Pelosi: Clinton Loss Won't Mean Women Suffer A 'Step Back'

Bloomberg:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said women won't suffer a "step back" if Democrat Hillary Clinton loses her presidential bid, and rejected the idea of sexism in the presidential campaign.

Clinton, 60, a New York senator, is "bigger than all of it"' and has shown "courage," Pelosi, a California Democrat, said in an interview with Judy Woodruff broadcast on the PBS NewsHour last night.

Read the whole story: Bloomberg

Comments

[Muzikal203]

Once again Nancy tells it like it is, why couldn't she be this tough on Bush?

[AshleyMarie]

We would actually suffer a step back if she won. She is a terrible example of what I would expect from the female seeking the highest office in the land. She makes women everywhere look bad, lying, cheating, desperate, do anything, say anything... She would ensure that we didn't get back in that office for a while.

I expect the first female President of the United States to set the bar pretty high, and that doesn't look like something she would do.

[thepoliticalcat]

Vindictive and spiteful, too. She has set the cause of women back by a century.

What a dreadful excuse for a human being. Utterly amoral and brazenly manipulative.

[MrsMattlinger]

I agree with you. I think Hillary Clinton has set back women's issues. Ironically, an Obama win would do more for the women's issues than Hillary ever could or would.

Hillary has demonstrated the worst stereotypical female behavior. From "not being good with money" (true, she has raised a fortune, but squandered it, to the point where her own staff says "it borders on fraud") to demanding special treatment, expecting handicapping in a race with men.

Her record, such that it is, is rife with failure. Of having "tried", insisting on her own way or no way, and failed. And because of her abrasive character, people have relished slamming the door in her face, saying, "no way" to her, and as a result we have all suffered. She's gone on to make $109 million. From 1993 to now, and still no universal health care? The blame lies with Hillary.

I've been mortified by Hillary's behavior. She has become the role model in my family, for my daughters and granddaughters, for how NOT to be. Her lying, her sense of entitlement, her inability to admit her mistakes, her failure to retreat from bad decisions and chart new courses are all traits I never want to see held up as models for women, for Presidents, for women who aspire to become President.

[hillarysupporter]

I'm horrified by Michelle "omarosa" Obama's behavior.

[likeicare]

Nancy smells the stench of Hillary's dying corpse, too.

No, Hillary wasn't THE ONE, like she tried to make everyone believe she was.

That's all.

[Marcospinelli]

I've been calling and writing the women on the superdelegates' list and reminding them that if sensitivity to women's issues is uppermost in their consideration of who to endorse, Barack Obama is closer to appreciating the obstacles women of all ages are coming up against than Hillary Clinton. It is his race that makes him more of a feminist than Hillary Clinton.

Along those lines, I've been wondering where ARE these feminist leaders who are threatening to vote McCain or sit out the election if Hillary isn't the nominee or on the ticket?

I haven't seen ANY populist women's leaders come forward for Clinton. Geraldine Ferraro is not, and has never been a feminist. Neither is Feinstein. Has anybody seen any known women, known as champions of women's issues, appear with Hillary lately? And no, Erica Jong doesn't count.

I FundRaced some, and what I found paralleled what has happened everywhere else.

Very early on they donated to her campaign, and not the maximum. As the campaign has worn on, they've donated to the National Campaign and to Obama, but nothing more to Hillary. No appearances with her, no hosting of or appearing at fundraisers for her. One example is Lily Tomlin; looking her up reminded me of Molly Ivins and Ann Richards - Can you imagine what either of them would have to say about what Hillary's been doing?

[thepoliticalcat]

Well, there WAS that public meltdown of the New York chapter of NOW.

And here I was thinking feminism was all about respecting women's choices even if those choices happen to be contrary to what YOU think they should choose. Foolish me.

[MrsMattlinger]

It's not the first time that a leader of a local chapter of NOW has had a narcissistic meltdown, parting company with the consensus. Tammy Bruce/NOW/1996.

Yours is an interesting definition of feminism, especially with the comment about the NY chapter of NOW, given that chapter's outrage and denunciation of Ted Kennedy for his endorsement of Obama. I've never heard any feminist claim that definition, including me. It's a noble definition, IMHO, for humanity, for liberalism, but that's not what a strictly feminist ideal.

However, back to Hillary as a feminist champion (NOT).

What has seeped into the ozone is the threat that a bloc of voters (politically and legislatively active professional women across the nation) are allied and will prevent any Democratic nominee other than Hillary Clinton from winning in the general election.

[NCRESIDENT]

Here is why Obama lost in Ky and WV. The mindset of these people tell you what station they look at. They are the ones who are frightened.
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/1318534/obama_faces_racism_in_west_virginia/

[Marcospinelli]

The same people in KY and WVA who voted for Hillary and said they would vote for McCain if Obama was the Democratic nominee are the same people who voted for Bush over Kerry in 2004.

That's all anybody needs to know.

If Hillary was the nominee, they would vote for McCain.

[ohiomark]

There is no way Princess Pelosi want Hillary to win.

SHE wants to be the most powerful woman in the country.

[thepoliticalcat]

Oh, puh-leez. Another Republican troll.

[Marcospinelli]

If Nancy Pelosi wanted to be "the most powerful woman in the country" (i.e., the president), she could have put the impeachment of Bush and Cheney on fast track and had the job within a day (impeachment can take as little as one day to get done).

[bratzilla]

I did not have sex with that woman.
I'm no stand by your man.

The Clintons shamed our nation. He lied and she covered up.
He lied about all the woman he was involved with.

They made me ashamed to be a democrat.
They opened the door for George W. Bush to get elected.
I hold them responsible for what is going on today.

[YankeeCanuck]

Clinton's personal shortcomings were none of anyone's business. How HRC dealt with her husband's infidelities is none of anyone's business.
Our prurient interest in the real or imagined sex lives of public figures shows our immaturity.

Bush lied about matters of international and national security. Some of us still think that's fine and dandy. Now, that's pathetic.

[bratzilla]

I agree all the good old boys need to be kicked out. Look what they have done to us. They sold us out, they need to clean house and get rid of all the old timers.

[Sabreen60]

See, this is why we need to clean house of the old time Democrats. Pelosi actually said, "you know she (Clinton) may still win this". How???? By stealing it??? What the h*ll is Pelosi talking about???

[olivia]

Technically that is correct. The superdelegates who have publicly committed to one candidate or another can change their minds until they cast their votes at the convention.

If Pelosi said anything different you know what the backlash would be.

[CocteausTwin]

And the pledged delegates aren't truly pledged either -- or is that another lie I accepted without much thought. Maybe it is they are only pledged on the first round of votes at the convention.

[lisakaz2]

Nancy,

I'm sure you're right that Clinton losing is not a setback for women per se. But the way HRC ran her campaign of triangulation, lies and smear sure is.

[itsbushstupid]

puleeeeze, nancy,
put your name on obama's ticket.
let's see:
impeachmen­t.......ch­eck
end the war...........check
obama super........check,
wow, the obamanation is soooooo lucky.
maybe reid and dean will be on your side soon.

o's ---your clock has been cleaned.

[thepoliticalcat]

Prescription meds not working, dear?

Four new superdelegates to Obama today, one of them a former Clinton supporter. Polls showing Obama beats McInsane's aged azz flat in Ohio.

It's a good day.

[Dane1911]

I respect Pelosi, but she is on tape stating who ever gains the majority of the delegates she would endorsed. Well its now Friday afternoon, and she still hasnt endorsed Obama. Whats the hold up are you afraid of the so call CLinton machine.

[k6007]

Three more primaries.

[walk0nwalls]

Actually I think that everyone is utterly fucking terrified of the Clintons simply because they've been the Democratic status quo for so long. They're effectively royalty and have their own group of personality cultists following them around who are loyal to the Clintons first and the Democrats second.

While that's true of any of the primary candidates, the Clintons have been around the longest. The Clintons already served a presidency, and the Clintons are a force to be reckoned with.

But that dragon's going to have to fall eventually

[evekendall]

In the Democratic Party, we do have some women who are highly qualified to be in positions of leadership...for instance:

Governor Janet Napolitano of Arizona

Governor Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas

NEITHER of whom used charges of sexism to win political office. They won on the strength of their leadership, abilities, experience, and character. Both should be in the running for Vice President.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Napolitano

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathleen_Sebelius

[YankeeCanuck]

There's Ruth Ann Minner, Gov. of Delaware, Lt. Gov of Iowa Patty Judge to name a couple more notables. Both very strong, eloquent and capable.

[txgal44]

There will be a woman President. It just won't be Hillary. The universe has not decided yet. It has to be just the right person at just the right time. We've not met her yet but we will. I hope it's in my life time.

[speakyourmind]

I agree with you. It'll happen at some point, but not with this one. She inspires too much vitriolic hatred.

[YankeeCanuck]

Both Clinton and Pelosi have been lightning rods for hatred. Partly because of misogny, partly because of actions and words.
Would Pelosi have had to take as much heat if more than 35% of voters had turned out in 2006 and given the Dems a strong majority? Perhaps impeachment could have been on the table.

[jhNY]

If Pelosi's leadership and achievement are meant to stand as monuments to what a woman can do in high office, she deserves a trophy commensurate in size with her accomplishments, and I didn't know they make loving cups in H-O scale.

She and her congressional minions were sent to congress in 2006 to stop the war and, at least in the hopes of many supporters, to impeach the criminals in the executive branch. Immediately, without any prompting, she took impeachment "off the table." And as for ending the war? Didn't even pretend to try hard to get 'er done. Perhaps she's sitting on a secret plan to end the war, a la Nixon in '68, but most likely , it's just her sorry behind.

[theMightyT]

Without Liebermann they don't have a majority. Since he's with Bush on all war votes, and that means that the Republicans win, what do you expect her to do? Also Bush has vetoed every bill with an attempt to change direction on the war or set timetables for withdrawal.

What would YOU have done?