Even in Defeat, Clinton Makes History

The pro-Obama media sabotaged Sen. Clinton's campaign from beginning to end. The result is the enormous campaign debt.

With Sen. Clinton's exit, the Democratic Party can kiss the White House goodbye. Today is a sad day for the future of America. What could have been with President Hillary Clinton...hopefully, she will be a presidential candidate in 2012. For 2008, I will volunteer and vote for John McCain in a swing state.

ta-ta crat3, don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Crat3- You are a Republican TROLL. Clinton was the "inevitable" nominee as decreed by the media. Her strategists screwed up and didn't have a campaign strategy. She wasn't even running as a woman candidate at first! The media crucifed Obama for weeks (and still are) with the Rev. Wright crap. The media spilled no dirt on Clinton until after she lost- The Vanity Fair article which spilled Bill's dirt. Her campaign was not sabotaged, she just ran up against someone who has a better message as she didn't have one for a long time until she found her voice in late March/early April. McCain- who called his wife the "C-WORD" in public, in front of reporters can kiss our votes goodbye....he also called her a "trollop" in public for wearing too much makeup and Oh yeah, about that first wife who waited for him, raising his children then had a car accident and was paralyzed and he cheated on her and left for her for Cindy's fortune. Yeah- that goes over real well with us WOMEN and I didn't even get into his lousing voting record! McCain doesn't think a WOMAN should be given EQUAL PAY for EQUAL WORK!! McCain McWar McDraft!! Nope, that warmongering nutcase isn't getting anywhere near the White House.

crat3 & Lisa:
Ditto -- I whole heartedly agree with both of you.

Hillary Clinton's run did pave the way for other women to run for the presidency; perhaps when another woman runs run for election to the presidency, it will be to represent ALL the people of the United States, not just the 17 or 18 Million she represents, like Hillary.

Crat3 more like "rat3"..., republicans are stooping to any method they can. McCain is simply more of Bush..., corporate/millionaire welfare at the expense of middle-income America. If this race is even close, and Obama doesn't run away with the biggest landslide in recent history, then I know the stealthy hands of diebold have been covertly at work.

History will show that this has been an important year in politics; both the Clinton and Obama camps need to realize and understand that, and move on. There is a lot more at stake than just their campaigns!

We learn from just about the get-go of our lives that someone will win, and someone will lose. The truly dignified and gifted among us learn to accept that fact with both grace and honor. Some call it taking the high road, some call it being ethical...there are also those who call it a sign of weakness. Those are the people we have had in control of this country for nearly 8 years and we as a people and society, do not need/want them in power ever again. Because of them, we are much worse off in almost every aspect of our lives, than we were 8 years ago.

I for 1 do not want to follow these past 8 years, with 8 more years of a Clinton (or Clintonesque) administration. Then what? Another Bush family scumbag rises from the ashes and runs with his daddy's friends pulling the strings?! The possibility of 28 years of a rotating monarchy between the Bush and Clinton families is exactly what our founding fathers wanted to avoid at all costs!! Does anyone want to see that? Well except maybe the likes of Rove and Carvill, of course.

Let's move forward for once. We tried it in 1960 and a lot of really tremendous things happened...we really need to try it again!

Crat3, if you insist on not voting Obama and decide t go third party I can understand that, but if your really so bitter that you want to vote for and campaign for McBush all I can say is I sincerely hope that you get drafted first. Don't get me wrong I personally feel that BOTH of the Clintons are DLC corporate elitist war mongers, and I would have likely voted Nader or some other third party candidate if Hillary had won (and especially if McBush had a big lead in my state); however, if you chose to actively campaign for a confirmed war monger, lobbyist lackey, and foreign policy know nothing you may well force us all to eat the bitter fruit grown from the spiteful seeds you sow. I can understand a sever personal dislike of a candidate, but I think before you go and fight for a Republican you should seriously ask yourself just what it was you supported about Clinton. Did her policies genuinely appeal to you? Did you really want to see the country turn 180 degrees from the Bush years? Or are you a very shallow person with no attachment to the policies espoused by your favorite candidate? You do realize of course that many people think that in an ideal world candidates should run and win based mostly on things like issues right? I sure hope you reconsider, but of course you wouldn't be the first person to vote based on hollow issues, just consider the Regan revolution and all those non millionaires who have shot them selves in the foot over the years by backing someone who pushed deregulation and other economic policies that ran dead against their own personal interests.

Yea, some beautiful white chick with a $100 million saying she's oppressed...Clinton is the best case of narcissist personality disorder I've ever seen...totally detached from reality...if this is the future of feminism...your screwed

Correction to my post at 4:49 pm 6/7/08 that was inadvertently addressed to crat3, big mistake; suppose to be addressed to jimbo & lisa; now it makes better sense; sorry about that. I do not agree with crat3 at all.

Any lefty that wants to be a REPUBLICAN so badly that they will vote against their own left culture is called a lumpen-proletariat. Apparently crat3 chooses to be a lumpen-proletariat, who has no idea what politics is, and more than likely doesn't know his/her right from his/her left.

"the party never really supported her, Barack Obama came along and they just jumped on the bandwagon." words like that are huge excercises in intellectual dishonesty. in my observation, barack was not getting real support from the party or real attention in general or given real consideration as a contender until mere moments before the iowa caucus. scores of elected and unelected officials jumped on the hillary bandwagon, in fact, incredibly prematurely, demonstrating the kind of kneejerk loyalty and support that the clintons and the hillary supporters now suggest - in full contradiction of reality - hillary had been so unjustly denied.

recent CNN poll indicates that 60 percent of Clinton supporters said they would vote for Obama, but 17 percent said they would vote for McCain and 22 percent, said they would not vote at all if Clinton were not the nominee.

Wow. 60% would vote for Obama. Already. That's 10.8 million voters out of that 18 million we "need" to win. I think we'll be OK witout that 17% (3.06 million) who will vote for McCain and the 22% (3.96 million) who won't vote at all.

Think about it. There's only approximately 7 million whining members of the Sour Grapes Party, and not even half of those will vote McCain. The Democratic traitors make up a lousy 3 million, at most. A tiny fraction of the 18 million who cast a vote for Hillary. Simply put, these Sour Grapes McCain voters can't lay claim to all 18 million voters. They barely have 1/6 of that 18 million voters in their camp.

I think we can safely shrug off the constant claims that we'll "need" them. We have the intelligent Hillary supporters, and we appreciate their support for the Democratic Party. We certainly don't need those 3 million turncoats, and frankly, I don't think 3 million people will help McCain very much considering how many people we're getting registered to vote due to interest in Obama's platform. If anything, the 3 million going to McCain will barely make up for the Republican voters who are either not voting because they dislike McCain, or are voting for Obama in protest of Bush's policies.

So the next time one of those Sour Grapes Party members tells you about how you'll "need" their vote, just let them know that they are actually in a minority, and that we'll pick up 3 million NEW voters quite easily (if we all work together to get people registered). Tell them, in no uncertain terms, that they are impotent.

(kos)

You're blaming the campaign debt that was run up by an incompetent campaign on the press? Next thing you will be blaming the press for Hillary's ambition itself.

Before we congratulate outselves for having both a black man and a woman running let us look at how far we had to go into the incompetance of a white good ole boy to set that up.

I am happy about the Dems but wonder if the GOP had a person of any thought other than get fat off oil would we be willing to try anything else.

Lets face it the Dems get to run against 50 more years of Iraq. Once again I am very happy, but something is wrong having a leader as bad as the one we have.

It is almost like a set up.

capt, hahaha. You underestimate the discontent of Americans and the potential for third party candidates in the face of two unremarkable party selections.

Consider many polls put Obama at a loss nationwide versus McCain. Also consider that 39% of all voters are registered Independent, meaning they did not participate in your proposed numbers. Get over yourself and start sucking up to your fellow Democrats, because a holier-than-thou attitude only shows that the elitist concerns about Obama and his supporters is quite true.

The contest is over and it is time to unite and support the Democrat nominee.
To say you will vote for McCain is to vote for four more years of Bush policies.
Our almost bankrupt country,
an unjustified war, the deficit the biggest it has been in history, our economy, medical, education, employment in shambles makes me wonder where your intelligence is. Be sure to explain to your children, grandchildren and great grandchildren that you supported a continuation of policies that have made them victimns for years to come.

A ticket which could win the general election would be Hillary/Bloomberg. Obama is unelectable and because of that it makes McCain, depressingly electable.

In the article, a Virginia lawyer says, "The calls to drop out wouldn't have happened if she were a man. The attitude was that she needs to let the deserving man have his job."

Oh really? In other words if Hillary were a man she could have kept on going even though someone else had the delegates necessary to win the nomination? Even though she had clearly lost? Co'mon, that's playing the gender card. Surprising that a lawyer would have said that.

To be honest, I didn't support Hillary because she supported both the Iraq war and NAFTA. Those two decisions were wrong. My decision didn't have anything to do with her being a woman.

I supported Obama because he had the foresight to oppose the war from the beginning - a very unpopular stance at the time. His being half black had nothing to do with that decision either.

In the article, a Virginia lawyer says, "The calls to drop out wouldn't have happened if she were a man. The attitude was that she needs to let the deserving man have his job."

Oh really? In other words if Hillary were a man she could have kept on going even though someone else had the delegates necessary to win the nomination? Even though she had clearly lost? Co'mon, that's playing the gender card. Surprising that a lawyer would have said that.

To be honest, I didn't support Hillary because she supported both the Iraq war and NAFTA. Those two decisions were wrong. My decision didn't have anything to do with her being a woman.

I supported Obama because he had the foresight to oppose the war from the beginning - a very unpopular stance at the time. His being half black had nothing to do with that decision either.

A great Thank You goes to this great article, which surprisingly comes from Mother Jones, the periodical that has been quite ruthless in its attacks on Hillary Clnton throughout her campaign. But, Jonathon Stein nails it perfectly when pointing out the merit in Hillary not dropping out of the race on Tuesday, but letting it last a little longer so that she may give herself, her supporters, and the country the time to reflect on the historical moment that has been made for both women and African Americans: "And it was for the opportunity to make this point, I believe, that Clinton didn't drop out on Tuesday, a night dominated by Obama's victory."

I couldn't support Clinton because of her policies period - like her support of the war and any number of onerous policies she supported. Added to that ignoble record are the many situations, at home and abroad, she simply ignored as per many in power.

I don't think she lost because she was a woman. I think she lost because she is such a poor choice (even as a figurehead) for the job.

Ok so I don't post at all here, since I live in a defacto US colony north of the 49th parallel with enough problems to work on here.

But as someone who is a former US resident who follows US politics, I find this victim-playing over Hillary to be nauseating.

While I don't see Obama as any great shining light of democracy or progress either (it seems impossible for a true progressive to get anywhere in such closed restricted voting system), it seems in the all Clinton could easily be a Republican from the way she votes--literally backing every major Republican initiative, no matter how horrifying, destructive or dishonest (and believe me, it's pretty bad by global standards).

Clinton represents a wing of the dictatorial quasi-totalitarian rule of corporate America over your country and beyond. Don't forget this. Her record speaks for itself.

She's certainly looking at a glass ceiling, except she's looking downward.

Let us not forget that the irreversible mistakes Hillary Clinton's campaign management made (ignoring the power of the caucus states) did her in. This one simple oversight dug the hole from which there was no return. There was no "conspiracy" to stop a woman in the Democratic party. All Democrats were overjoyed with the prospect of making history with either choice! We need to focus on making history and know that Hillary's historic run is now one for the history books and the talking heads.

I voted for Sen. Clinton because of her experience and policies, not because she was a woman. Sadly I know many people voted against her not because of her polices and experience but because she is a woman. The sexism and misogyny in the US is rampant but has become very obvious int he past 8 yrs. One only needs to look at women's portrayals in the media and see that Religion and Government in past 8 yrs. has decided to try to government a women's body. Can you imagine how men would feel if Government and Church's told them what they could or could not do with their bodies? In a patrichical society that of course would never come to be which is exactly why sadly it has been the case and the plight for women. I don't believe due to the sexism that women will ever have true equality so long as society, media, government and religion define the very nature of women.

Well, with steadfast bozos like Jimbo, Capt, and An Honest Voter so freely displaying their sexist lack of objectivity, more Hillary voters may very well switch to McCain. If McCain can say something original, moral and decent, they will vote for him. If not, they will stay home. Before calling me a Republican troll(as you did with Crat3; I at least have voted Democrat for the last 28 years), do know that no bleeding heart liberal democrats appreciate having an affirmative action candidate who excels most in reading teleprompters of speeches written by others. If Obama does not select Hillary as his VP, I too will stay at home coem Nov.

I'm an independent conservative - I voted for George W in 2000 because I thought he was conservative. It turns out the Bush administration has been more BIG Government that any liberal democrat I've seen since Johnson.

The democrats are noted for "tax and spend" while the current republicans are for "borrow and spend." Because of this current policy, our National Debt will be over $10 Trillion when Bush leaves office - double what it was when big Liberal Clinton left office. In addition, the Iraq occupation is bankrupting our country as we borrow hundreds of billions from China, Japan and India to pay for this insane occupation - that over 80% of the very people we are staying there to help want us to leave.

IMHO, "tax and spend" would have been the noble, honest, unselfish thing to do - by running up a monster debt that our children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren will pay either by huge taxes or a third world standard of living we Americans show no morality, intregrity or love for future generations.

I'll vote for Obama not because I believe he can "fix" the problems the republicans left, but because 4 more years of the same and the U.S. will be a Banana Republic.

very disturbing on how the press covered the election..you should all be disturbed, next time it could be your candidate, be very aware of the change in press coverage on elections, demand fair reporting if you really want change in our system , this is big brother at its worst...i believe the demos will change the way they select nominees, after this, so that is a possitive hopefully, but i dont know after watching this if the demos can run any thing much less the country, the polls show pres bush 28 percent appoval, but congress is even lower than that, the demos shouldnt be to over confidant with all this, i personnly feel we need a third party , these two old partys have been screwing up the country for to long and no one is over joyed with either one, the people are really confused,obama is not the real choice of the demos , he ran a good technical campain in the begining , and he loaded the caucasses, all fair in this system , but not the real choice...the best chioce would have been the clintons, common sense tells you that, obama , fine campainer great orator but to me, his time would have been later, after say seeing how he does in his new job the us senate its a break down in our systems , americans place in the world order is no longer assured , and we are not helping our selfs...im really concerned about our countrys future

Dear Michael Z. Let me ask - if Hillary were an unattractive man, how would you assess him? I believe the traits you abhor in Hillary would be touted as strong attributes in a male politician. This is the crux of the problem and at the heart of sexism - there are different standards for men and women. If you are a typical male, which I hope you are not, then we are ALL indeed screwed.

Can we please put one myth to rest? The reason that HRC was asked to step aside was because the math showed she could not win the nomination and this was clear weeks ago. All the subsequent energy and money was a nice exercise in rhetoric and enthusiasm, but Obama had the nomination in the bag by April. Anyone who listened to MSNBC and their number cruncher heard that. From April on, HRC had to win almost 80% of the superdelegates to win and that was not going to happen. Making this a matter of gender bias plays right into the plans of the GOP, who will take her comments about what a great guy McCain is and run them for the next five months. What was she thinking of when she said such things?

Do you think Hillary might have lost more graciously without shading the truth and without denigrating (pardon the expression) Barack's ability to serve to the point of boosting McCain? I don't think it's misogyny but rather a quest of the voter for decency.

The time has come to tone down the rhetoric of division. Hillary Clinton did a remarkable and very admirable job of doing just that on Saturday. I have been an Obama supporter from the day he declared, and believe Hillary Clinton ran a less than stellar campaign. It was less than adequate because the Hillary Clinton we saw was not the woman who stood and gave a moving speech that tried to heal wounds in the party, and acknowledge how far we have come and how far we have to go to remedy the sexism and racism that continues to hinder our progress as a nation. I don't believe Hillary lost because of sexism, but I believe she was certainly treated in a rather sexist way. The terms used to describe her were sexist. A man would never be called shrill, because shrill is a pejorative adjective used to describe women. The terms of engagement are such that she would never have been called "gruff" or "bellicose", although the latter would surely have been applied to any man that described "total devastation" of Iran. The debate will go on for years concerning where the Clinton campaign went wrong. For now we need to focus on winning back the White House, and be glad that the Hillary Clinton is now acting in a way where the word statesman applies, and I certainly don't think there is anything sexist about that.

Give me a break. Women can and will do better than this. I have six strong sisters and a terrific mom. HRC was trying to do it old fashion way while claiming new ideals. As the Gov's wife she climbed up on her husband's shoulders through the Rose law firm and unto Walmart's board then claimed his experience while being the president's wife, worked his connections to become senator all the way to would be president. She has never stood on her own. There are so many other stand up women that are far more deserving than she unless you all agree that the right way is to marry "right" then complain that odds are stacked against enough people did not buy the hype. She was a only candidate that had a full time double so her opponents had to defeat two "candidates" while she only had to defeat one. Thatcher and Merckle did not stand on their husband's shoulders to win the right to lead their countries. This is not India. Hard work does count most of the time. The manipulative girl power rally cry was effective but the bearer was lacking. Great message to our daughters if you was to become president, then marry one. Sorry not mine.

Give me a break. Women can and will do better than this. I have six strong sisters and a terrific mom. HRC was trying to do it old fashion way while claiming new ideals. As the Gov's wife she climbed up on her husband's shoulders through the Rose law firm and unto Walmart's board then claimed his experience while being the president's wife, worked his connections to become senator all the way to would be president. She has never stood on her own. There are so many other stand up women that are far more deserving than she unless you all agree that the right way is to marry "right" then complain that odds are stacked against enough people did not buy the hype. She was a only candidate that had a full time double so her opponents had to defeat two "candidates" while she only had to defeat one. Thatcher and Merckle did not stand on their husband's shoulders to win the right to lead their countries. This is not India. Hard work does count most of the time. The manipulative girl power rally cry was effective but the bearer was lacking. Great message to our daughters if you was to become president, then marry one. Sorry not mine.

I am really very tired of hearing that the positions of Clinton and Obama are virtually the same. Not so!! Clinton is an unapologetic supporter of all things Bush, especially the war. She voted for Kyle/ Lieberman. Obama is anti war. Their campaign styles give credence to this as well. She fights and he conciliates. When she was ahead she got great press and he was ignored. She did not complain and has only done so since losing the primary votes.

Give me a break. Women can and will do better than this. I have six strong sisters and a terrific mom. HRC was trying to do it old fashion way while claiming new ideals. Marry well and fame and fortune will follow. As the Gov's wife, she climbed up on her husband's shoulders through the Rose law firm and unto Walmart's board, claimed his experience while being the president's wife, then worked his connections to become senator all the way to would be president. There are so many other stand up women that are far more deserving than she unless you all agree that the right way is to marry "right" then complain that the odds were unfairly stacked against enough people did not buy the hype. She was a only candidate that had a full time double, so her opponents had to defeat two "candidates" while she only had to defeat one. She has never stood on her own and continued standing on his shoulders all through her campaign. Thatcher and Merckle did not stand on their husband's shoulders to win the right to lead their countries. This is not India. Hard work does count most of the time. The manipulative girl power rally cry was effective but the bearer was lacking. Great message to our daughters- if you want to become president, then marry one. Sorry not mine.

Hilary is as out of touch with the Real People in this country as Bush and the Good old Boys who think they are in Charge.
I think Obama will win because Regular people democrat and moderate republicans see him as a fresh ,honest Idealist .hopefully he can loosen the grip of the hateful policies of the last 25 years and FIX THIS COUNTRIES many problems.
At least he is aware of them .That is why you lost Hilary.
And Mc Cain will loose also.

While disliking Hillary Clinton's politics I do agree with Jonathan Swift and others that sexism was afoot in her treatment as is racism in relation to Obama. These things exist at the same time not canceling out each other.

Hillary's ideas were usually backward and destructive and she was also abused just for being a woman.

While disliking Hillary Clinton's politics I do agree with Jonathan Swift and others that sexism was afoot in her treatment as is racism in relation to Obama. These things exist at the same time not canceling out each other.

Hillary's ideas were usually backward and destructive and she was also abused just for being a woman.

I believe we got the message "Enough Already/Randy!!

I believe it's very difficult to determine the real Hillary/Obama supporters here from republicans trying to cause desent... IMHO, anyone who loves America will vote for Obama regardless of who they originally supported (I kind of liked Paul for his honesty).

While disliking Hillary Clinton's politics I do agree with Jonathan Swift and others that sexism was afoot in her treatment as is racism in relation to Obama. These things exist at the same time not canceling out each other.

Hillary's ideas were usually backward and destructive and she was also abused just for being a woman.

Sorry about the triple posts-my bad

Senator Obama was not a sitting Senator when the "DECIDER" got us into this Iraq war,he has certainly joined with Hilary and a raft of other Democrats to vote funds for this war. Only one Senator, Russ FEingold dem.Wi. has openly opposed this war from the start. We sometimes call him honest Russ to differentiate him from the politicians around him.
If this was a true patriarchal society Hillary could not have run at all. If all the women who voted in the primary voted for her she would have won. Women kept her out,they are much tougher on other women than men are. It's a fact feminists try to ignore. Men are just not powerful enough and are certainly a minority group.

The last great President we had was Bill Clinton. He invaded no countries nor sent massive troops. He was a very pleasant speechifier[oops a bushism].And the taxes for us middle wage earners were never so low. Plus our budget was balanced.And all that with the Republicans controlling Congress. I suppose he kept them so busy trying to find the stains on the dress they couldn't see what the other hand was doing.Sorry just waxing sentimental.

Hillary Clinton and her supporters have to take responsibility for losing her campaign. I was a proud Clinton supporter. I volunteered for Bill Clinton's campaigns. I bought Hillary's book. I voted for her for Senator. When Obama came along, I thought he didn't have enough experience and should wait eight years before running. I was ready to vote for Hillary. But then I watched a debate and felt Obama won. I heard Hillary speak and felt as though I didn't really know who she was. If she had a message, it wasn't coming through. Finally, Bill and Hillary Clinton decided to go for broke and use the race card. They tried to paint Obama as the black candidate. They gambled that they wouldn't need the black vote in their efforts to court certain white voting blocks. Their ambition began to show. In the past, when Republicans would criticize the Clinton's for their blind ambition, I defended the Clintons. However, when Hillary became "the white candidate", she lost my vote. I was incredibly disappointed with the sleaze factor that took over her campaign. Hillary did not lose because of the media, or because she is a woman or even on some level because of Barack Obama. She lost because of her short comings as a leader and because of her failure to campaign as a candidate for all democrats and not just a chosen few. What is additionally disappointing, is that some of my fellow women voters feel comfortable overlooking Hillary's racial transgressions in their longing for a woman president. Progress does not mean that we vote for a woman at any cost. Progress means we vote for the right candidate who represents all of us.

STOP! Can't all of you idiot nit-pickers just let HRC have a deservedly proud and historical moment without dragging her down into the mud with yourselves? She has been maligned like no other since Bill first ran for president. Sure there were mistakes made -- in both hers and Obama's campaign; however, now that she's out, couldn't some of you muster some graciousness and lighten up? Find another whipping post.

Rachel Could not be said any better and clearer. Honesty is so refreshing.

There's no denying the Hillary is a woman .Hillary got her first job at the Rose Law Firm because her husband was an elected official ,Hillary got into the White House as the wife of a a president .Hillary got elected to the senate from New York because she was a Clinton . You can bet if this same woman's name was Smith she would have been defeated. Hillary crowned herself as the candidate years ago and the press , demo party and big money boys agreed and supported her. Hillary got out-smarted and lost the election because of bad judgment and over confidence, not because she was a woman.Barack will become our next president unless the female vote stays home and closes their pocket books .That would be the highest form of hypocrisy ever in politics.

Two weeks ago a campaign rep admitted that Clinton had no strategy for after Super Tuesday-she expected to secure the nomination by then. She was done in by her own arrogance-not by 'sexism'. True, there is a lot of sexism in this society, but it's not always the reason a woman doesn't get what she wants.

I think that Clinton's attitude turned a lot of people off-including me.

Her campaign strategy was essentially taken from the "shock and Awe" play book. What do you mean there is no plan B? So guess how she would have governed?

Folks:
Hilary Clinton didn't make it partly because of the feminist image she projects and partly because she showed no respect for herself during the Lewinski affair. She preferred to stick to the presidency and the fame rather than part ways with Bill, and ultimately that was her undoing.

Sage, I believe there are a lot of "borrow and spend" republicans here trying to stir-up trouble between Hillary and Obama supporters. A lot of stuff posted here is obviously intended to push a McCain win.

"I was a big Hillary supporter, but I hate her now" - yeah, sure!!

I hope the Obama sages have the wisdom to include Hillery in his Administration. Her style would be a compliment to his. In reading in between the lines of her final speech, which I assume she crafted, to the her Democratic supporters and those in the party that failed to support her, one can see a wisdom and strength of character sorely needed in American politics, regardless of party. We've made several mistakes in the past re our political leaders, the greatest among them is allowing G.W.Bush to lead this nation. I hope we don't allow, Hillery, this gem of a personality to pass us by as we did Al Gore.

I know, I know. There are a lot of ladies crying at my work today over Hillary. But, I will remind everyone here as I did these dear mourning ladies today: Hillary's big mistake was in voting for the Iraq War. And doing so enthusiastically. Obama ran a campaign that took advantage of that fact over and over again. In the beginning, America bought GWBS WMD reason for the war hook, line and sinker but when no WMDS showed up after the invasion slowly the idea that EVERYONE had been suckered spread across America. No one likes to be made a fool, especially if your relatives are dying for such foolishness. So everyone is very sensitive to the people that voted for such foolishness. Unfortunately, Senator Hillary Clinton was such a person. And, it left as ugly a stain upon her record as a politician as the one that was left on Ms. Lewinsky's dress. In my humble opinion, this one fact did more to doom her than anything else. One can almost hear Lady Macbeth muttering 'Out, damned spot!'

Nat, Chris Custer, Pamela, Jonathan Swift, Randy White, Enough Already, Lenore Von Stein, Chris Ogden, sage and ountiful:

Do you even know or care what N.A.F.T.A. is and the harm it did and continues to do to the working people of this country?

Do you know or care what war is and how it has devastated and continues to devastate Iraq as well as the United States?

If you have any idea, it doesn't appear so, because Hillary lost because of her right wing corporate slant away from the concerns of the people and toward the corporate DLC's war of aggression and N.A.F.T.A., and for no other reason.

It is time to put Hillary Clinton behind us and accept that the people do not want to continue an unnecessary right wing war. The people want peace and jobs, instead of having their jobs outsourced.

Barack Obama has a dynamic mind and is able to consider the prosperity of all people in the United States as well as the world, not just how to prosper one little group.

Before you condemn Senator Obama, learn about him -- read his book, "The AUDACITY of HOPE -- Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream." "The Audacity of Hope" is Senator Obama's call for a new kind of politic --- a politic that builds upon those shared understandings that pull us together as Americans. Obama sets out his political convictions, which are inspiring. Obama is the best hope for the United States at this time.

Independent has got it right! There's a lot of conservatives on this site trying to divide and conquer with their Hillary vs. Obama rhetoric.

Least you folks forget, it was the super delagates that made the difference in this election, not the popular vote. Why is it that the supreme court can get involved in our decisions,as in the Gore affair, and now its the 'super deligates'. Well what about the super citizens. Collectively, we pay the dam bill for this mess, financially,emotionally,economically and with our sons and daughters lives when some clown declares war against our collective wishes... why cant we voters pick a president without any other political interference? When presidential candidates are campaigning, they're talking to the people,not to the superdeligates, not the master legistlature body, that is picked for life by previous President for their specific political views, talk about an edge !! A 'super deligate' is just another person, like me, with political views, maybe not like me. Why do they hold sway in our collective voting decisions. The American people are smart, we ultimately live the reality of our decisions, including our political decisions. I'm for the popular vote...the candidate that gets the most votes wins. Whats wrong with that. None of the mess that has taken place over the last eight years would have happened if the American voting public would have been allowed to pick their president via the popular vote. Think about that. I dont have to review all of the many negitive issues we as a nation have endured and will have to continue to endure as a result of this past Bush administration...one that should not have been, based on the popular vote.

Wow! Anyone who will support and vote for John McCain because Clinton didn't get the nod dishonors all of her efforts. It is time to stop thinking only for yourself; it is time to START thinking of the legions of citizens of the U.S. and people around the world who have suffered so greatly at the hands of Bush, Cheney, and, yes, McCain over the past 8 years.

THANK GOD FOR SPELL CHECK.... Least you folks forget, it was the super delegates that made the difference in this election, not the popular vote. Why is it that the Supreme Court can get involved in our decisions, as in the Gore affair, and now its the 'super delegates'. Well what about the super citizens. Collectively, we pay the dam bill for this mess, financially, emotionally, economically and with our sons and daughters lives when some clown declares war against our collective wishes... why cant we voters pick a president without any other political interference? When presidential candidates are campaigning, they're talking to the people, not to the super delegates, not the master legislature body, that is picked for life by previous President for their specific political views, talk about an edge !! A 'super delegate' is just another person, like me, with political views, maybe not like me. Why do they hold sway in our collective voting decisions? The American people are smart; we ultimately live the reality of our decisions, including our political decisions. I'm for the popular vote...the candidate that gets the most votes wins. What’s wrong with that. None of the mess that has taken place over the last eight years would have happened if the American voting public would have been allowed to pick their president via the popular vote. Think about that. I don’t have to review all of the many negative issues we as a nation have endured and will have to continue to endure as a result of this past Bush administration...one that should not have been based on the popular vote.

Not so fast capt -- it is also a matter of where those women are. If the vast majority of the women, who supported Clinton, and now follow her lead and vote form Obama live in the Norheast and or Pacific states those are areas the Democracts should win. It doesn't really give him much in the way of electortasl votes that he wouldn't have gotten anyway--and remember there's no proprotional representation in the general election. But if the rejectionists are women in the Midwest that could create a real problem for Obama as, barring any inroad into the South or MOuntain states, it could throw the election to McCain. Look at the outcome in 2004 and think. Don't be so fast to write off McCain either. He's been written off by the Republican Partry before but like the energizer bunny he keeps coming back and Obama promising a windfall profits tax on oil--isn't that pandering?-- isn't doing himself any favors either. The last windfall profits tax did nothing to lower the price of oil. And to remind you of another point that Hillary pointed out. If the Democrats used the same system as the Republicans, Obama would not have been the candidate. In a first past the post system or winner take all I believe Clinton wouldhave wrapped up the nomiation by the end of Super Tuesday or shortly after.

Independent -- Thanks, I think you're right. Anyway, I hope you are. It would be a shame if most of this hateful rhetoric was truly coming from free thinking Democrat and Independent hearts and minds. I was a HRC supporter and now, I will definitely cast my vote for Obama. Once HRC supporters get over the disappointment, and let the bitterness settle, hopefully, the bigger picture and a more generous spirit will prevail to get the G.D., self-righteous, yet hypocritical Republicans out of the White House.

Hillary's baggage went way beyond her gender. Her defeat should be seen as a matter of policy and principle, not prejudice. Let's not forget the period of time when she was seen as the inevitable nominee, a time when she enjoyed wide support among African-Americans.

Obama's and Clinton's ideas and policies are virtually identical. However, Americans love a good dramatic tale straight from Hollywood and the contest delivered a young rock star (Obama) and a token villainess (Hillary) saddled by the scorn and derision heaped on the Clintons earlier. Apart from all the rhetoric of campaign strategy, this is how it usually boils down- to semiotics in US culture. We love a lone hero that will "clean up" the town- preferably with sex appeal. Hillary could not have a sex, as a woman competing with men- but Obama could be a masculine ideal. All these factors of course do not guarantee a win in November as all general elections usually go to the middle and the perceived safe choice. Also, being a crusader, no matter how appealing, does not guarantee an effective presidency. Jimmy Carter? I believed that Hillary would have made an excellent president although the knives would be out from the start. Obama is a very unknown entity in public life. I will vote for him come November as a loyal Democrat but his lack of experience (coupled with his seeming overconfidence) does make me nervous. I trust he has the intelligence to surround himself with good people (unlike W) if he does win.

Crat3, you make no sense! If you believe in Hillary and all that she worked for, the most disrespectful thing you could do now is to vote for McBush.

OK, this is ridiculous. Agree with HRC or disagree with her, I'm tired of people getting on her case for doing all the things that male politicians do. Men and women are not two different species. The point of feminism is that the two genders are equal. No, we're not exactly the same, but despite our differences we are still *worth* the same. Think a nickel versus five pennies. Now you've got it. And there is nothing inherent in a man or a woman that says they have to campaign differently. If HRC had tried to campaign "more like a woman" she would have been given nine shades of crap. As it was, the one time she allowed tears to show, everyone pilloried her right on up to Obama, who all but accused her of being on the rag ("she periodically feels down")! You seriously want to tell me sexism hasn't been a factor here? As to the accusation that she "stood on her husband's shoulders" or milked her connections or whatever, name me ONE male politician who has not also done that. OK, maybe it wasn't his wife's connections--but sometimes it was, you know. Nobody condemns that. It's perfectly OK. You know, I don't think it's the feminist movement with the problem. I think it's all these jerks who try to tell feminists how to *be* feminist, then shoot us down when we fall short of their arbitrary marks. I want to know why we didn't hear more about HRC's proposed policies than whether she or Obama were slamming one another for superficial reasons, or whether one of them was crying, or whether one of them wore a turban, or whatever other ridiculous thing we've got to talk about rather than securing the future of this country. As far as I'm concerned most of the people in this country don't even deserve the right to vote. Tear your eyes away from American Idol for five darn minutes and use your brains and quit embarrassing your country. Please. It's not the politicians' faults we're falling apart. It's ours.

I was 50-50 between Obama and Clinton at the beginning of the year. When she started Obama bashing I became 100% for Obama. The Dems do not need this infighting. Her gender had nothing to do with it - it was her campaign. I am a caucasian woman in my late fifties.

I soooooooooooo agree with Rachel. I'm a really old woman who marched in Florida at the capital for the equal rights amendment, and I would love nothing more than to see a woman be president of united states of america (Alice Paul being one of my heroines).......but that woman just wasn't Clinton.

I'm not so worried that some HRC supporters will vote for McBush. Remember that the vast majority of primaries were OPEN, meaning that independents and in some cases Republicans could vote in the Democratic primary. Some percentage of the people who voted for Clinton might not have planned to vote for her anyway in the general election (remember Limbaugh's call for people to vote for Clinton). I agree with some earlier posters that the reason Clinton didn't win have very little to do with her gender and a great deal to do with both her vote on the Iraq war (that's when she lost this 60+ female) and her campaign tactics and mismanagement. I'm optimistic that the people who really supported her will realize that 4 more years of Bush's policies and Supreme Court nominees will be a disaster for this country and support Obama in November.

Hillary rose, in my estimation, when she spoke like a true statesman and finally quit the campaign. I preferred her to Obama, but will vote for him as they are similar on quite a few issues. My candidate of choice didn't make it this far. The US is so backward and so far from what it claims to be it may be a while before a woman can be elected. It remains to be seen if a "black" (or half black) man can be elected. Even Bangladesh, a very conservative Muslim country has a woman president, and India. And Spain, under the Socialist government of Zapatero has a majority of women in ministerial (cabinet) posts and the vice president, de la Vega, is not only a woman, but a lesbian woman to boot. And she is very popular - and rightly so.

To those who say "unless Senator Clinton is VP, he has lost the election," you simple sound bitter. As an Independant, I would have voted for either Obama or Clinton. Let's see how the race for President goes. I will not be rushing to a decision until I see what Obama and McCain have to say, and how they campaign against one another.

Great and truthful article in a publication that has decided to support Obama in spite of all his flaws and fakeness.

I have stopped reading this publication for this very reason. Today it was an exception. We have also cancelled our subscription.

After reading most of the blogs responding to this mostly great article I agree the most heartedly with "Rachel". Hillary did not lose because she was female. Sure sexism is still alive and well as is racial bigotry in this under educated country, but Hillary was groomed, obviously and consistently, for the two years before, and for the first four months of the campaign by the media, to be the next president, despite her well known lack of personality, surplus baggage and questionable ethics or at least stand up strength of self respect and character. So sure was she that she was going to inherit the golden crown, she never bothered to snap her supporters into the whip shape needed to beat the skinny kid from Illinois with an oratorical gift and a unique idea - that the whole system had failed and was due for a change. (I've been to two Bama Rama's - parked really close in my wheel chair and have failed to see the telepromter mentioned several times.)

She ruined what would have been an important and memorable speech of concession by insinuating she lost thru sexism, although I understand it to be a face saving attitude. To my mind the only moving thing she said was "Yes we can" in apparent support of her former rival who she had slammed, insulted and slandered on a daily basis once it became clear she wasn't going to win the part without an honest audition. If she is in lots of debt (with a $109 million
bank account - next we'll hear her 5 million dollar home is being forclosed upon like another celebrity we're supposed to pity) that is her fault and her problem for being disorganized.

Personally I'd like my next president to be organized and in charge enough that he expects the same from his team. Bad planning on her part does not make an emergency to the democratic party - who support Obama a few dollarls at a time. I don't have enough left over on a fixed income with horrendous living expenses to reimburse a millionaire who could have saved millions of campiagn expenses by bowing out when it was logical she'd lost. Personally I'd like my next president to have a little sense financially.

And lastly, why is experience supposed to matter if that experience dictated her actions that any fool could see were ethically and morally wrong. I have no political experience whatsoever but I knew Bush was lying, and was obviously unfit to be even a minor political figure. A leading insider Democrat (alleged) with tons of experience should have seen thru his facade in a New York second.

Sadly I think Hillary came so close for the wrong reasons - because many women voted for her because she is a woman rather than what she stood for - that Latinos voted for her because they tend to be prejudiced and that the truly redneck states voted for her because they were voting against a black man in the white house. It was bad timing for her to be pitted against someone so inspirational when she had nothing to offer but the sad old political game a lot of us are sick of. It was great that she improved her message and ability to communicate but it was sleazy to try to play the race card called "working class" that everyone pretends to believe is just that. We're all working class - no one is fooled by the phony phrase.
Probably Bill Clinton used the race thing as a last resort but I think it cost Hillary a lot of delegates. Even if the voters couldn't see thru it - the delegates could. I personally won't tolerate a president who is a bigot, even if it's a last ditch attempt to get what she wants. Integrity counts, so does honesty. Change is desparately needed and is possible. A very real human being who will stand up and fight back against the adverse and dangerous stupidity that is Mccain and his ilk will turn this country around. I and millions of others want to be part of that ride. I hope Hillary will help, quit whining about "lack of money" and "the handicap of being a woman" and will sincerely, without ulterior motives get in there and help straighten out this hideous mess left by greedy, blood sucking respublicans so we can all have a decent life. Just please don't do it as the Vice - not enough trust - too much old school - too many ties to a not so ethical relative and Obama has enough a job ahead of him to worry about a possible stab in the back. Personally I like the guy from New Mex, Richardson, a lot.. but that's another blog.

Dear Pamela, 'if Hillary were an unattractive man...' excuse me but didn't I say I had something against BOTH of the Clintons? (that does include Bill when I say '...BOTH of the Clintons are DLC corporate elitist war mongers...' there is nothing sexist about it, I have the same things against BOTH HRC AND BILL. Did you even read all of the post?) I think MarthaA pretty well hit the nail on the head with her NAFTA/Iraq comments, does her dislike of HRC make her a terrible sexist like me? I disliked the 'cleavage' controversy and some of the other sexist comments the media made, but that doesn't mean I have to go support a candidate who is flatly wrong and has run a far more ugly & Bush like campaign than her opponent. And no you can't call that sexist either, Bush was a slime ball in the 2k because of the 'illegitimate black baby' thing, and as all the polls showed HRC consistently attacked unfairly through out much of the campaign, not to mention that she lied about things like NAFTA. Why is it that I as a male can't dislike BOTH of the Clintons with out being sexist?

This is a useless red hearing of an attack that is beneath the kind of intelligent and thoughtful feminists that I respect, (I do sit around and watch feminists talk about equality on free speech TV and other places on occasion and generally like and respect their opinions). I may be a man and have a young male libido and all of the inappropriate thoughts that come with it, but I respect women and believe that they should get equal pay and respect just like every good citizen deserves no matter their race, religion, sex, etc. Unfortunately all of these baseless claims of sexism denigrate thoughtful women and feminism by creating dumb attacks on people like me who have actual issues that we disagree with.

I don't agree with your "blogger"... politics is full of mind games, and everything else, and a male candidate would have been pressured to relinquish in the same position as Clinton was in, just like anyone else

I thought the media was unfair from the beginning to Hillary. Chris Matthews, Keih O, and the likes. Why is it so unfair for a woman to reach the same goals as a man. We raise our daughters that you can do anything you want to do if you work hard it achieve it. But than you have a daughter that after getting her BA and Master's and is 30 and her biological clock is ticking has to decide how much she wants her life to change. The shame is we women take the responsiblity for everything. Hillary is more qualified, more experienced but again she is a woman and women are not taken seriously. It doesn't say much for us as mother's that had these men. I hope in my lifetime we will see this again and this time the woman will be treated with dignity and grace. But I am 62 and a working Mom so I don't think the time is there. What a shame.

I certainly a sad day when a competent woman accepts defeat over an incompetent male. It is another working day for most women. However, if Obama thinks Hillary supporters will jump to him just because he is a democrat, he is in for another surprise. McCain has already done more to appeal to women than Obama has done. I will not vote for Obamam but rather I will write the true nominee for the Democratic party in which is Hillary.
If it were me...I would encourage Obama to start sucking ass to women because only a small percentage of us have to switch sides. He may have won the nomination...he still didn't win any of the states he needs to win to defeat McCain and the popular vote is still with Hillary..that will NOT change.

Policey before Identity.
I don't care about a candidets Gender, Ethnencicty, or Colour. I wouldn't vote for either Clinton or Obama, their Policies are poison. If better policies were presented by a sock puppet, I'd vote for the sock puppet!

Hillary Clinton did not fall short--the Democratic party did.

Obama supporters are not using their heads. They would rather punish Hillary than garner every vote for Obama possible, by shutting up about her or her campaign. She DARED to oppose your candidate. She was far more fair in her campaign than any other opponent will be, yet you persist in character destruction. If if makes you feel better to continue to drive Hillary supporters to a decision to sit out this election, then bash your way on down the road. You make it impossible for any fair minded middle of the road Democrat to support him. Mr. Obama can thank McCain for being such a pathetic candidate, because his die-hard fans are driving away potential voters by the bucketloads.

Why are white women so openly racist about the Obama campaign? Has his nomination skipped your timeline for access to the good ole boys' club? Were white women supposed to excel first? See this http://video.google.com/videosearch?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=obama%20white%20women%20protest&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&um=1&sa=N&tab=wv# . I really don't understand the rigid gender analysis of old school feminists, largely a group of crusty old white women, who forget that race is as powerful, if not more so, than some forty and fifty years ago. If you are interested, look to Tim Wise's article, "Your Whiteness Is Showing...". Obama cannot be blamed for Hillary's failings; if she had planned and organized past February, maybe she would be the front runner, but she didn't. She expected, as was predicted, to be the natural candidate. If we're talking about silly personality assassination, then talk about the media's overblown coverage of Jeremiah Wright, or even the unaffiliated Catholic priest who spoke at Trinity. Hillary has made the party weaker, while Obama is actually running, or at the least overseeing, organizing that happens on the ground, not the neo-liberal top-down model that has proven so detrimental.

Justin, you are a real misogynist like so many Obama supporters. We will vote against the misogynist Obama by voting for McCain.

As I read the posts, I see a society that is ill and cannot acknowledge it's prejudices.

I voted for Hillary Clinton because of her policies and intellegence. I also voted for Clinton because I saw her connect, I saw her passion up close. There was a real connection and we have a great loss for our County, for our families.

There was a feeling of safety, because she represented all of us, and not just a small spectrum of they young and special interests. Sadly, I do not feel that with Barak Obama. I do not feel he has the wisdeom, the experience to lift our Country out of the darkness. He is too focused on who he is instead of who we are.

During the campaign Hillary invoked the phrase, "If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen." when the Obama campaign called certain attacks as the "old" politics. When the going got tough for other candidates Hillary said, that for her, the fun was just beginning. Well, now that Obama is the presumptive nominee, why is there all this parsing about the way Hillary was treated? This is the way the political machine operates in America. Is Hillary supposed to have special treatment? Obama didn't have it. Those Hillary supporters who are bitter over her defeat need to get back into the kitchen instead of demanding to be served at the table. You don't win a campaign crying foul from the Butler's Pantry.

It was good to read these comments. I enjoy reading and hearing many perspectives.
However, I must also say that, like much of the coverage of the Democrats’ race (where race and gender were the main topics of discussion), this article left me just a little bit disappointed. The little summary on the lead page read “Saturday showed how far the country has come, and how far it has yet to go.” I had to sit back and ask myself, “How much further does it have to go, and why?” Is there a widespread since of disenfranchisement now that Senator Clinton has not walked away with the big prize. The Virginia lawyer who said, "The calls to drop out wouldn't have happened if she were a man. The attitude was that she needs to let the deserving man have his job" and "This election has ripped the cover off things we like to hide” and “Lots of young women and female bloggers have had their eyes opened to how sexist our society is." My own mother felt exactly the same – that women had once again been cheated.
Surely you have by now asked yourselves the obvious questions – “What if she had won? What if Obama had been left back in the cold?” Would we then be screaming again about how racist our society is?
This, like the many fierce responses attached to the piece, once again brings to light the ugly nature of these things. It shows off the one element that makes the economics and, thus, the entire social make-up of our nation so destructive – competition. It keeps us from cooperating and coming together to see the best of situations like these – that we might now be able to start down that great road where we can finally begin to completely forget about race and gender.
In the end, I think we saw why Senator Clinton is a fine public servant. She was able to cook it all down to a beautiful truth when she said, "Could a woman really serve as Commander-in-Chief? Well, I think we answered that one," and "…could an African American really be our President? Senator Obama has answered that one.”
Let’s hope so.

Go away HRC. Just go away. For reporters give us news we can use. This garbage is starting to get old and stinks. Poor weak HRC, couldn't stand the heat in the kitchen. Pitiful human being. Go Away please.

Go away HRC. Just go away. For reporters give us news we can use. This garbage is starting to get old and stinks. Poor weak HRC, couldn't stand the heat in the kitchen. Pitiful human being. Go Away please.

Go away HRC. Just go away. For reporters give us news we can use. This garbage is starting to get old and stinks. Poor weak HRC, couldn't stand the heat in the kitchen. Pitiful human being. Go Away please.

I never thought I'd live to see the day when a woman and a Black man were able to run for president. The fact that Obama won the Democratic nomination tells me that sexism is just a little deeper ingrained in our White male dominated culture than racism. I just hope he makes it to the Whitehouse. Bobby didn't, and he was a White boy!

I am an Obama supporter but I am glad that Hilary gave such a gracious speech. the sad thing is that many of the talking points used by her against Obama are being used now by the Republicans. To all the Clinton supporters we need your votes and your help. Please do not let your bitterness divide this party.

I never thought I would see the day when I voted for a republican but that day is here. I never realized how bad the democrats were because I was so caught up in being one. After the long primary season where the party insiders' actions were exposed and the media so biased towards Obama, I fear for our democracy. There is nothing wrong with McCain and all this rhetoric about him being Bush is just asinine.

It is not about men and women, black and white, Christian, Jew or Muslim; but it is about Democrats and Republican. I am a black man, however, I care about all of America's issues and challenges. If we can make a change in the crash and burn course the Republicans and President Bush have set us on, all Americans will benefit. I am concerned about all Americans white or black, women or men, or any particular religion. The war must end. Inflation must end. The high price of gas and food must end. Underfunded school systems and failing education must end. Healthcare must be free and affordable for all Americans. Senators Clinton and Obama have similar views and are important to, not only the Democratic Party, but to all Americans. The hard fought primary is over- so let's get over it and move on. If Senator Clinton would have been the nominee, there is no question that my loyalty and support would be totally behind her. I am a Clinton fan, but Obama won. So, please let's come together in unity of purpose and peace in order to defeat Senator John "Chameleon" McCain.

Democrat for Life.

Rev. Charles (not verified) says:
Senator Clinton nailed it twice during this 2008 DNC. Her support for the Obama-Biden was gloriously evident. So, Hillary Clinton lovers should get on board and not vote for Senator (Chameleon) McCain to all of our detriment. My admiration for her grew after her speech and call for unity of party and purpose. Now, my former hero, President Clinton, should put the nail in McCain's coffin (figuratively speaking), by delivering the type of speech affirming Senator Obama's readiness to be president of these United States- ready from DAY ONE! President Clinton will restore my belief in him as one of our greatest presidents ever.

Rev, Charles, if you want to know the truth about Obama, check out Pastor Manning on you tube.