Media Bias towards Obama is just making me vomit. Why not just plant a crown on his big arse head and get it over with.

Hillary has the most experience, compassion, ability; not that any of that matters. I have found that the biggest Misogynist in the U.S.A. are WOMEN. Way to make it happen Ladies Congratulations JOB WELL DONE. How you must disgust your mothers!

Hillary - You were robbed vy a disgraced media and Jealous young women who will one day get the message of Family first.

Davyd In LA.

Ruth,

Being anti-war ought to mean being anti-Obama. I refer you to this link (be forewarned, it's a conservative blog): http://ex-donkey.mu.nu/archives/166079.php. I point out this statement it quotes: "'I am absolutely certain Connecticut is going to have the good sense to send Joe Lieberman back to the U.S. Senate so he can continue to serve on our behalf,"' he said."

And what did Lieberman think was in the best interests of our country? According to Wikipedia: "Lieberman has been one of the Senate's strongest advocates for continued prosecution of the Iraq War." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Lieberman

Saying the Hillary's compromise for working women means she's not your kind of feminist isn't very damning. In fact, it shows she can negotiate with hostile legislators, something Obama has never shown any interest in doing with all his "present" votes.

Hillary has done more good for this country than Obama ever has. I'm from Illinois. I know first-hand how lazy a legislator he is.

Some of the HRC backers need to remember one thing -- it isn't even close to "feminist" to tell women they have to vote for a female candidate.

My girlfriend is a women's studies major who considers herself a feminist, has actively worked in the pro-choice movement and supports Obama.

And she feels very insulted by anyone who says she should support Hillary because she's a woman.

Hey...I'm a mother, a grandmother, and a great gradmother. And I just voted for Obama.

About Hillary and compassion...please ck this out:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-rees/clinton-obama-and-clust_b_84811.html

(TPM: why haven't you explored this?)

Ruth,

Thankyou. A lot of us men, who are totally with you on all things feminist, have the same thoughts and feelings. A more enlightened era means we can NOT vote for an otherwise qualified woman because of something as fundamental as support for an illegal and immoral war. This issue has no gender.

Feminism would be opposed to the "dictatorship" of the vote, e.g. only vote for the woman. That would be silly.

The writer has not laid out "feminist reasons" for her choice. She simply has explained why she'd like to vote for a woman in principle but has chosen Barak at this time as a practical matter, based upon a well laid out series of arguments IMHO.

Seems that some are attacking the writer, rather than disagreeing with the arguments presented.

The GOP controlled congress when TANF was reauthorized. If you think there was a shot in hell of keeping 30 hours, you are living on another planet. Hillary actually did pretty well to get the 35 hour compromise, as it looked for a while like 40 hours was a real possibility.

This is such standard politics, and Hillary did the very obvious thing given the circumstances. I find it hard to believe that this is really your primary obstacle to voting for her.

I also find your war argument unconvincing. Their policies are the same, but you don't think she's passionate enough about ending the war? And the level of her passion is a dealbreaker? Wow.

I think its kind of dumb for anybody to assume that feminists have to vote for Hillary. Likewise, despite being a Hillary supporter I can see plenty of good arguments for Obama.

But these are some of the most unconvincing arguments I've seen for some time.

None of us determined which gender we would be born, so it is absurd to vote for only the person who has similar genitalia to one's own. Vote for the person,and not just their plug and play parts. Neither you nor they designed or selected them.

Personally, I find it more than just a little disturbing that you feel the need to explain yourself at all. We like to think we're beyond the pettiness of racism and genderism, and yet both have reared their ugly, prehistoric heads over and over during this campaign.

Bill Clinton recently said, "I think it would be just as much a change, and some people think more, to have the first woman president as to have the first African-American president." For me, that pretty much sums up the ignorant bigot view in a nutshell. If he's suggesting anything other than his belief that a woman is better than a negro, I'd like to hear what it is he meant to say.

The goal, among those with an agenda, is always the same: divide and conquer. They want to split the whites from the blacks, the men from the women and the "real" feminists from the "phony" feminists who would dare to vote their heart or their principles over their genitalia. They're trying to shame you and trap you by reminding you that you're a woman first and a human being second.

In their zeal to elevate someone with breasts into the Oval Office, they have hypocritically and carelessly cast themselves and those around them into boxes. You're either with them, or you're against them. Divide and conquer. What they're attempting to do to you is the female version of calling you an Oreo cookie. Shame on you for abandoning the gender, you man-lover, you.

So maybe they've succeeded in making you feel a little guilty. But if they have, then please ignore them, because THEY are the ones who have abandoned their principles. They are the ones who are attempting to subvert the primary goal of the feminism by accusing you of being a person instead of a woman. They are the ones who have set equality aside in favor of some sexist goal they believe is better: WOMEN'S equality. They haven't yet grown to realize that there is no goal higher than plain equality--without any limits, designations, sexual or racial biases, or any of the other stupid limitations people would put on simple equality.

It warms my heart to see so many Americans so willing to take a chance on believing. On hope. On casting their lot with someone who offers us something better--the ability to lift each other out of the hole we've carelessly dug for ourselves. So vote for Obama with pride, dear person. You are doing more to put an end to stupidity than they could ever understand.

PS: If I, as a white male, was ever asked to explain why I'm supporting a black man instead of a white woman in this election, I'm afraid I'd be far less tolerant than you. They'd be telling it to the finger pretty darn quick.

My 68-year old feminist mother wrote this:

I made up my mind to vote for Barack Obama at a rally for him in New Hampshire, which we attended with our daughter and her young children. Previously, I had said that my heart wanted to vote for the transformative Obama, but I wasn’t sure about his electability. I had considered, as a woman, supporting Hillary Clinton, even though I didn’t feel compelled by her candidacy, personally. I felt most aligned with the policies of John Edwards.

On a sunny day in New Hampshire, following a huge snowstorm, we stood in line with thousands of others, waiting to get into the gym at Concord High School. We had been early, so were relatively near the front of the line. The crowd grew and the line snaked to a continually receding point far away, This was a civic coming together that I had not experienced since the days of civil rights, peace and anti-nuclear rallies years ago. It felt as if people—these mannerly New Hampshire voters of all ages—had, like us, been watching the events of recent years with quiet desperation at our seeming inability to effect change in the policies of our government, and had finally sensed a way to say we are a better people and a better country than we have seemed to be.

Inside, amidst the signs, the Secret Service, the cameras, the managers, the roped off pathways, and the buoyant crowd, anticipation grew. We were happy to share so colorful an event, especially one that is part of the nation’s political process, with our granddaughters. And then Barack Obama began to speak, urging us to overcome the naysayers, to vote as our best selves, to move toward the future as we wish it to be. Looking over, I saw that my husband had tears running down his cheeks. “Why is Grampa crying?” asked one of our granddaughters. “Because this is the way it’s supposed to be and what we wish for you”, I said. And that is when I made up my mind.

Actually, the supposed lack of passion on ending the war is not the main point. Read between the lines. The big problem is that Clinton voted for the war. Moreover, she claims she was duped by the president. Well, other people weren't duped, and you cant use that as an excuse when your opponent clearly was not.

See what I mean? Don't confuse me with the facts. Obama, Obama, O'Bama (he endorsed Machine Gun Richard M. Daley, too).

Why is it that some feel it necessary to insult those with whom they disagree?

Those who call those with whom they disagree idiots - meet Lou Dobbs and what's his name Beck.

Those of you who say you'll vote republican if your candidate is not nominated - meet Ann Coulter.

Come on. Get real. Relax and take a few deep breaths, the democratic nomination campaign will go on through the convention.

Reality Check:

To this very day, Hillary Clinton does not feel that her vote to authorize the War against Iraq was a mistake, and to this very day, George W. Bush agrees with her on that.

I did something that may be more unusual than I thought it would be when I was making a decision on whom I'd vote for in the primary: I read the platforms and then tried to track how well the candidates adhered to their visions in the debates and when pushed to adopt more "moderate" stances.

I actually laughed as myself when I decided that of the remaining candidates (it was four at the time), the white Southern guy seemed to have the most progressive platform and consistent adherence. It was pretty funny with the other three being black, Mexican, and female, especially when I'd happily voted for candidates from all those groups (and more) in other elections for other offices.

But that's how it was. And even if it's contrary to conventional wisdom, I'm not going to second guess who's got the best chance of beating McCain, Romney, or whatever unpalatable candidate the Republicans come up with. I'm going back to the platforms and I'm going to do some comparing and contrasting. And then I'll decide whom I think has the best vision and course for saving the rest of us from the muck and mire of this administration.

I realize I'm probably coming off as sanctimonious. But I look at this simply, and maybe simplistically. I gotta know I'm voting for someone whose policies I can believe in.

i hope people wake up and vote their minds and look at the issues.....candidates records....experience.....and their ability to run a government......the media gave us george bush.....the media gave us the war ......and now they are trying to shove an inexperienced...great speaker that says nothing and is probably a bigger con artist than BUSH......the media thinks we are all IDIOTS... dont prove them right

I'm extremely troubled by the feminist that cites Bill Clinton's infidelity as a reason to vote against his wife.

Twirling Fartknocker,

I completely agree with what you wrote:

"Hillary has been running to the right since she was elected to the Senate. Republicans set the bar on political action and she either agrees (attack iran) or barely nudges the conversation a tad to the left (35 hours). As long as Democrats act like kinder, gentler Republicans, this country will continue its long slide to the right. We need bold actions to turn this ship around, not more triangulation and capitulations to Republican talking points."

Given that what you say is true, where do we now find a candidate to vote for since neither Obama nor Clinton fits the bill you describe?

The issues here are complex and not easily sorted out. It does sadden me to see so much polarization-both Hilary and Barack are for change, both are working to bring it about, both offer vision and it is a true 'delight' to be living in a time where we will have to choose between two such candidates. What worries me most is the pitting of youth against elders (age-ism), of denial of the hard fought battles that get reduced to "tradition", of the lack of true understanding of the complexities of systemic discrimination and oppression and the necessities for working in a plethora of ways to end it. Of course, Ruth, you aren't full of self hatred for not voting for Hilary, any more than those who are of communities of color are for voting for Hilary. Both offer us so much.