst for learning. She served on city council for two terms and was a mayor. She beat an incumbent governor and negotiated a pipleine with the
oil companies that benefited the people of Alaska
and that was in addition to raising five children.
Now share with us what you have accomplished in your life.

Comment by Pennsylvania Red | 2008-11-05 15:58:18

The proof he has that Palin is a bimbo is the same proof my (bimbo) cousin had:

It takes one to know one.

 
 
 
 

Comment by Alice Paul | 2008-11-05 15:27:47

Wise woman I agree with you. I hope she is NOT part of his cabinet at all.

Comment by Brodie | 2008-11-05 17:18:45

I hope she just ignores Precious and doesn’t do anything for him. Enabling is such a terrible thing…

 

Comment by csuzeq | 2008-11-05 18:06:16

I don’t understand why anyone thinks he’d choose Hillary for anything, but to pick up his dirty socks. He didn’t choose her as VP which was insanity due to his hatred for her. He won’t put her in any position in his administration.

 
 

Comment by hillarysmygirl | 2008-11-05 15:29:45

“Is there any other oppressed group of people on earth who are expected to excuse any and all injuries to themselves as long as someone else benefits?”

The answer is yes. Apparently gay and lesbian people are in this category too. Here in California, gay marriage was just banned. So “bitch” isn’t the new black. Women and gay people are. Obama got black people out to vote, 70% of whom voted to ban gay marriage. So racism is bad, but sexism, misogyny and gay bashing are permissible?

I welled up last night when Obama won. Not from happiness, oh no, but because a. I realized Hillary would never be President and b. because everything Obama stands for is now acceptable.

Comment by pm317 | 2008-11-05 15:36:08

I have been asking this about prop8. Did the majority of CA voters who voted for Obama not vote for this or did they vote like Repubs?

Comment by tampagurl | 2008-11-05 15:59:20

So let me get this straight. They voted for the rights of animals and not for the rights of human beings? I’m telling you something is wrong with all those people.

I remember when an Obama supporter said Palin shouldn’t have had trig because he was a drain on society and the environment but was appalled at the fact Palin sued the government to keep polar bears off the endangered species list.

 

Comment by benny | 2008-11-05 16:00:08

prop8 has passed. the ‘yes’ vote won.

 

Comment by George Smathers | 2008-11-05 16:43:53

This was not a Democrat vs. Republican issue in the state. Prop 8 passed because indirectly because of Obama’s candidacy. Support for Prop 8 ran the highest in the AA community, and since the AA’s turned out in record numbers to vote for him, the number of yes on Prop 8 votes went up as well. AA’s tend to be more family defined and more likely to regularly attend church services. Also to be taken into consideration is the high number of Asian voters in CA, many of whom are first generation immigrant families that identify as Democrats and are generally less religious than AA’s but also tend to hold to more conservative family views.

The number of voters who registered as Republican in CA compose only one third of the total electorate, i.e. 33%. Even making a false assumption (false because of those that did not vote on this issue or vote at all, plus thesignificant number of log cabin republicans in the CA party who would vote no on Prop 8) that all registered republicans voted yes on Prop 8, the 52% Yes on Prop 8 vote indicates that significant support for Prop 8 came from Democrats, third parties and the no party affiliated voters. Therefore, over 50% of the yes vote can therefore be attributed to non-Republicans even if one were to make the false assumption above that 100% of registered Republicans voted yes on Prop 8.

Here are the numbers form CA:

Prop 8 (96% of precincts)
Yes 5,240,930 (52%)
No 4,806,595 (48%)

President (95% of precincts)
Obama 6,125,805 (61%)
McCain 3,693,865 (37%)

It should be noted that the total number of registered Republicans in the state is just over 5,230,000 voters. If all Republicans who went to the polls voted for McCain, then lot of Republicans sat this election out in CA; that raises the non-Republican vote in favor of Prop 8 yet even significantly higher.

Comment by George Smathers | 2008-11-05 16:46:38

Where that smiley appears should be the number 8 followed by a closing parentheses ) - auto inserts suck when they don’t show up on the preview

Comment by hillarysmygirl | 2008-11-05 18:12:24

As far as your estimate about Asian Americans or immigrant Asians here in California, as an Asian American myself, I know that although our views ARE family-oriented, we tend to be quite open and supportive about homosexuals. The Buddhist religion is much more pantheistic than the Christian religion. From what I could tell, most Asian Americans were supportive of Hillary, but a lot of them (myself NOT included) were partisan Democrats who held their noses and voted for Obama. But…they DID vote to oppose the ban on gay marriage. I truly think it was the preponderance of African American voters, who traditionally think gay marriage is condemned in Christianity and in the Bible, who tipped the scales on the gay marriage ban.

Comment by WynterSkye | 2008-11-05 20:58:54

Surprisingly, the latino vote, which is predominantly Catholic and other mainstream Church denominations, had the lowest percentage of YES and of course the corresponding highest percentage of NO votes on Prop. 8 , i.e., Latinos were less opposed and more in favor of gay marriage than other groups, including the Asian vote. The AA community was split 70-30 for YES-NO on Prop 8, whereas the Latino vote was split 51-49. The Asian vote was split 54-46. The generic white male vote was 52-48.

 
 
 

Comment by pm317 | 2008-11-05 20:09:31

Thank you for this info. Yes, I was making the stereotypical assumption that Republicans would be the ones to vote yes but also noticed that the Dems would have had to vote yes to make the number as high as it is.

 
 

Comment by JozefAL | 2008-11-05 16:56:16

The vote count that I found (as of 1:15pm PST) had the following results:

President:
Obama–6,286,024
McCain–3,828,147
Others–190,361

Prop 8:
Yes (to ban same-sex marriage)–5,358,796
No (to allow same-sex marriage)–4,866,831
Unaccounted/not voting–78,905*

It’s pretty obvious that a sizable chunk of Obama supporters/voters voted to ban same-sex marriage. Even if you presume that ALL the “No” votes on Prop 8 came ONLY from Obama supporters (highly unlikely since the Green Party–Cynthia McKinney’s–supports same-sex marriage as part of its official platform, and the Libertarian Party, while not necessarily supporting same-sex marriage required Barr to apologize for his pro-DOMA stance while in Congress), that still leaves more than 1.4 MILLION Obamaists who voted FOR discrimination by voting “Yes”. (The only thing that makes this seem better than it sounds is the simple fact that there presumably would be nearly 100,000 3rd Party voters who would have voted “No” on Prop 8. In that case, the Obamaists who voted “Yes” would climb to nearly 1.5 million.)

*This figures come from the total cast among those who voted for Obama, McCain, Keyes, Barr, McKinney or Nader against the combined declared numbers voting either “Yes” or “No”. As California voters have been known to cast their votes for a much larger number of write-in “candidates” (whether they were actually running or were vanity votes; in 2004, there were 6 official and 5 write-in candidates), the Presidential vote tally could be even larger. Intriguingly, the total votes in this year’s Presidential contest (at this time) is quite a bit BELOW 2004. In 2004, a total of 12,421,353 votes were cast for the 11 names; as of 1:15pm PST, with 99.5% of all precincts reporting, the total votes cast come only to 10,304,532–a full 2,116,821 (or 17%) fewer than 2004. (Incidentally, Kerry won almost 460,000 MORE votes than Obama got in California. Just something to make you go “hmmm”.)

Comment by pm317 | 2008-11-05 20:14:16

Thanks for the info. Yea, where are all his NEW voters?

 
 
 

Comment by wodiej | 2008-11-05 15:59:30

I heard about this today. I guess tolerance is selective for some. They ask for tolerance but give none.

Comment by Tuppence411 | 2008-11-05 17:25:21

I lived thru the gay marriage battle in Massachusetts. I will tell you, the homophobia and vitrol coming out the the black civic and religious leaders was astounding to me. Really took me back. Silly me! I thought civil rights were civil rights. A small portion of it was from religious leaders with misplaced concerns over the impact on the already threated AA. nuclear family. The majority were vicious. An attitude that there was only ONE “true” minority requiring legal protection, and gays were not it.

There has been gay marriage in MA for what 3-4 years? I can tell everyone as a Catholic heterosexual it hasn’t impacted my marriage one bit. Families and Communities aren’t falling apart. So everyone oppossed should just calm down.

 

Comment by pm317 | 2008-11-05 20:16:21

Yep, one would think they would understand discrimination if anyone could.

 
 
 

Comment by Amazon Queen | 2008-11-05 15:31:12

Women will never be equal to men. all we will ever be is fuck machines, baby makers and penis wrappers. why? because we don’t stand up for each other. there is a special place in hell for women who don’t stand up to woman. that hell is earth.

Comment by benny | 2008-11-05 15:36:09

 

Comment by fleur | 2008-11-05 15:55:59

Amazon Queen
It doesn’t have to be that way. We as women can fight back.

thenewagenda.net a nonpartisan approach to standing up for women.
Boycott the networks, consumer products, etc. nothing hurts more than an empty pocket. They’ll start to get the message.

 

Comment by wodiej | 2008-11-05 16:03:45

you are right, and this is how the majority of men view women. Even some of the men on here have exhibited sexist tendencies. That being said, I am not a fuck machine or anything else for men because I interact w them as little as possible. I will never understand why some women allow men to mistreat them and use them for doormats-NEVER. My mother taught me to stand up for myself, I will be grateful to her for many things but that is one of the top ones. I’d rather be alone than allow someone to mistreat me.

 

Comment by wodiej | 2008-11-05 16:03:46

you are right, and this is how the majority of men view women. Even some of the men on here have exhibited sexist tendencies. That being said, I am not a fuck machine or anything else for men because I interact w them as little as possible. I will never understand why some women allow men to mistreat them and use them for doormats-NEVER. My mother taught me to stand up for myself, I will be grateful to her for many things but that is one of the top ones. I’d rather be alone than allow someone to mistreat me.

Comment by benny | 2008-11-05 16:19:38

hey, not me. I’m a man and I dont view women in that way. Infact, I want women to come to the forefront.

 
 
 

Comment by cathnealon | 2008-11-05 15:32:14

“It remains to be seen if Obama will reject sexism”
Wow, you can’t be that naive. He instigated, promoted and practiced the worst sexist words and gestures of any presidential candidate. His hatred of women, his attendance at that church and his friendship with a bomber who blew up buildings is the only evidence anyone needs that this abomination that will walk into the White House in DC(if he doesn’t move it to Chicago)is as evil as Bush’s rape of the economy. “Reject sexism”–we’ll be lucky if we’re all not wearing burkas next year.

Comment by jbjd | 2008-11-05 15:43:47

When I was in law school, I observed some of my fellow students cheating on exams; marking up library books (sometimes stealing them); and chatting so loudly during lectures the students seated around them could not hear the professor. Seeing this conduct, I wondered, at what point will these law students become ethical practitioners? Of course, the answer was, they won’t.

BO is still the same sexist racist homophobic dishonest vindictive reactionary empty flim flam man he was yesterday. Only now, he will be our President, if we cannot come up with some way to stop him.

 
 

Comment by C.S. | 2008-11-05 15:36:03

Please don’t expect a leopard to change its spots. Soertoro/Obama chose his path when he took Senator Clinton’s delegates and used them as stepping stones to the top. We certainly don’t expect thieves who steal from us to suddenly become paragons of virtue.

Stealing elections is theft and does not a winner make. There are 41 days left to right this wrong if we have a shred of our democracy left because if we don’t use checks and balances our Constitution provided for us, then democracy is gone because democracy has never flourished on lies and deceit.

These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.
Thomas Paine December 19, 1776

 

Comment by The Robot | 2008-11-05 15:38:33

No the misogyny will not be acknowledged in any way.

The fraud Obama benefited on three fronts:

Using right-wing created perceptions of the Clintons against the Clintons.

The misogyny that emanated from the top down of the Obama campaign - and the media.

Fostering the absurd idea that the Clintons were racists - this, to wholly dislodge the Black vote from the Clintons, and rally the far-left.

Obama is a charlatan - may he ultimately be found out.

 

Comment by Buzz McLatte | 2008-11-05 15:43:22

You are welcome to leave anytime, Mike S.

Take your superior attitude with you and say “Hello” to karma the next time something nasty happens to you.

Comment by memi | 2008-11-05 16:29:20

Buzz McLatte

Did Barry put some snortin’ coke stuff in your latte, moron? Watch it tho! Your burqua’s falling down your shorts!

 
 

Comment by Max Thrax | 2008-11-05 15:45:03

[admin edited sexism]

 

Comment by Objective Analysis | 2008-11-05 15:45:23

Just look at this article. Talk about no class and no taste from the Sun Times…

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/the_real_american_idol/article1889614.ece

Comment by tampagurl | 2008-11-05 16:32:13

What a piece of shit that reporter is. He called Sarah’s daughters boyfriend a redneck.

Certainly, many people this year have thought themselves to be above the rest of us. I’m sure that reporter never met the boy. furthermore, I believe the reporters remarks tell more about the reporter than about the young man.

 

Comment by LandOLincoln | 2008-11-05 17:19:30

That’s not the Chicago Sun-Times, that’s a UK paper called The Sun.

Comment by LV | 2008-11-06 10:02:52

Yes, and it’s a rightwing tabloid famous for its rampant misogyny.

 
 
 

Comment by pm317 | 2008-11-05 15:45:33

It is interesting that Greta does not have big cheer leader like blog on the election results. She is also a strong voice supporting Palin. Did she do that for Hillary? I forget.

Comment by KarenG | 2008-11-05 15:57:16

Greta’s husband was working on Hillary’s campaign and switched to McCain after Hillary lost.

 
 

Comment by LogicallySpeaking | 2008-11-05 15:48:03

Will the media and Obama’s supporters’ frenzied misogyny be employed as part of the permanent campaign of governing?

My guess is yes.

 

Comment by pm317 | 2008-11-05 15:53:13

The Affirmative Action Bush from savagepolitics.com

I called him the Democratic Bush earlier:
What we have is a Democratic Bush this morning. Many of us consider him illegitimate in the way he attained his position. He will perhaps bungle through just like the Republican Bush but the media will cover for him, prop him up because he is their creation and if they don’t they would be admitting guilt. He needed to be squashed out of the primaries but we all know what happened. Once he got the Dem label, it was that much harder to prove that he was an illegitimate nominee. I wrote a comment a few days ago here panicking that I had lost faith when we started hearing about voter fraud. All that I felt in that moment has come true. This is not a true democracy. We the little people and our votes didn’t matter. After spending all that money and credibility on him, did you think his puppet masters would let us have any say? This is a corporate democracy.

 

Comment by wodiej | 2008-11-05 15:53:14

thank you Bud for your post. My emotions have been raw all day because of this very issue. Again, women got screwed.

In California the proposal to defeat gay marriage went through and guess what? 70% of blacks opposed gay marriage. What does this tell you-that discrimination is selective. So much for tolerance.

It’s ok to trash women just don’t dare criticize or ask anyone else to be accountable and I am not just talking about blacks. White men are guilty too. Women are constantly trashed by magazine covers, music, television shows, at work, home, school and in government. By their friends, family, spouses, partners, co-workers, teachers, coaches and bosses. Even OTHER WOMEN. I have to wonder what kind of society advocates and even enocourages calling respectable, positive female role models like Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin, bitch, “ho”, cunt and other nasty vulgar names. It’s disgusting and unconscienable.

Comment by Bud White | 2008-11-05 15:59:24

Thank you. You perfectly capture the double standards in the culture against women.

 

Comment by Margaret | 2008-11-05 15:59:42

I am feeling just the same raw emotions about this as you are. I’m glad we have No Quarter.

Comment by csuzeq | 2008-11-05 18:31:13

Me, too. When I think about how we had to raise up the AAs at the expense of women I just sob. In this country I truly believed that we would someday really be equal. Now I know we won’t. I’m glad AAs think they just saw the end of racism. they didn’t. I truly am now a racist. When I see a black person all i relaly see is Obama as their symbol. A whiney, weak little prick who needed to be propped up because he can’t do it on his own legitimately. Well, AAs. That is how I now see you. I truly don’t give a shit what happens to people of color. You can fucking fend for yourself like I have always had to do. Women stand alone. I will stand alone. I will enjoy watching that symbol of reparations fuck you over. I really will. I don’t even care what you think of me. Now I know America put women at the same level as dog shit. I truly can’t get much lower. I will fend for myself in the country formerly known as America and the former land of the free. Fuck all of you Obama supprters who wanted this guy more than American freedoms. Quite frankly, you can all go to hell and I hope when he fucks you good, you storm the whitehouse and you all suffer and disappear. Go to Kenya with Dear Leader for all I care. I don’t care.

Comment by Margaret | 2008-11-05 21:12:01

Keep coming to No Quarter so you don’t have to be alone! I share your rage at African Americans, they’re enjoying this victory at our expense, and they know it, even gloat about it. Actually my rage is particularly at black men.

When I was in law school, someone put up a sign during the Rodney King riots “black men have a right to their rage”. And I’m thinking, what about black women? And what would have happened if someone had put up a sign “women have a right to their rage”?

We do have a right to our rage, it is legitimate, a terrible injustice has been perpetrated. I too will enjoy when AAs get screwed over by Obama, and when all his supporters pay the price of his illegitimate power. He will never be my President. He’s a worthless Chicago thug.

 
 
 
 

Comment by Lisa_NY | 2008-11-05 15:54:50

Here’s a thought…off the topic a little.

Since Sen.Ted Stevens of Alaska was re-elected, there is a chance that if he is convicted, he will lose he seat and Gov.Palin can choose whom to put in to replace him. Could it be possible for her to remove herself as Gov. and replace Stevens in the Senate?
I would love to see her in Washington !

Comment by Sarracuda | 2008-11-05 16:03:03

I would LOVE for her to become Senator, that would ROCK. But question, if she did that, would that be bad for her to basically put herself in control without the votes of the people of Alaska? Ok now on to this whole sexism thing, I learned in this election that women are still considered second class citizens, I thought we improved on that, but we are now considered below minority groups. The way Sarah was treated by the media, I can’t even describe the anger that I have for the media, calling her every name in the book, first of all if the media had done their DAMN JOBS vetting Obama he wouldn’t be the President today, they coddled him, they protected him, and they used Sarah as someone to bash, why not, heck, blame the woman for everything, blame her for the economy tanking, blame her for the fact that mccain was intertwined with bush, voted with bush on numerous bills, why not, heck why blame the guy RUNNING for President, he’s meaningless right, just blame the woman, it’s always been like this and unfortunately I don’t see it changing anytime soon. It’s so strange, in Israel they elected a woman who zero experience(except being in Sharon’s cabinet) and she won by a landslide, but here “Oh boy here comes the woman, we can’t vote or her” its unreal, what is wrong with people

Comment by xax | 2008-11-05 16:51:37

Palin’s a tough chica. I wouldn’t worry about that. She’s not afraid. I’m unofficially giving her a second nickname: “Everlast”.

Comment by Susan1968 | 2008-11-05 17:02:37

Everlast. I like it.

But I would call her Everlast,II.

Hillary is truly Everlast, I.

She took the hits for a lot longer attacked by her own party.

Imagine being called a racist by the very African American politiams who YOU helped get into office.

Imagine how that felt.

As a woman younger than Hillary by a decade, I was amazed at her energy and her resolve.

Every time they knocked her down she got back up.

She refused to be pushed out. She refused to quit, she took every punch from the media.

She stayed to the end to prove women are not quitters.

Not many woman could bear that pressure for so long.

I love Hillary for that.

Hillary made Palin possible.

 
 
 

Comment by Just_Saying | 2008-11-05 16:06:02

In Alaska, Lisa, the governor can appoint only a temporary senator in the case of a senate vacancy. After the prior governor, Frank Murkowski, appointed his daughter to the senate vacancy caused by his election as governor (he had been senator for years), the law has been changed to require an election to select the permanent replacement for the senate.

Of course, Sarah could resign, leaving the Lieutenant Governor, Parnell, to appoint Sarah temporarily, and then she could run for election.

Since she stepped into the ring as VP candidate, it may not be as easy for her to get elected as it would have been for her to be elected in August. People have become viciously partisan over Sarah.
.

 

Comment by fluffy bunny | 2008-11-05 16:11:13

Why on earth would she want to go to Washington, DC? She can stay in beautiful Alaska and serve people who know her and love her.

She just watched an election where millions of republicans sat home and refused to vote for a great man and great patriot for president. She watched as her own party’s voters chose to install Barack Obama as her son’s commander in chief while he is in Iraq.

The final revenge of GW Bush and Karl Rove against a great man they have treated like sh*t since 1999–help hand our nation to Barack Obama, William Ayers, and Rashid Khalidi.

Comment by tampagurl | 2008-11-05 16:42:07

I think it would be poetic justice for Sarah to go to Washington and be a thorn in the side of Obama.

Especially, if she called them all out for their corruption and backroom deal making.

Comment by xax | 2008-11-05 16:52:56

Exactly. I WANT HER IN THE SENATE!!! If Mac stays (will he?), it will just be fantastic.

 
 

Comment by McPalin | 2008-11-05 16:55:11

Yes and MOST states that Mac lost in, he lost by less than 100,000-150,000 votes maximum! Makes me sick. Some states were very close by a few thousand. Now the tie breakers are within 100 votes!..PUMAS did the green thing I guess.

 
 

Comment by Docelder | 2008-11-05 16:37:24

Or the first President of the Republic of Alaska. Alaskan’s don’t owe the rest of us anything. The lower 48 has dissed them, treated their governor with contempt and the media has as much as labeled them a kind of Canadian “trailer park” trash. We don’t deserve Alaska, their minerals or Sarah Palin.

 

Comment by SN in MN | 2008-11-05 16:46:01

Govenor Anderson of MN did this in the seventies, and then got booted out in the next election.

 

Comment by JozefAL | 2008-11-05 17:25:48

I don’t believe that such a thing is permitted under the law. I’m pretty certain that it’s never been done since the direct election of senators began in 1912. Each state is granted the right to determine its own specific method for replacing US Senators, with most allowing the Governor (usually with Legislative approval) to appoint a replacement for a period of time. In some states, that time may be until the next general election, while in others, the appointment may last until the end of the replaced Senator’s term would end (the latter is very rarely employed, especially in a case where the Senator is replaced early on due to death or other replacement).
But, in all honesty, I don’t believe that Palin would even consider putting herself in Stevens’ seat. (Gods, there have been so many politically shady/greedy politicians, especially Governors, in the South who never took advantage of such a situation, it’s hard to believe that Palin would think of doing it.)

 
 

Comment by Margaret | 2008-11-05 15:54:51

Bud thank you so much for this post. You eloquently state what is in my heart, this anger and sadness that it is on the backs of women that Obama stands today as President elect. I am afraid of what his Presidency may mean for women, I am afraid of the conduct of his supporters going forward - will we see an increase in violence against women? Will they be emboldened now to be even more sexist now that the sexist tactics have gained Obama the presidency? This is very likely.

I saw a bumper sticker, No Palin, and she wasn’t even the nominee for President.

Comment by LogicallySpeaking | 2008-11-05 15:58:44

To me that bumper sticker also shows how afraid men/society are of women.

Comment by LogicallySpeaking | 2008-11-05 16:00:49

…and mostly how they treated and still continue to treat Hillary.

Comment by Guy Smiley | 2008-11-05 16:03:56

Just this morning he sent Hillary to go pick up lunch and then chastised her for not getting enough guacamole. He called her ’sweetie’ too.

Comment by benny | 2008-11-05 16:21:54

dumb and dumber

 

Comment by rw | 2008-11-05 16:53:12

This must be a la Raza bot.

 
 
 

Comment by Jay Fink | 2008-11-05 18:12:35

but a higher % of men voted for the Palin ticket than women.

 
 

Comment by Bud White | 2008-11-05 16:06:50

thanks, Margaret.

I am afraid of the conduct of his supporters going forward

Agreed.

Comment by Margaret | 2008-11-05 16:19:10

You’re welcome. I really can’t thank you enough for your post, this has been a rough day and what you wrote really helped me feel better.

 
 
 

Comment by pm317 | 2008-11-05 16:02:22

So AAs finally had their president which they felt entitled to even after being ONLY 12% of the population.

Women are 52% of the population. When are we going to feel entitled to it? When will we build a working coalition (like the AAs) and support each other close to 100% to elect our own woman president?

Comment by Margaret | 2008-11-05 16:04:15

So 12% have benefited by standing on the backs of 52%. And half of that 12% is women. I think Susan B. Anthony and the others who fought for women’s right to vote must be turning in their graves.

 

Comment by benny | 2008-11-05 16:14:01

exactly. Its high time women broke into the glass ceiling. enough is enough. If europeans and asians can do it, so can americans.

 

Comment by C.S. | 2008-11-05 16:36:05

African Americans didn’t elect Soertoro/Obama. But unless there is better accountability than we had during the primaries, we’ll probably never know who did because government and neither political party seems to care. But then, when the system is force fed votes by Mickey Mouse, Hitler, Osama bin Lauden, and the deceased…what do you expect? We’re probably lucky Hitler didn’t “win”!

We have 41 days to investigate. Think any member of the government or the Judicial system will? Think the Supreme Court will adjudicate the eligibility requirement for Soertoro/Obama before December 15? Will any of We the People who fought so far for a fair and honest election? (My guess is no because the Democratic party, which has no Constitutional standing, chose mystery man Soertoro/Obama while the whole world watched; but then the world doesn’t understand democracy like We do.

 

Comment by McPalin | 2008-11-05 16:58:14

I thought women are 65% of the population the last time I looked.

Comment by JozefAL | 2008-11-05 17:33:18

Well, when you hang out in lesbian bars, they are.

(Just joking. Everyone knows that in a lesbian bar, 75% of the population are women. The rest are straight guys who walked in, thinking they just hit the jackpot!)

 
 

Comment by tek | 2008-11-05 19:36:31

We’ll get a woman president when the corporate powers that be decide they need a woman to keep their hold on the country.

 
 

Comment by American Girl in Italy | 2008-11-05 16:02:33

The first step is for Obama to acknowledge that he benefitted from it.

very well said!

I guess we could say *sexism is the new black*

 

Comment by Tuppence411 | 2008-11-05 16:03:40

“Obama’s presidency has been purchased at the expense of women.” Amen. I believe. That is the absolute truth.

There is no compassion or empathy from me for the tears split by Juan Williams or anyone else, knowing it was a triumph bought at the expense of others.

What Barky Oblahblah accomplish was the establishment of a new pecking order with women and gays at the very bottom. Others became more oppressed so some could rise. That doesn’t sound like equality and freedom for all to me.

Comment by AF catfish | 2008-11-05 16:57:32

The Pie of Rights

There’s that pie mentality - the Barack and Michelle Obama “pie of rights.”

For some oppressed people to get some pie, some other people will have to get smaller slices.

Comment by McPalin | 2008-11-05 16:59:31

And how will they determine who is oppressed? Based only on the color of ones skin?

Comment by G. Bharat | 2008-11-06 08:01:37

NO, it’s racial category. Sean Hannity implied Bobby Jindal was going to run in 2010 and I heard Obots hurling deragatory names for Asian Indians. Jindal’s skin color is the same as Obama’s but since he’s Asian he’s not a “cool minority.”

 
 
 

Comment by BarkyDonated to Sharia Law Campaign | 2008-11-05 17:03:48

OBAMA’S GAY LIFE IN NEW YORK WILL COME OUT. THERE WAS NO GIRLFRIEND IN HIS COLUMBIA OR HARVARD YEARS!

YET THIS MONKEYMAN ELECTED AS PREZ INVITES HOMOPHOBE PREACERS TO HIS FUNDRAISERS AND ACTS AS IF HE WERE STRAIGHT!

GIVE ME A BREAK!

LARRY SINCLAIR WAS BOUTH OFF BY AXELROD’S LAWYERS!!

 
 

Comment by Buzz McLatte | 2008-11-05 16:06:03

Keep pressing what legislators we have left to continue delving into allegations and lawsuits.

If you go to the Justia website - Obama’s named in over 29 lawsuits. I quit counting at 29.

Comment by Uppity Woman | 2008-11-05 16:17:45

Buzz, a President has all kinds of privileges. He won’t have to answer to much. And even if the most dire thing were proven, who’s going to impeach him, Nancy and Harry?

Look at the crap Bush and Cheney got away with without a scratch on them. Their shenanigans are the reason we are in elective the situation we are about to get into. Cheney’s approval rating is what, six percent? People were sick of these people shafting America left and right so now they went to the other extreme direction so that America’s shafting, started by the far far crackpot right can be completed by the far far crackpot left.

Moderation no longer exists in politics. Two parties hijacked by extremist nutbags.

Obama can make anything go away he wants to go away. He’s already proven that.

Comment by Buzz McLatte | 2008-11-05 16:54:47

Agreed. But that’s why we have three branches of government. Even Nixon didn’t get away with it.

But, perhaps that was during a time when government was functioning.

 

Comment by wodiej | 2008-11-05 16:55:34

agree again.

 
 
 

Comment by Uppity Woman | 2008-11-05 16:10:57

Next, will be a bit of sharia law like they allow in England. Barack’s buddies in the Middle East, the ones who set women on fire, will be pushing for that.Right now we have a piece of crap from texas hiding out after having killed his two young daughters for hanging out with infidels—-and the FBI had to take the word “Honor Killer” off their Most Wanted poster for the pig because that’s “discrimination” or some such shit. We have another sack of crap in Georgia in jail for killing HIS daughter because she didn’t want to be married to another sack of crap just like him.

I’m glad I have a gun and a dog. Because I’m not taking any shit from anybody without first emptying my clip and giving my dog a snack.

And one more thing. My sympathy goes out to every Jew on this board. They are going to blow up Israel and Obama is going to whistle through the entire thing.

As for the young women who think their rights were always there and always will be there, I’ll just watch. You’re on your own and will find yourself fighting a fight that was already fought for you once. Good luck with that. I’m all set. I’ll just watch. You deserve what you get. Because the attitude of a President rolls downhill into the workplace. And the home. Just like shit rolls downhill. Good luck with that too.

These are the things I see in Barack Obama. If I’m wrong I will gladly retract. But I’ve been around a few blocks and I know a misogyny Enabler when I see one.

I’m going to want the popcorn concession to this one. Whatever you do, don’t complain, girls! You’ll be a racist if you do. When that excuse starts to wear thin and you are wondering what the hell you were thinking as you watch your respect level erode to just one step up from a dog, don’t expect sympathy from those women who fought your fight for your complacent selves.

Comment by Pennsylvania Red | 2008-11-05 16:14:45

As for the young women who think their rights were always there and always will be there, I’ll just watch. You’re on your own and will find yourself fighting a fight that was already fought for you once. Good luck with that. I’m all set. I’ll just watch. You deserve what you get. Because the attitude of a President rolls downhill into the workplace. And the home. Just like shit rolls downhill. Good luck with that too.

Well said.

I don’t know if they can grasp your concept though, it seems like the little ones believe climbing the corporate ladder involves not getting kicked out of the Big Brother house.

Comment by Arabella Trefoil | 2008-11-05 16:20:34

I think it will take another generation for the message to sink in. My neices are in their twenties. They will have to relearn a lot of hard learned lessons.

 

Comment by Uppity Woman | 2008-11-05 16:20:51

I don’t know if they can grasp your concept though,

They’ll Get It when the telephone poll falls on their heads and the doors slam.

Two women were destroyed by the Enabler. Two far more powerful women than any of these little girls who swooned for him. The die is cast.

Not my problem.

Comment by Northwest rain | 2008-11-05 16:38:55

I agree.

From now on the fight is for younger women — IF they give a damn.

 
 
 

Comment by wodiej | 2008-11-05 16:47:23

rock on Uppity-well said!!

 

Comment by csuzeq | 2008-11-05 18:37:56

Don’t feel sorry for all jews. My boyfriend is one and so are his daughter and parents. They think Obama is the nicest man and they voted this fuck into office. Jews like them deserve to watch the slaughter of Israel.

And the young women who supported this piece of shit over Clinton or Palin deserve to always lose the job to the less qualified man or younger man. This is what they voted for.

 
 

Comment by Arabella Trefoil | 2008-11-05 16:16:47

I chose to stay and fight.

I take great comfort from history. Right now I’m reading about Colonial New York, jus prior to the revolution. The stuff we think of as just “happening” actually involved lots of false starts, dead ends, moments of despair, and just plain boring day to day bullshit.

Thank heaven for the written word, and for good company.

 

Comment by pal3 | 2008-11-05 16:19:23

A lot of women resented Palin because she is good looking and smart. Women are very petty when it comes to those kind of things. I guess she would represent the other woman.

For whites that hated her, I think its more a cultural and social class thing.

 

Comment by pal3 | 2008-11-05 16:19:24

A lot of women resented Palin because she is good looking and smart. Women are very petty when it comes to those kind of things. I guess she would represent the other woman.

For whites that hated her, I think its more a cultural and social class thing.

 

Comment by hilldem08 | 2008-11-05 16:19:55

Good Lord, stop reducing everything to identity politics/sexism. This is a perfect time for many PUMAS to take a good look at themselves — what they have become — and do some soul searching. All of the numbers coming in have pretty much reflected national polling. But PUMAS placed their hopes in Shiloh’s internals or an obscure whako blogger’s Nosterdamus predictions about a Mccain/Palin landslide. PUMAS made a statistically insignificant dent in this election because, contrary to self-delusion, their numbers are not huge. Even if you numbered 100,000 (and you don’t), you would be a fraction of a percent in voter turnout. And hundreds of thousands — millions — of Hillary’s female supporters turned out and voted for Obama because his agenda is almost identical to Sen Clinton’s. If you are angry, bitter, pissed, direct that to Penn and Wolfson who never organised properly for caucus voting, never explored the advantages of the internet for fund-raising and for youth voting, and intially agreed to not count MI and FL because they thought that Clinton’s nomination was a done deal in February.

We are closing the chapter on the worst 8 years of modern Amercan politics. We have the opportunity for expanded health-care, a chance to shape the Supreme Court, continue to protect reproductive choice and civil unions, we have a chance to strengthen the middle class, and yet, some of you prefer to paint Obama as the black dangerous OTHER, the threat to America’s values and national security. You have a heightened sense of how sexism works in politics, but in this internet bubble world devoted to the cult of personality (hillary or nobody) you are blind to how you have been co-opted by the GOP who has used racist tactics to destroy a candidate THAT REPRESENTS MANY OF YOUR OWN INTERESTS.

Stop finding solace in the rantings of Hannity and Limbaugh about dubious associations, stop waiting for that hard to locate “Holy Grail” video that will once and for all destroy Obama and his wife (for all the ink spilt against sexism on PUMA sites, Michelle gets called every mysogynist slur under the sun on those same sites), and rejoice in the fact that Dems finally have the opportunity to put in place a national agenda that ALL OF YOU believed in and worked for when Hillary announced her candidacy.

Turn the fu**ing page. Work hard with the Denver Group to reform the Dem party, hold Obama up to his promises Hillary has spent half her life on. But don’t retreat into anger, or numb your grief by believing in Obama conspiracy theories — all the crap that you laughed at when bitter angry Republicans generated the same kind of garbage at JFK, MLK Jr, or teh Clintons. Turn off Fox and reinvest in an America that just put an end to W’s reign of terror.

Comment by Uppity Woman | 2008-11-05 16:22:56

When the telephone poll falls on your head you will Get It.

I’m all set. Good luck with that.

Comment by Pennsylvania Red | 2008-11-05 17:05:11

UW-
Upthread I posted that Wall St. isn’t responding well to the GE. Down 400 pts (- 5%.)

One stock I was looking at is up significantly - a Precious Metal Fund, the age old hedge against calamity. At lunchtime I was talking to a friend telling him I avoided gold the past few years, but am now going to invest. This is before I saw what was going on with the fund I’ve been watching.

A financial “girding of loins”, so to speak.

 
 

Comment by Arabella Trefoil | 2008-11-05 16:22:57

I think you raise some good points. We have an infrastructure in place, so that’s a plus.

Time for me to put on my big girl panties and get to work!

 

Comment by benny | 2008-11-05 16:31:45

this is ridiculous. yes, the last 8 years have been hell. but what gives you the impression that the next 8 years wont be hell? as I stated earlier, obama = GWB3. yes, obama has a democratic tag. but look within yourselves. Is he really a democrat? Thats ok, you dont look at reality. you’re depending on obamas classic promise of hope and change. get real, people.

 

Comment by memi | 2008-11-05 16:34:13

HILLDEM ‘08

GO AND REPRODUCE THYSELF IN A KENYAN TENT–WHERE YOU SO CLEARLY BELONG!

If you are as OBAMYOPIC not to have seen the Misogynist media frat-boys pushing Obama to a fraudulent finish line and the Messiah you voted for trashing women more competent, more qualified and more CLASSY than this JayCrapper-wannabe jerk, you need your lenses corrected.

Cut your crap and go to HuffPost!

 

Comment by wodiej | 2008-11-05 16:44:30

The Democratic party? There is no Democratic party. They can go straight to hell. It will be a cold day in hell before I ever vote Democrat again.

 

Comment by C.S. | 2008-11-05 16:50:49

Neither political party represents my interests. As an independent voter, I look closely at the candidates and mystery man Soertoro/Obama is not “the one”. To be a leader you need to earn the trust of We the People and what I do know of this man does not make me want to trust him with my money, let alone with the lives of my children!

The only thing we do know about Soertoro/Obama is that he is probably not an American citizen, is more interested in seeing Odinga in control of Kenya than Kenya being a democracy, did not chastise his cousin for burning a few hundred Christians, has a circle of friends who help him out that includes criminals, racists/bigots, terrorists and Muslims connected to terrorist groups. Oh, yeah, that makes me have faith that he will suddenly become the new Jesus!

I’m not one of P. T. Barnham’s suckers born every minute and you can’t fool me once, let alone twice. If this man lived in your neighborhood and a parade of crooks and terrorists were in and out of his house, would you vote for him to be on your city council? If you reply yes, then may your god protect you because no one on earth can.

 

Comment by DeaninMi | 2008-11-05 17:05:05

If Obama is doing everything Hillary would have done, then why isn’t she President right now?

I don’t want some wannabe Hillary in the White House!

You are simply delusional if you think Obama is going to embrace any of Hillary’s proposals, anyways. Hell, he has problems embracing his own proposals!

 

Comment by McPalin | 2008-11-05 17:07:40

We have the opportunity for expanded health-care, a chance to shape the Supreme Court, continue to protect reproductive choice and civil unions, we have a chance to strengthen the middle class, and yet, some of you prefer to paint Obama as the black dangerous OTHER, the threat to America’s values and national security.

How’s your vote for NOBAMA? ‘Felt good to cast for him huh? You fool. You fell for it. You have the opportunity for what? Wait and see. He’ll take this country down the tubes and don’t say you were not warned. And those who couldn’t find the courage to stop this Obama pig shouldn’t call yourselves PUMAS beacuse that would be a lie.

 

Comment by Pennsylvania Red | 2008-11-05 17:10:56

Turn off Fox and reinvest in an America that just put an end to W’s reign of terror.

Reign of Terror - a bit over the top.

I don’t recall George W. Bush’s Truth Squad, comprising law enforcement authorities to silence the opposing views.

you are blind to how you have been co-opted by the GOP who has used racist tactics to destroy a candidate THAT REPRESENTS MANY OF YOUR OWN INTERESTS.

What candidate did the GOP destroy? Oh right, the one who just became President Elect. That’s some powerful destruction going on.

What racist tactics did the GOP employ?
OH yes I recall clearly how the GOP called out Bill CLinton as being a big fat bubba racist in South Carolina.

mmm-hmmm.

Right.

 

Comment by mary | 2008-11-05 17:13:47

HILLDEM ‘08

Good intelligent post and I feel your distress at the Puma’s refusal to “see the Obama Light”. Much of what you say is true and insightful.

But if it weren’t for the PUMAS digging out the truth with their strong paws and smelling out the dirt of the Obama campaign’s vile sexism as well as the media misogynists, we woouldn’t have known what hit us in this ignominious “election” that never was. It was a crowning and the guy outspent his equally undeserving opponent by 8 to 1!

For you to refuse to see in your OBAMYOPIC fashion that SEXISM against HIllary (and then against Sarah Palin) had a KEY ROLE and was promoted by the Obama campaign and executed by the Obama supporters….is plain Obamyopic and you need to see your ophthalmologist for corrected lenses. Your daughters will thank you.
It is only by pointing out the truth and not trying, as you are clearly doing, to (a) diminish the role of sexism (b) permit sexism to be swallowed up by the general euphoria of the ‘historic first’ and

(c) WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER HISTORIC FIRST THAT HILLARY’S GENDER REPRESENTED? WHY ARE YOU DIMINISHING IT AND THROWING IT UNDER THE OBAMACARPET?

SEE THE LIGHT–AND CURE YOUR OBAMYOPIA! You certainly showed in your post that you’re capable of rational thought. Use it to stand up for Women’s and Girls’ Rights and don’t you ever sweep them under, or take them for granted–or pretend they’re not as important as THE BIG ISSUES…They are big, believe me. Open your eyes and see the vital role of the PUMAS in this Election! You owe them, dear friend, you owe them!

 

Comment by SN in MN | 2008-11-05 17:21:13

You’re delusional. He does not represent anything I support. He’s a fraud, a marketing construct, that has no intention of doing anything for the white middle class. He’s a black nationalist, who’s been simmering with resentment since he first realized he was treated different than his mother. You’ll learn.

Comment by candy | 2008-11-05 23:37:04

AMEN and thank you.

Obama’s agenda has nothing to do with my agenda. I want to see a woman in the White House and he did everything to make sure it doesn’t happen. I won’t get behind him or you cult followers even when hell freezes over and when pigs fly. And guess what, his campaign has opened my eyes and I know don’t eve like the Democratic agenda anymore. I think my interests lie mainly with the Republican Party and I’ve switched party affiliation. Party United My Ass. I’m now uniting with the other party.

 
 

Comment by LandOLincoln | 2008-11-05 17:39:56

Boy, are you a sucker. Barack Obama is a Neocon boosted into office by the same powers that gave us Gee Dubya.

Anyone as willfully ignorant as you has absolutely no business lecturing anyone, let alone us PUMAs.

F**k off.

 

Comment by Newly Independent | 2008-11-05 18:44:50

Good Lord, stop reducing everything to identity politics/sexism. This is a perfect time for many PUMAS to take a good look at themselves — what they have become — and do some soul searching.

Search your soul for backing a crooked, inexperienced, unprincipled, sexist lowlife for president. And STFU.

 
 

Comment by Matt | 2008-11-05 16:20:36

I would admit that Hilary’s defeat in the primary was a setback for women’s rights but a loss by Obama would have been a setback for African Americans. Despite the complaints on this site to the contrary, I see little in Obama’s campaign that I would really call sexist (just as I saw little in Hilary’s campaign that I would call racist).

There will be many opportunities over the next four years for Sen. Obama to advance the cause of woman’s rights: perhaps we should wait and see how he treats those opportunities before judging him too harshly.

The issues of sexual and racial equality are tough to tackle and there are bound to be some hurt feelings but I think anytime we advance the cause of civil rights, everyone benefits.

At the very least, Obama has convinced many Americans to try to influence their governments direction and that should be a good thing in any democracy.

Comment by Margaret | 2008-11-05 16:23:50

If you want to wait to judge him that is your prerogative, but it is perfectly fair to judge someone based on two years of conduct.

I disagree, women do not benefit when others get civil rights at their expense. Not even black women will benefit from this, only black men.

 

Comment by benny | 2008-11-05 16:25:12

‘There will be many opportunities over the next four years for Sen. Obama to advance the cause of woman’s rights’. yeah right. hope springs eternal, as usual.

 

Comment by wodiej | 2008-11-05 16:27:08

so you equate being called a bitch, cunt and ho to “hurt feelings”? You’re sexist just like your Obama.

 

Comment by Arabella Trefoil | 2008-11-05 16:27:32

Matt - There is no way I can agree with you when you say that there was no sexism in Obama’s campaign. To make that claim is to rewrite history.

He won the election, and he is the president we must deal with. That’s the fact and I’m ready to deal with it. But I will not let stand claims that Obama did not use sexism in his campaign.

 

Comment by noproblama | 2008-11-05 16:31:20

Wow Matt, we haven’t seen a “nice” Obama supporter here in quite a while. And although it’s encouraging that he still has some, don’t waste your time trying to tell us it’s all for the best.

We’ve been watching this unfold very carefully and we know only too well just how much damage has been done to any group that dared disagree with the anointed one. The door was opened and the bigots welcomed.

We were one of the first but we won’t be the last

Comment by LogicallySpeaking | 2008-11-05 16:38:15

it’s all for the best.

It’s always for the best when it comes to women.

 
 

Comment by memi | 2008-11-05 16:37:06

Matt,

you’re just another Obamayopic fool. Get your lenses corrected and see that Obama’s “win” was only cause he outspent 8 to 1 and he couldn’t have won without bashing Hillary with Misogyny that will go down in history. Your Obama creep is the CAMOUFLAGED MISOGYNIST WHO ALLOWED HIS 2 DAUGHTERS TO WITNESS THE PORN-ON-THE-PULPIT BY HIS MENTOR SPIRITUAL ADVISOR JEREMIAH WRIGHT…LET THEM ABSORB THE RACIST HATE.

Go get tested to your nearest Opthalmologist Matti boy!

PUMAS ARE HERE TO STAY!

 

Comment by jbjd | 2008-11-05 16:39:19

See, here’s where your logic flounders. Assuming for the moment HRC’s loss to BHO in the Democratic primaries did not result from a DNC-rigged nomination aided and abetted by the MSM; that the eminently more qualified women was selected over the inexperienced man evidences sex discrimination independent of race.

 

Comment by C.S. | 2008-11-05 16:55:00

I suggest you take a look at the Comstock Laws. You will find a lot in them that disproves your theory.

You endow Soertoro/Obama with characteristics he has not shown; perhaps wishful thinking? But wishful thinking has never changed one thing, only action will do that.

 

Comment by Northwest rain | 2008-11-05 16:56:35

Get this — Now hear this!

Obama is NOT an African American — he never was and he never will be.

He fooled AAs into voting for a frat boy — a self centered narcissist, passive aggressive nut.

O-zero — he might look black but he was raised far far far away from the African American culture.

He is a fake — everything about him is fake.

He has not produced dozens of records — like his BC.

This guy has no apparent core values — except that he HATES WOMEN. And this scares the hell out of me — he has attitudes about women that are primitive.

If one more damned liberal writes how damned thrilled they are because of how happy the r@cists blacks who voted for O-zero are — I’m going to stick my hand through this computer screen and slap that liberal face.

O-zero is a crook and a fraud — massive funds were funneled into this campaign from unknown sources. This fraud is owned by someone and it is NOT the dumb AAs who went out to vote for him. The AA voters will be thrown under the biggest train — because under the bus no longer has any room for the poor misguided, delusional AAs who wanted to believe the guy with the phony preacher man voice.

Affirmative Action is now DEAD. You got your prize — now shut up and behave — is the message.

Comment by memi | 2008-11-05 17:32:08

northwestRain

Amen.

 
 

Comment by DeaninMi | 2008-11-05 17:06:02

IRON MY SHIRT, MATT!!!

 

Comment by SN in MN | 2008-11-05 17:23:26

You can’t advance civil rights and black entitlement at the sametime. That’s the hypocricy of the bleeding heart “progressives” that many of us have seen through.

 

Comment by Newly Independent | 2008-11-05 18:49:58

I see little in Obama’s campaign that I would really call sexist

That’s because:

a.) You’re a man
b.) You’re an Obama supporter
c.) You’re blind, deaf, dumb, stupid and crazy
d.) You’re self-centered
e.) All of the above

I think the right answer in your case is “e.”

Comment by candy | 2008-11-06 02:56:36

 
 
 

Comment by Matt | 2008-11-05 16:26:32

There was no civil right gotten at woman’s “expense.” That’s nonsense. Hilary didn’t have some “right” to the presidency any more than Obama did. The winner has to earn it by waging a superior campaign: To suggest that Hilary should have won because she is a woman is sexist!

Comment by Margaret | 2008-11-05 16:27:45

troll alert. IGNORE!

Comment by Arabella Trefoil | 2008-11-05 16:28:29

 
 

Comment by wodiej | 2008-11-05 16:28:48

apparently your definition of “superior” includes lying, cheating, stealing, sexism and vulgarity. Did I leave anything out? Probably but nuff said.

 

Comment by rw | 2008-11-05 16:36:09

Matt, doesn’t know his history. Again, the Obama supporters profess to be the “educated and the enlightened”, some sane human please stop the madness.

Comment by C.S. | 2008-11-05 16:58:17

Well, Matt certainly can’t do math or he wouldn’t have shown his ignorance by saying “Hillary lost”. Took a lot of contrivances by both Soertoro/Obama and the Democratic party to concoct a win for him.

 
 

Comment by Silence DoGood | 2008-11-05 17:15:34

Matt

You are missing the point. During the primaries, Hillary was clearly the superior candidate.

You said,

“To suggest that Hilary should have won because she is a woman is sexist!”

We are not saying that she should have won because she is a woman. We are saying that she lost because she is a woman. There is a difference.

 

Comment by Newly Independent | 2008-11-05 19:24:04

There was no civil right gotten at woman’s “expense.”

Bullshit.

That’s nonsense. Hilary didn’t have some “right” to the presidency any more than Obama did.

Bullshit again.

You think Obama should have won because it would have angered my community. Yet f— the anger of 52% of the population in this country for witnessing yet another more qualified woman being villified & cheated out of a position of leadership because of her gender. Is that your message?

The winner has to earn it by waging a superior campaign:

Theft and cheating is NOT a “superior” campaign. It’s desperation and insecurity.

To suggest that Hilary should have won because she is a woman is sexist!

Hillary should have won because she was MORE EXPERIENCED & MORE QUALIFIED than Obama. Seems to me like you ignored her qualifications because she’s a woman.

I’ll bet that your hypocritical ass clowned eight years ago when George W. Bush got the Presidency in spite of losing the popular vote. Yet you cheered when Barack Obama got the Democrat nomination in spite of losing the popular vote, didn’t you?

I’ll bet you laughed at the Hillary nutcrackers & “Bros before Hos” t-shirts that sold like crazy during the primary. Or did you wear one of the green & white “Sarah Palin is a c—” t-shirts? Or draw a cartoon of yourself punching Sarah Palin in the face & post it on a blog? Maybe you cheered when Obama played Jay-Z’s “99 Problems (But A B—- Ain’t One)” at one of his campaign rallies earlier this year?

 
 

Comment by Soldier of Christ | 2008-11-05 16:28:11

I am a little baffled at how some of you still support the Clintons. I was out there screaming at everybody when Bill was caught with Monica. I ranted and told every person that I met up with that men are pigs. That they are the preverted son of bitches that like to watch women do things with their own sexes and they also are preverted men who make up hollywood stories or designed dress ups for women. But after stating this, there are 65% of them that are value men that respect women and they worship them as mothers and wives. These are the men that voted for Hillary and Palin with women voters. I screamed at anyone who would dare say anything about Hillary, or Bill. But, I am sorry, after seeing them go out of there way to make sure the party was first and not the country, I will never see them in a good light. If Hillary ran for anything in the future I will never vote for her or even defend her. Don’t come on this blog and tell me she was forced by the party. She did it to make sure there was a democrat in the whitehouse even if it was to give up the moral values that she supposely was crying about in NH. Nope, sorry guys and gays, the only true moral value woman was Palin, who got hit and bashed more than Hillary Clinton. I will vote for her in a heart beat if she ever runs again. I just hope that someone in the Republican party have enough sense to fire the campaign managers and get this smart woman ready for her goal in 2012. You saw her crowds, she can do it and without Mccain.

Comment by wodiej | 2008-11-05 16:34:40

I am with you on this. I called her campaign today for them to send me back my contributions to her campaign. I would have been fine w her keeping them until she got behind Obama. He and his campaign treated her like yesterdays garbage. She didn’t owe the Democratic party shit. Or perhaps she did it for Bill which he did not deserve either after how he humiliated her in public during his Presidency. Nope, got no use for a woman who allows herself to be treated like that by anyone. If the Democratic party is more important to her than her country, than she does not respresent me.

Sarah Palin represents what I stand for as a woman and an American.

Comment by McPalin | 2008-11-05 17:13:54

There are lots of people asking for their Hillary donations to be returned to them..wow.

 

Comment by memi | 2008-11-05 17:17:57

WodieJ

You’re sounding more and more intolerantly obamabotic…or have you changed to an extreme fringe right-winger going the way of Dubya!?

Come on, you never supported Hillary and you wouldn’t know how to spell misogyny if it jumped out of somebody’s T-shirt….

Hillary was the best, most qualified and CLASSY candidate and this PUMA ain’t alone!
Get over it!

 
 

Comment by Susan1968 | 2008-11-05 16:45:02

She was also protecting her party supporters.

Many a politician (especially the African American politicians) who stuck with Hillary to the end was informed they would NOT receive funds or help for their relection from the Obama-controlled DNC.

Hillary struck a deal to do what she did at the convention in exchange for assurances her supporters would not have their own political careers destroyed.

She didn’t do it to save herself.

 

Comment by mary | 2008-11-05 16:46:27

Soldier for Christ.

You are a good Republican and that’s fine. But PLEASE don’t dare trash Hillary and do a false comparison of perceived ‘wrongs’ suffered by either/or Hillary and Palin in order to boost up what you perceive as a weaker candidate in Sarah.

I am a PROUD HILLARY SUPPORTER AND A PUMA WHO RESPECTED GOV. PALIN’S NOMINATION THROUGHOUT AND WROTE INNUMERABLE COMMENTS IN HER FAVOR. FOR YOU TO COME BACK AND TRASH HILLARY IN THIS IGNOMINIOUS, UNFAIR FASHION UNDER UNKNOWN PRETENSES IS SIMPLY UNPRODUCTIVE AND….PARADOXICAL! WE BOTH AGREE OABAMA BASHED BOTH HILLARY AND SARAH UNFAIRLY–AND THAT’S HOW HE WON.

A PROUD HILLARY SUPPORTER FOREVER—AND PUMA SUPPORTER OF PALIN/MCCAIN–whose Speech was far superior than Obamarama’s last night!

Comment by Soldier of Christ | 2008-11-05 17:35:22

I am a true demo since I was 18 years old and now 58 years old - but thank you for addressing me as a republican- I see now that this is the party of G-d- what the hell was I think these last 40 years stickin to the party of demons.

 

Comment by lusitania | 2008-11-05 18:05:12

WOW! You are so right about McCain’s speech being so wonderful. What a gentlemen. Obama was smug in my view. He really looked as though he thought HE was entitled, a charge often pressed against Hillary. What an A–.

I have been bummed all day long, just moping around the house. Early in the afternoon I dug out a DVD from, I think 2001, starring Jeff Bridges and Joan Allen. The movie title is “The Contender”. I recommend it to everyone who agrees about the mysogny in US politics. It is the story of a woman who is tapped by the POTUS to be VP, after the elected VP dies. As Joan Allen’s character is going through the confirmation process she finds herself being called out on things that no male counterpart would be asked about. She sticks to her principles and refuses to answer the charges in any manner at all. The ending speech given by Jeff Bridges speaks to mysogny in politics and is very relevant to this past election. Please watch it with your friends and older daughters. I highly recommend it!

 
 

Comment by xax | 2008-11-05 17:12:18

Mary,

I hear you. But I got to agree with Soldier. I mean I understand why Hillary did it. It was for herself and likely other people. But the fact that she did it proves that there is too much corruption and back stage dealings in DC. I’m tired of it. Hillary knows how to play the game, but the game is the problem. The game has got to stop.

I’m a little upset with her too. Soldier is more vehement than me, but rightfully so. We got to stop putting ALL of our faith in politicians and put it in ourselves. I would have preferred Palin, Clinton or McCain. But in no way did I expect them to deliver our nation’s soul. I expected them to do the job.

And like Soldier, if Palin wants to apply, I’m 100% behind her. Somebody’s gotta be willing to do the job.

Comment by mary | 2008-11-05 17:24:20

Xax

How could any sane person disagree with you. THERE WAS TOO MUCH CORRUPTION AT THE DNC and anyone refusing to see this needs help.

There are many documentaries now being made on this subject and there are many AFrican Americans participating and documenting the FRAUD instigated by the Axelrod Furher (can’t resist as the guy scares me in his resemblance, mustache and all with The Fuhrer!)….
Dr. Lynette Long is a mathematician whose blog has a lot of these issues depicted and Hillary blogs (just say no deal, riverdaughter etc) have clips of the docs with the Obama-produced fraudulent nomination tactics, etc…..

Yes, DNC, I wouldn’t be surprised if they defrauded the system…Obama’s margin was only 3-4%! I wouldn’t call that a landslide! And we have yet to hear an apology from this anorexic resume holder to Sarah Palin and HIllary for his misogynist campaign…..I ain’t holdin’ my breath for this hip=hop JayC rapper-wannabe to offer his sincere apology….God save us the next 4 years!

 
 

Comment by LandOLincoln | 2008-11-05 18:00:52

Soldier for Christ, I believe Hillary was threatened with at least the loss of her senate seat if she didn’t campaign for Obama, and I believe that by doing the same (campaigning for BO) Bill Clinton and Wes Clark were attempting to protect her.

I also believe she wants to hang onto the senate seat in order to keep fighting against the Neocon/Neolib thugs who’ve stolen the third election in a row, and co-opted at least half of the Congressional Dems as well.

I don’t think it’s going to do her any good, however; as I posted above, I think she’ll be lucky to be allowed to serve out her current term.

The same is true for Senator McCain on the Republican side.

I’m afraid there’s only one party now, the Republicrat/New World Order party, and any politician who gets in the way will be done away with, in one way or another.

(BTW, a year ago, even six months ago, I would have thought that was crazy, tinfoil hat talk, but no more.) We are sooo screwed.

Comment by tek | 2008-11-05 19:20:38

I believe you’re right and McCain as well as Hillary will not get their seats back when they come up for re-election. The facist coup is now complete.

 
 

Comment by Newly Independent | 2008-11-05 19:29:09

I’m definitely with you on this Soldier of Chirst!

 
 

Comment by meileen | 2008-11-05 16:30:28

“Is there any other oppressed group of people on earth who are expected to excuse any and all injuries to themselves as long as someone else benefits?”

Interesting quote. In California, folks voted to give animals their rights but took away the rights of the LGBT community to marry. I guess those folks who voted that way ‘benefit’ by semantically claiming the word ‘marriage’ for themselves. So, the answer to the question is, “Yes” if you are LGBT.

 

Comment by KintheNorthwest | 2008-11-05 16:30:40

http://www.youtube.com/user/dzapped

Why the need for a communist flag.

 

Comment by pal3 | 2008-11-05 16:30:45

I don’t Obama is sexist. He just like people who adore him. Had Hillary treated him like a messiah, she would have been VP.

Comment by Arabella Trefoil | 2008-11-05 16:33:45

That’s hysterical.

 
 

Comment by rw | 2008-11-05 16:32:10

Makes me think of that book, The Backlash, written about the abuse and denigration of women that rose and was tacitly sanctioned during the Reagan years.

 

Comment by Susan1968 | 2008-11-05 16:32:17

MISOGYNY runs rampant in our culture because the biggest practitioners of MISOGYNY are often women.

Women have been second-class citizens in EVERY culture since the beginning of recorded time.

Yes, African Americans suffered under the horrors of slavery dating back to the founding of this country.

But women have suffered under the yoke of SEXISM and MISOGONY since prehistoric times.

For millenium we have been taught that other women are the enemy.

WHY?

Because beating out another woman for the PRIZE MALE PROVIDER meant survival for herself and her children.

Because gaining favor with the PROVIDERS (MEN), even at the expense of other women, meant you and your children lived another day.

This ancient thought process is so deeply engrained in women it may well be imprited on female DNA after 1000s of years.

This is the problem. Women hate when another woman “stands out” because it triggers their ancient survival mechanism — “Oh, no — if she stands out I will lose the provider’s attention, I will die.”

It’s all unconscious but it’s very real.

And as a result women are taught to seek CONSENSUS from other women.

To be liked you must first gain APPROVAL & CONSENSUS of other women who will then instruct you as to how much you’re allowed to “stand out.”

Try to assert your autonomy in defiance of the female consensus, you are demonized.

All my life, from childhood to adulthood, I’ve had female friends act shocked when I’ve made a major decision in my life WITHOUT consulting them first.

“What? You didn’t tell me you were thinking of doing that!”

“What? You didn’t tell me you were going to wear that dress to the party!”

“What? You didn’t tell me you were thinking of cutting your hair, changing your job, breaking up with your boyfriend!”

It never fails to boggle my mind — these women expect me to clear my choices with them before I act.

And if I dare make a move of which they disapprove, merely disagreeing with me is not enough.

They must destroy me, cast me out, shun me, before I “stand out” and catch the attention of the “PROVIDERS” (MEN).

It’s horrible — but it’s a reality.

African Americans are aware of the phenomenon — those among them who identify more with their oppressors than their own people.

Every dumb ass female who pulled on the SARAH PALIN IS A CUNT Teeshirt was licking the boots of her oppressors.

So pathetic are they that they would rather destroy another woman than fall out of favor with their “providers.”

Until this changes, nothing will ever change for women.

Comment by Arabella Trefoil | 2008-11-05 16:35:46

It will change, but at the speed of a glacier.

Comment by jbjd | 2008-11-05 16:42:05

If that were true, I would encourage the utmost use of carbon based fuels.

Comment by LV | 2008-11-06 11:22:43

 

Comment by LV | 2008-11-06 11:23:08

 
 
 

Comment by wodiej | 2008-11-05 16:40:12

you’ve got a point. I see women go bonkers if they think another woman is even looking the way of their “provider”. It’s sickening. I just look at them and think “please girl, I don’t need a provider, I provide for myself!” I think alot of it is they way they’ve been brought up, society…it’s ingrained in them. And then there are some of us who kick ass and take names later….. :)

 

Comment by noproblama | 2008-11-05 16:49:44

Sadly, you’re spot on.

 

Comment by mary | 2008-11-05 17:27:00

Susan 1968

Thanks! Good post. I just viewed on youtube JOHN LENNON’S 1970 underground hit:

“WOMAN IS THE NEGRO OF THE WORLD”–Great lyrics we should all hear periodically when Barak feels down on the polls and starts launching attacks against women to boost his appeal, eh?!!!

Comment by Julia | 2008-11-05 17:42:45

Why this outrage now? When all is over then the outrage? The outrage must be before if not is cowardice. Women had to vote against their oppressor but they didn’t. Now all is over.

 
 
 

Comment by WestPalm2008 | 2008-11-05 16:40:07

Today I began mentoring children at a local disadvantaged school. All four boys in my group are black and in the fifth grade.

The first exercise of the day was to establish “group rules,” and the boys were to come up with the rules by themselves. One of the boys came up with the rule, “no racist statements” (I’m a white guy so I hope he wasn’t trying to insinuate anything about ME, lol). After he said it I replied, “That’s a good one. Let’s also say, “No sexism.”

The boys gave me a confused look. One boy asked, “What’s that?” I told him it’s when you say bad things about girls or being a girl. “It’s as bad as racism,” I said. The boy looked skeptical. “WHY?”

“Because when you say something sexist, it means you think you’re better than a girl because of something she cannot change, just like racism can be someone saying bad things about someone because of their skin color.”

I’m working on it. It seems the youth has been plenty schooled on “racism,” but sexism is not yet discussed or taught. I hope Obama’s campaign has not taught them that they can get away with anything against women.

Comment by jbjd | 2008-11-05 17:10:27

…one conversation at a time…good for you.

 

Comment by memi | 2008-11-05 17:37:01

WestPalm

You represent REAL HOPE for this hill of beans we live in. Like Hillary said in ‘95:

WOMEN’S RIGHTS ARE HUMAN RIGHTS
AND
HUMAN RIGHTS ARE WOMEN’S RIGHTS

…thanks!

 

Comment by Margaret | 2008-11-05 21:00:29

Good work, and I like your description of sexism.

 
 

Comment by xax | 2008-11-05 16:40:23

I plan to post this to every blog a frequent so if you run across this again, excuse me but

THIS MUST BE SAID:

I WANT AN OATH FROM EVERY WOMAN AND MAN ON THIS PAGE (WOMEN ESPECIALLY) THAT WE WILL LEARN TO TREAT EACH OTHER WITH RESPECT, DIGNITY AND HONOR. WE WILL NOT HOLD EACH OTHER DOWN. WE WILL NOT FOCUS ON PETTY GRIEVANCES. WE WILL FIGHT. WE WILL UNITE. WE WILL STAY STRONG. WE WILL ELECT A WOMAN PRESIDENT OF THESE UNITED STATES IN THE NEXT 4 YEARS.

Comment by xax | 2008-11-05 16:42:18

Feel free to add on and repost. Or make up your own. It has to be done. I’m tired of this.

 

Comment by mary | 2008-11-05 17:29:58

XAX

You have my vote! I don’t care if it’s Gov. Palin or Sen. Clinton. We will make sure a Woman gets to the White House in 4 years regardless!

AND SEXISM WILL BE A FEDERAL OFFENCE AND LEGISLATION WILL BE PASSED FOR WOMAN-HATRED COMMENTS

 

Comment by JozefAL | 2008-11-05 17:49:03

You might want to change your wording.
There is NO WAY for us to “ELECT A WOMAN PRESIDENT OF THESE UNITED STATES IN THE NEXT 4 YEARS.” I understand what you’re trying to say, but we’re not going to be holding another election for President “in the NEXT 4 years”. We will be doing so in 4 years, but not the “next 4 years”. (The wording should be “4 years from now” or just “in 4 years”.)

Comment by Margaret | 2008-11-05 20:58:56

lighten up.

I applaud Mary’s enthusiasm

 
 

Comment by Scout | 2008-11-05 18:28:39

 
 

Comment by Arabella Trefoil | 2008-11-05 16:49:17

I’m going to read a book for a while. Sometimes it’s nice to looks at print that doesn’t interact with you.

I’m reading a biography of Theodosia Burr, Aaron Burr’s daughter. She had a very tough life.

I hope the trolls get bored soon. I think the paychecks stopped as of yesterday.

Comment by Bud White | 2008-11-05 16:53:19

Very interesting. Maybe we should do an Open Thread called: What are you reading now?

It’s a good time to read some books.

 

Comment by memi | 2008-11-05 17:38:27

aabella Trefoil

You just gave me a good laugh! Thanks. Keep up the novel reading…we’ll need it in the next 4 years of Obamaturbulence and Sexism Unbounded…

 
 

Comment by Linda | 2008-11-05 16:50:53

We are not going away. And the realities will bare light in his coming months and years.

He may have be the president elect, but he has not earned by respect.

Not only was his misogyny in full play, but he gave it weight to be used by all his surrogates and the media, and it was, tossed around and played so much it that it seemed to be in disguise of for paying compliments to women for their accomplishments and success in the face of great difficulty.

But I will never forget or forgive the race card he too played. Accusing others relentlessly.

Pretty funny, maybe that will be Barry’s legacy. The one term president that won his position through racism and misogyny, bought and paid by the people who helped carry it out, but ended up being just that empty symbol of change, never to have delivered on his soaring rhetoric

Barry S Obama,
One Term President

Comment by Linda | 2008-11-05 16:57:44

Having said that, I believe our job as true conscience of the voters, it will be our jobs to educate the electorate of that which the media failed to do, so they will be know the real Barry and will protect and work to protect the citzenry and country so he does not deliver, they are able to choose a new president in 4 years.

An informed citizenry by the grassroots citzenry.

Comment by jbjd | 2008-11-05 17:05:03

Thank you. I posted similar sentiments this morning. It will be hard work; often we will be sharing information with those who would rather not hear. Sometimes, we will need to bite our tongues even as we speak the truth. But having spent so much time here on this blog, I anticipate we can do this.

I have been pleasantly surprised at how easily the whole facade begins to crack once one previously unknown fact about BO pierces through the idolatrous miasma.

 
 
 

Comment by Bill Dupray | 2008-11-05 16:52:31

Comment by Arabella Trefoil | 2008-11-05 16:57:08

Comment by McPalin | 2008-11-05 17:26:40

 
 

Comment by Gerard McNedich | 2008-11-05 16:57:51

what is Peggy the Moocher going to do now?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bpnZD_MEtU

a. hillary
b. mccain

america first!

Comment by Barry bums a ciggie | 2008-11-05 17:09:38

Somebody need to sit Peggy down slowly and tell her the hard truth. I feel badly for people who bought into the BS promises. She’s in for a rude awakening.

 
 

Comment by jbjd | 2008-11-05 17:06:32

Yes, but, he’s black!

 
 

Comment by EightBelles | 2008-11-05 17:01:14

Bud, you nailed this one! When Barack Obama chose Joe Biden with his meager 8000 primary votes over Hillary Clinton and her 8,000,000 supporters, I smelled sexism. I also caught a glimpse of a candidate who was in effect giving HRC’s 8 million supporters the brush off. I still stand by Hillary. Maybe she knew something we didn’t–that no matter how hard anybody fought, the fix was in and BO would be the next POTUS. All along I sensed that in some way John McCain might have been a designated sacrificial lamb for the Republican Party. George Soros and moveon.org bought this election. Had McCain-Palin won, it would have been against all odds. There’s something rotten in DC, and I fear we haven’t seen anything yet. In other words, an Obama victory is probably just the tip of the iceburg.

Comment by Bud White | 2008-11-05 17:14:39

make that 18 million Hillary supporters.

 
 

Comment by joker | 2008-11-05 17:03:19

I love women but I just blew my stack when wife was watching oprah. She turned it off…..

Comment by Pennsylvania Red | 2008-11-05 17:14:51

hahaha

sounds like life at my place last night.

BF had on network election returns, I blew up, he turned it off!

Good dog.

 

Comment by Arabella Trefoil | 2008-11-05 17:21:48

Oprah’s magazine is going under because of declining circulation and news stand sales. Her show has lost ratings. Apparently her audience has gone to Ellen.

She has picked out her gown for the inaugural ball, and will no doubt look stunning. I don’t know who her current beard boyfriend is, and if he will accompany her to the ball.

Comment by mary | 2008-11-05 17:46:56

Arabella Trefoil

Pray tell, Arabella, is this your fictional name and, if so, is she an author (or a rap or hip-hop artist)? It’s really intriguing….your posts are sooo serene and welcome in the cacophony of the now….ah…the Sound and the Fury….signifying nothing…perchance the election of the Anorexic Resume that got to the top of the Presidential interview file by accident….now tell thee thine name ain’t Emily Bronte! southern belle perhaps?

Comment by JozefAL | 2008-11-05 17:56:01

The “real” Arabella Trefoil was a character in an Anthony Trollope novel, The American Senator.

http://www.anthonytrollope.com/books/works/american_senator_the_/

 
 
 

Comment by Newly Independent | 2008-11-05 19:39:11

I can’t stand Oprah.

Thanks for blowing your stack!

 
 

Comment by EJ | 2008-11-05 17:23:20

Sexism will only stop when we stop treating women like sex objects. When all of the news anchors show off their assets each and every day, sexism will continue.

It’s everywhere…12 year old girls showing off their bodies as if they were little hookers. Two women kissing on TV is thought of as sexy.

Until we get back to some sort of virtuous societal behavior and the sexism will continue.

Comment by mary | 2008-11-05 17:49:02

EJ

Agreed. I remember shuddering the 2 Obama girls at the Trinity Church of Hate and that disgusting Rev. Wright gyrating lewdly serving PORN-ON-THE-PULPIT screaming at the congregants:

“Bill does to us what he did to Monica” in full view of all the kids in Church.

Maybe Hussein Obummer should buy an X-RATED SIGN TO POST OUTSIDE THE CHURCH AS A DONATION ….

 

Comment by VMorris | 2008-11-05 18:25:15

Sexism will only stop when we stop treating women like sex objects. When all of the news anchors show off their assets each and every day, sexism will continue.

It’s everywhere…12 year old girls showing off their bodies as if they were little hookers.

I have to agree with this. As long as women are willing participants in being treated as sex objects and as long as women are willing to bash and trash women who are not like them, the sexism and misogyny will continue. If the women who continue to go along with the sexism and by example teach their daughters to do the same, it will never go away.

Someone posted that women are our own worst enemies. I agree. Obama is no champion for women. You can take that to the bank.

 
 

Comment by Sam | 2008-11-05 17:47:27

African Americans “stormed” the streets of DC last night in victory. Can there be any doubt about what would have happened in defeat?

 

Comment by Soldier of Christ | 2008-11-05 17:48:21

Obama made himself famous with ” this is not a black american, this is not a white america, this is not a blue america, this is not a red america”! Well….I hope the republicans are listening and learn from their mistakes. First, get rid of that insigator Dick Morris, the troublemaker who should have stop bashing the Clintons every chance he got. I guess he thought his goprevwright clip was going to save the day, I knew it wasn’t. I thought of many ideas and the republicans sat on their asses until the last minute. Terrible campaign managers. Maybe karl rove was needed for this fight after all. After shutting Dick Morris and asking him that in 2009 and 2010 not to help them, get Palin and the little dark India man in Louisana educated in foreign affairs and get rid of the Senator in Alaska- impeach the son of bitch and if he didn’t lose the election (I stop looking at tv) move Palin to Senator spot. Get her to go see the troops alot in 2008-2009-2010. I am sure they will still be crapping in foxhole since OBama has lied to the american people about bringing them home. Republicans get prepared- stop pussyfooting- And yes- my fever is gone- I am switching my party- can’t bear being called a democrat anymore. Sorry if I offend others on this blog. Now we have a woman and a minority and first India man in 2012, isn’t this “all americans?” Or better yet, throw Senator Martinez with Palin. Anyone but Obama for 8 years in a roll, please!

Comment by LandOLincoln | 2008-11-05 18:34:32

Soldier, you just don’t get it, do you?

Karl Rove was working for Obama this time.

Barack Obama is George Bush’s third term. He’s a Neocon–why else do you think Colin Powell endorsed him? Because he’s also black? Pffft–that was just icing on the cake for Powell.

And Dick Cheney’s “endorsement” of John McCain is directly comparable to Osama bin Laden’s “endorsement” of John Kerry four years ago, and done for the same reason.

 
 

Comment by jdona | 2008-11-05 17:49:55

If anything positive came out of this election, it is the awareness now of sexism as an issue. Its been swept behind the door for decades now. Women had a false sense of security in their equality because of some gains made in the business world. Now it is front and center again in all its ugliness. One can only hope people take a step back and start to see it and then do something about it.

 

Comment by Judy | 2008-11-05 17:59:27

Without doubt, Sara Palin and Hillary Clinton were swiftboated by the f**kin media.

I will never watch Katie Couric, Charlie Gibson, Brian Williams, Campbell Brown, etc. again. I am very angry with what they all did to 2 great women.

Evil!!!

Comment by VMorris | 2008-11-05 18:18:22

I will never watch Katie Couric, Charlie Gibson, Brian Williams, Campbell Brown, etc. again. I am very angry with what they all did to 2 great women.

Adding Keith Olberman, Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow, Ed Schulz and Stephanie Miller…There are more. Maybe I should just list who I will watch…..

….crickets……

Comment by Newly Independent | 2008-11-05 19:46:01

Yep!

Stopped watching all of those bastards earlier this year. The only thing soulless Wall Street types understand is loss of revenue.

 
 
 

Comment by noosama | 2008-11-05 18:04:39

Obama is a Muslim by birth. Congenitally Obama would apply the Islamic law. This sexism and misogyny are part of the paradigms of Islam.

This is just the beginning of islamization of America.

Expect more Islamic laws to be introduced in the US by this moronic cum Islamic Obama.

 

Comment by Fred | 2008-11-05 18:31:20

Yeah - good thing nobody tried to smear Michelle Obama claiming there was a non existent tape with her ranting about “Whitey”.

Because that would have been a really really sexist thing to do.

Comment by LandOLincoln | 2008-11-05 18:47:49

Of course there’s a tape and the Neocon Republicans have it, but since Obama was their candidate this time, of course it never saw the light of day, and probably never will–unless of course BHO should prove as disastrous for them as GWB did.

Then the corporate media will suddenly (gasp!) discover all sorts of unsavory things about your guy.

Sucker…

 
 

Comment by Heidi Li | 2008-11-05 18:31:48

Bud White: the Willie Horton/misogyny analogy is inspired. There are so many ways Mr. Obama could make the correction or elimination of misogyny and sexism a cornerstone of the new administration. We must begin the drumbeat now, until it becomes too deafening to be ignored.

 

Comment by Fred | 2008-11-05 18:32:34

How is the son of an atheist and a Christian a “Muslim by birth”???

Comment by LandOLincoln | 2008-11-05 18:51:40

Excellent point–and even if he were “Muslim by birth,” how would that make him “congenitally” apply Islamic law?

 
 

Comment by tek | 2008-11-05 19:18:52

Bud White. I think you’re on to something here. The New Politics are: find an aggrieved swing vote group and promise them the moon, run one of their own and win with an extremist agenda. I think the next aggrieved swing group should be women.

 

Comment by IndieDogg | 2008-11-05 19:42:42

You hit the nail on the head, Amazon Queen about the level of female hatred directed at both Senator Clinton and Governor Palin. And, I’m a man (but with a long female led and influenced life), (former) Hillary supporter and proud member of Team Sarah.

[A Note: I adopted the habit of always referring to Senator Clinton and Governor Palin when writing about them and it's been very interesting to sense the difference. It adds, for me, a level of respect and helps me avoid falling into the habit of referring to women less formally than I might a man in the same position. I tried it as an experiment but I like it so I've continued to do it.]

Anyway, you’re right. The most irrational and vicious attacks I heard were from women. I’ve seen women tear into each other before over a guy (jealousy) but most guys can match that. We can all get crazy where that’s involved. But, this I never could get my head around. To not support is one thing but the vile nature of it was astounding (yes, the guys tended to be more vulgar and graphic, as is their custom, but the level and intensity of the pure white-hot hatred coming from women was unreal).

I’d like to hear from a psychologist on this topic if there are any out there. Because, until women aren’t the enemy of each other (respectful foe, fine, but not bloodthirsty executioner), that 52% number isn’t going to mean much.

Continue to,

Stand Up!!!

 

Comment by marley | 2008-11-05 20:16:57

Yes- some women at my work were even calling Palin a whore. After I called them on it, two of the three women later said that they preferred to work for men only because “women are so catty, y’know?” Another co-worker, AA Republican, voted for O, said that she would never vote for a women president.

On the “B*” word… I like swearing in the right company. Even so, I have never liked the B-word thrown around between women as a cutsie name.

At work, the women do it (and I am talking women over 50 too) and I finally politely said that I do not respond well to that word, even in jest, because it is too self-deprecating and because men are never called it.

Sadly, they just defended its use because they did not get it. It was like I was being offensive for asking them to stop calling me that.

I cannot help think that O’s campaign laid the foundation for the C-word. “Stop being such a “C” and pass me the butter, “B.”

Perhaps NOW should bury that B-word like the NAACP burried its N-word?

 

Comment by hootnannie | 2008-11-05 20:30:03

For over 60 years, I’ve watched women figuratively scratch each other’s eyes out, and it all seems to be to please men. Things haven’t changed ONE BIT in all that time. A woman I work with said Palin “thinks she’s so cute”. Well, isn’t she–way more than cute, wouldn’t you say? My husband said Fox’s Meaghen Kelly went on today about McCain advisors going to speak with Palin and being met by her in a towel. Horrors! Black people are the ones who demanded that they be treated with respect. Why can’t women? Because they’re too busy being–well, CATTY–and putting other women down!

 

Comment by adfx | 2008-11-05 21:24:25

glad to see that there are other people

who actually looked at obama’s pro saudi oil voting

and can see that he is the real: mcsame

obama is a trouble maker

look already ..he isn’t even elected officially yet
and all of these people are already fighting and attacking

20 missiles in israel and Russia sent him a nice nuclear surprise

 

Comment by JJ | 2008-11-05 22:14:09

this election confirmed that women are f-in nuts and they got what they deserved. Women just love to hate each other.

 

Comment by fif | 2008-11-05 23:20:42

I would add to this post that Obama’s “victory” is also at the expense of race-baiting, ageism, classism, and homophobia. The “unifier” image is just more hypocrisy.

 

Comment by Tyrione | 2008-11-06 00:36:41

Women have no one to blame but themselves. Men will stick together and Women always cut each other’s throats.

You own the majority of vote and continue to be second class.

 

Comment by silverfox | 2008-11-06 11:50:50

there will never be a woman in the highest or second highest seat of power in the USA.

as the NWO architects continue to pursue their goal, the head of the world in their plan, the POTUS, will always be male. as will the VP, being so close to the head. the women will get thrown a few bones to make it look good…case in point Pelosi.

this is why sen obama was put forth. it would take a young partially white and well spoken black man, along with the constantly played race card in conjunction with a well oiled misogynist MSM machine to depose Sen Clinton…

and Clinton,who by the popular vote, the vote of the people, would now be POTUS…in a fair and just world uninfluenced by the corrupted moral compass within the power elite.

that said, my prayers go out to the people of the United States , and to the new Preisident Elect Obama. who has quite a bit to deliver on… and a very big tip of the hat to Sen McCain and Gov Palin, who took it to the streets and fought for the many good people who believed in their cause.. i deeply admire their great patriotism and hope that they will continue to have a presence in Washington..

may God help us all in the coming days.

 

RSS Feed for This PostPost a Comment

Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)