toocents

I Love Bill! Experience and foreign policy is key... The other suggestions have been so so so so drippy! posted 05/13/2008 at 10:53:48

: ) I miss the Edwards too. posted 05/11/2008 at 13:47:33

Here we go again, vetting the potential First Ladies with mean, nasty sexism even by Obama supporters. One aspect of the campaign that does not involve change! posted 05/11/2008 at 13:45:23

Hilarious! What is the deal with the stepford wife persona? Right on tho Toonadude this is DELICATE. MizFlagPin - Is it being a "wannabe man" for a woman to run for president? A very scary suggestion. Please save your "I Want a Woman just not THIS woman!!!!" pleez, we all get it HILLARY IS BURIED. Our hope is that Michelle can learn from Barack how to be more likable, bec he's our nominee! posted 05/11/2008 at 13:21:38

PS: i just saw your profile and you scare me!!!! did rush send you? posted 05/10/2008 at 16:25:38

Relax i'm for Obama but that doesn't make me blind to the media's sexism! Also it doesn't bother me when women are mannish (I realize that is not that popular on huffpost...) McCaskill could be good but she was just elected... someone with more experience is more likely. posted 05/10/2008 at 16:14:56

So having a critique of sexism in the media only concerns white women? Lets not get lost, its likely we both support Obama.

An achievement of third wave feminism is that it acknowledges the failures of 2nd wave (a white-only perspective, feminine mystique style) and the 3rd wave introduced "feminismS" ... how race, class, sexual orientation (the long list of identity politics) complicate issues of gender equality.

This is actually the lack of unity I'm talking about ... Its like 3rd wave backlash - suggesting to look at sexism in the media results in getting accused of being 2nd wave, accused of racism. Fair enough though, if I brought up sexism we should bring up the racism. Its been a horror, this whole campaign. posted 05/10/2008 at 15:49:24

Yah yah of course but are you denying that hate has not been inflamed by some nasty misogyny in the media coverage? posted 05/10/2008 at 15:16:18

I agree there has been deep racism in the media too. Absolutely, it has been a total horror. I think Obama and his campaign have risen above it, racist attack after racist attack. HRC hasn't really deflected the sexism (in my opinion.) My comment was responding to what the above article says about gender and the feminist movement. I don't think the fact that there was sexism in the media precludes that there was racism, clearly there was both, and should be looked at closely. (If we do this after the election it's looking like it will be under Obama's administration.)

Who do you "admire", I don't understand? Are you saying that HRC ran a racist campaign? If this is so this could explain why she is losing (or has lost.) posted 05/10/2008 at 15:12:08

My 57 year old mom is voting for Obama too, but I don't see it as a gift. She is exercising her right to vote. What is your subtext? I'm just impressed that she's 94 and still voting... posted 05/10/2008 at 14:42:10

Why do we have to congratulate women or feminists or daughters and mothers for being Obama supporters? I've noticed these proclamations a lot on HuffPost and generally and I don't understand it. I think there is some subtext here, I'm waiting for it to illuminate a message but I'm still stumped. posted 05/10/2008 at 14:37:43

I was disappointed in this article. It's probably due to the fact that I find my generation of feminism (b. 1977) disappointing, disorganized and lacking, despite how much I value the feminist movements history and see the incredible necessity to look critically at where our nation is with gender equality. Maybe its my fault, or maybe due to the third waves achievements (we simply don't vote for our gender, etc.)

Despite the so-called split of feminists support for Obama/Clinton, I was surprised how little organizing there was against the deep sexism in the media's coverage of Hillary (there was some voiced but were totally shadowed by Hillarys-character-cast as scratching for the election, doing ANYTHING to win), and the Hillary-nut-cracking-hate constant on this very site. I think we let a lot of offensive things go with very little outrage. (except the domestic silent outrage that went unreported) ... I'm hoping that after this is over we can process what was lost and what was gained in terms of a feminist agenda in the primaries. Right now it seems like nothing. At least that sounds better that we gained a woman who campaigned and almost won. Finally, I want to express how annoying it is that elder women boast there devotion to both Obama and Feminism, as if this was some kind of achievement. posted 05/10/2008 at 14:13:39

Nope not everyone is sleeping peaceful. This reporting is pretty sleepy. The idea that the media (including the huffpost machine) has announced that Hillary is not the nominee (fine) and that now everything is together for America - WAKE UP! Lazy lazy lazy. Do some more thoughtful work, even if that means more hopeful stuff about Obama - like the exciting policies we can look forward to! posted 05/11/2008 at 06:20:57

Right the majority of the population does not know blogs like this exist, true. HOWEVER the author of this article, Thomas B. Edsall wrote for the Washington Post -- the people running this blog are not exactly outside mainstream influence, the networks quote from HuffPost all the time on the news, also Arriana often makes an appearance. This article includes HuffPost readers comments in his article. Did you miss that in the above reading? If blogs are decentralized dialogs that can be referenced to as the pulse of a democratic constituent, fine. But to quote this audience as somehow the pulse of the party, not true - and a mistake. HuffPost needs to look closer at its bias toward Obama in its readership and writing (and the nasty-pigfaced unflattering photos they so carefully chose of Hillary -- I can just see the photo-editor chuckling every time, also the headline guy/gal is pretty laughable) ... Again, I support Obama, but I am sympathetic to our entire democratic base, because we need to win, not over-estimate the sentiments of commentators on HuffPost which largely represents anti-hillary crazed Obamaphiles. They just are not that far apart from each other as candidates. Unity, please.

I wish it was as simple as you say:

McCain - 4 more years of Bu$h's policies
Obama - a new direction - a new America.

The Hillary-Half needs to relent our idea of Obama - a new America. Again, unity please, don't let overconfidence lose us another election. posted 05/10/2008 at 13:16:08

Your idea that "there arent nearly as many Hilary supporters period" is exactly my point - it is a MISTAKE for Obama supporters to take that attitude. Have you not noticed how close it is between them? I thought Obama would be the nominee after Super Tuesday in February. (I mean the super tuesday before the previous super tuesdays)... Hillary is tenacious and has so much support, otherwise he would be our nominee right now. I fear the arrogance of Obama supporters (btw I support him) combined with the media lovefest will make us not as competitive as we think in the fall. There has to be the "unity" that Obama speaks so well about. Hillary-hate does not help the party. That arrogance isolates and shrinks support. posted 05/10/2008 at 12:38:21

FYI the links you made to the "stories" raising the "subject" do not function. Mysterious. posted 05/10/2008 at 10:19:21

HuffPost is only read by Obama supporters, it has alienated anyone who isn't intoxicated with Obama-mania. He's maybe the best choice, but looking at the comments as a gauge of public opinion is sorely out of touch. Dems need to be together. posted 05/10/2008 at 10:16:29

(I mean to have a running trannie) posted 05/10/2008 at 16:04:30

(I mean to have a running trannie...) posted 05/10/2008 at 16:03:14

We can only dream... posted 05/10/2008 at 16:02:28

1) dude
2) HRC
3) dude
4) dude
5) dude
6) Janet Napolitano
7) dude
8) dude
9) dude
10) Kathleen Sebelius
11) dude
12) dude posted 05/10/2008 at 13:31:35

Oh Pleeeezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
WALMART SUCKS.
you auto-hill-hating-bots need to chill. she's not going to win. posted 04/01/2008 at 10:02:31

I agree. Everyone needs to get behind the candidate after they WIN IT, and not be asking folks to step down. But it would be a mistake to think Obama doesn't play tricks, this is a campaign and he's winning it. Again, its amazing to me how similar these two vote and how either one of them comes up with a plan and then basically mimics the one who got to it first. And I wouldn't say he "twists arms"... why do all hill haters always use playground talk just because a girl is running? On the other hand, it was pretty annoying watching Joe Scarborough talk about what a sissy Obama was at bowling - that was so ridiculous! So Republican to get after the senstive '90s guy. Whatev. I'll be glad for all the relentless Obama fanatics in mid summer when this is over, until then, play nice, so there's no regret for folks to stand behind either dem. posted 04/01/2008 at 09:50:36

Interested why I haven't seen anything about Ralph Nadar's letter to Hillary Clinton about staying in the race. He told her its just "political bigotry" that everyone is trying to push her out. Sorry but i feel it is nutricious to play this out, whoever you stand behind. I'm an Obama fan but not annoyed at Hill for staying in the race, look they're pretty equal, both centrists.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/Whos_got_her_back.html

The title of this post "Hillary Clinton Deluged With Calls For Her Withdrawal" is less kind than the Wash Post "Clinton Vows To Stay in Race To Convention" .. Not surprised though because huff post is so pro-obama. Let's make it about the issues, and pushing these centrist candidates to the left and troop withdrawl (or whatever ISSUE matters to YOU) - as Klein/Scahill wrote about. posted 03/30/2008 at 11:19:06

The huff post really needed naomi & scahill's article. (THANK YOU!!!! A MILLION TIMES I WAS SO HAPPY FOR IT) the huff post and it's readership is relentlessly pro-obama, and that is not helping the end of this occupation. i get so thrilled when Katrina you're on tv asking the tough questions we can't ask. you don't have to defend your papers writers for encouraging the same thing. honestly. their message was an important one and we need to applaud their point. everyone needs to chill with praising obama as the messiah, he's a good candidate but we need to challenge his positions, he's easily pushed to the center with his reach across the aisle crap. i will support obama but sometimes i CANNOT believe that during this campaign season, during and after such a horrendous and /DESTRUCTIVE/ administration ... at this bleak moment in our political history we did not find strength for a united radical left for pro-peace. everything should have been in place for that. instead we have the Nation endorsing obama. it's so soft and it's rather depressing. Katrina this response lacks courage (seemingly unlike you from your public persona) and i feel klein/scahill were /finally/ gently pushing for that. s'okay. this was good. you're on the same team. posted 03/27/2008 at 11:46:11