BlogHer - PunditMom - Comments

If you are against sexism

Suzanne Reisman — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 11:30:44 -0500

I know people need time to think this through and analyze both remaining candidates, but I think that anyone who wants to take a stand against sexism must consider where McCain stands on the issue. In refusing to support the Fair Pay Act in the Senate (he missed the vote, but said if he were there he would vote against fair pay), he told people that it is more important for the government to let companies go about their business than to stop them from discriminating against women.

The Fair Pay Act was set to rectify a terrible verdict from the right-wing Supreme Court that said that people may only file discrimination suits within 6 months of the act of being discriminated against. However, most women do not find out within six months that they are paid less than their male co-workers because companies (and some states) have policies forbidding people to discuss their salaries with co-workers.

McCain said women need more education and training to bring our incomes up. True, but if companies can just pay you less because you are a woman, education and training don't help. Essentially, by not supporting the Fair Pay Act, McCain encourages companies to pay women less than men, and keep the information secret. If they are dumb enough to get caught in six months, then of course they should pay up. If that is not sexism, I'm not sure what is.

Suzanne Reisman, Contributing Editor - Feminism & Gender
Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants

Your question really got me

ByJane — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 17:09:21 -0500

Your question really got me going. The response is over at my blog today.

By Jane

http://byjane.blogspot.com

http://midlifebloggers.com

The role of pundits

PunditMom — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 08:32:23 -0500

I agree with your assessment that part of her undoing was as a result of the skewed portrayal Hillary received from the pundits, who were clearly pushing their own agenda.

Do you think part of it was because most of the high profile pundits were men trying to view Clinton through a male lens?

I don't know what I'm going

ByJane — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 01:32:12 -0500

I don't know what I'm going to do. A couple of days is not enough time for me to be able to see and think and feel clearly. I'm not so much mad at the media as disgusted that I was once a fervent part of the pack. I don't think it was sexism so much that did her in as punditry, from both sides of the gender divide. A whole lot of what passed for "news" or "informed opinion" were cheap shots, easy and cute, meant to made the deliverer look good. Clever. Smart. I remember that feeling of scoring in print or on air. Yeah! Look at me! I'm the messenger; let me tell you what's really what. Blech!

So I'm still mad and I feel disenfranchised and, I just realized as I'm writing this, disrespected by the Obama-ites. I don't know when, or how, I'll feel any different. I was part of Clinton's base not just because I believed in her, but because I don't believe in him. He'll have to go a long way to change my mind.

By Jane

http://byjane.blogspot.com

MidLifeBloggers.com

If Hillary had been the nominee

Nordette — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 22:19:14 -0500

I would have voted her even though I was pissed about some of what went on like Bill's South Carolina-Jesse Jackson primary comment, but I would have voted her and not for the Bushite.

I don't agree with everything the DNC does, and I voted Republican once. But never for W and couldn't vote for anyone who agrees with most of his policies. McCain so far speaks from both sides of his mouth to me on Bush policies. Wishy washy or worm. Either way not good. Plus, I think Hillary's smarter than he is.

She spoke well and I know it had to be difficult for her.

Nordette Adams is a Contributing Editor with BlogHer.org.

Double-edged and Intersections...

Yvette Perry — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 18:05:16 -0500

I think many of us in our discussions fail to consistently see the double-edged nature of these two campaigns: race helps in some cases and hurts in others; gender helps in some cases and hurts in others. Being well educated is "smart" in some cases, "elitism" in others.

Similarly--A BO/HRC ticket would be a dream to some and a nightmare to others. Some folks who would be OK with either a Black man or a White woman alone would not be comfortable with both at the same time. Not to mention a long history of racial/sexual imagery such a pairing would invoke for some (many).

Recoiling from this elephant in the room might make us temporarily comfortable, but make no mistake that we as a country are not past these kinds of subliminal worries and it will become an issue if these two run as a pres/VP team.

Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast

Links to all three speeches - Obama, Clinton, McCain

Catherine Morgan — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 00:26:39 -0500

Here are links to all three speeches from tonight...

Barack Obama Speech

http://politicsanew.com/2008/06/04/video-of-barack-obamas-speech-june-3-2008/

Hillary Clinton Speech

http://politicsanew.com/2008/06/03/video-of-hillary-clinton-speech-june-3-2008/

John McCain Speech and blogger reactions

http://politicsanew.com/2008/06/03/video-of-john-mccain-speech-june-3-2008/

Contributing Editor Catherine Morgan at catherine-morgan.com, The Political Voices of Women, Care2 Election Blog

I want her to unify the party

Erin Kotecki Vest — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 23:20:43 -0500

And I do not think staying in, when the race is over, unifies the party.

Tonight she had the opportunity to at least BEGIN to bring the party together, and she couldn't even muster acknowledging Obama now has the delegates.

Instead I heard how she has won more swings states.
How she has the popular vote.
How she will fight for your vote to be heard.
All fine and good when it's put in the context of unifying the democratic party-which she made only ONE reference too.

One.

The rest was all about her.

Not to mention she spoke after McCain spoke-and praised her up and down and sideways.

Not a word about McCain.
Zip.

Here we have the GOP nominee talking about how GREAT Clinton is for what seemed like EONS of time, and while the Dems are divided Clinton does NOTHING to bring the sides together but instead continue the battle on every single thing that has occurred.

I want the VP that is best for this country and can beat the GOP. If she's it-great. If OBAMA is the best VP-great.

But I want team players. Right now it sure does not feel like she's on my team.

Politics & News Contributing Editor
Queen of Spain

I Agree - She Shouldn't Drop Out

Gena Haskett — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 22:57:43 -0500

She should take it to the convention because I resent the news media dictating who is and isn't the nominee.

I don't think she should be his VP. Way too much bad blood has been spilled and can you imaging the ruckus when in the third year she starts campaigning for the office of President?

Frankly I wouldn't trust her behind my back if I was President. I'm still mad at not one, not two but three bone-head statements coming out of her mouth.

That White House would be rocking with stories leaking all over the joint about what one did to the other. And nobody seems to answer the question "What would you do about Bill?"

Gena - Out On The Stoop

My very professional opinion

HeatherB — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 22:05:04 -0500

As a blogger and as a long time member of the Democratic Party even though I am only 24; I don't think she should concede and I hope she doesn't. This is the most democratic process and it is being played out to the fullest as it should be. People who suggest that she should drop out, etc. are the same people who once upon a time got all upset that New Hampshire and Iowa practically determined who the nominee would be and the convention was rather superfluous. Now every single vote counts and I think it's fair and right and that the actual delegates at the convention should be able to vote on who the nominee should be as the rules of the Democratic Party explicitly state.

Heather B.
Personal Blog: No Pasa Nada
BlogHer CE: Business, Career & Personal Finance

Mmmmm... this shoe is quite flavourful...

nelle2nelle — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 21:35:00 -0500

Just reading on MSNBC that Hillary expressed interest today in the veep position to Congressional reps from NY.

So much for my thinking she would not be interested...

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/06/03/1102583.aspx

nelle

Ok I'm going to disagree don't zap my html code tho ok? :)

Jill Miller Zimon — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 21:33:30 -0500

I think they can pull it off, if they really want to re: Obama w/HRC as VP. Their dedication to the Democratic party is really unshakable. I believe her stock is only going to go up now. It is sad - I got chills listening to her, but I do not see her as a spoiler taking it to the convention. I just don't - being a realist as well as a fighter has been a Clinton Hallmark.

And you know what I think is the biggest reason she won't go to the convention? Chelsea. Chelsea as the embodiment of what we have GOT to get done now - that the fighting it to the convention hurts the future generations.

Clinton has already shown us everything there is to fighting - going to the DNC doesn't amplify that, it looks delusional, sadly, because in a democracy, we end up yielding to the Supreme Court no matter how we hated it and we yield to the process that she helped put in place re: the delegates.

This is what we do - we fight we win we lose we go on and we do. She is a doer who does by fighting for something - I don't think there's anything more to fight for now - she wanted everyone to vote - they voted. Now, the only one she'd be fighting for would be herself - assuming she can exact promises from the Obama campaign to take care of the Clinton constituencies.

Jill
Writes Like She Talks

Hillary just gave an EXCELLENT speech.

Catherine Morgan — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 20:55:40 -0500

Hillary just gave an EXCELLENT speech.

Contributing Editor Catherine Morgan at catherine-morgan.com, The Political Voices of Women, Care2 Election Blog

Not a Dream Ticket

Candelaria Silva — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 20:41:09 -0500

I don't see Obama and Clinton on the same ticket. I belive some of the nastiness that occurred from her and her camp was beyond simple politics.

I've read all the posts above and thought and thought and thought about it - and I just don't think the two of them will work. I will respect Obama more for not caving in to people who call for him to pick Hillary.

And Bill - tired of him. He adds nothing to the party at this point.

And what about Bill?

Laracolvin — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 20:21:39 -0500

I'm not opposed to a joint ticket right now with BO and HRC, but Bill scares the bejeebers out of me. I worry he'd somehow screw it up...he's being setting himself a pretty fine precendent this primary season.

Notions of Identity