By PEGGY NOONAN

Sex and the Sissy
May 23, 2008

She was born in Russia, fled the pogroms with her family, was raised in Milwaukee, and worked the counter at her father’s general store when she was 8. In early adulthood she made aliyah to Palestine, where she worked on a kibbutz, picking almonds and chasing chickens. She rose in politics, was the first woman in the first Israeli cabinet, soldiered on through war and rumors of war, became the first and so far only woman to be prime minister of Israel. And she knew what it is to be a woman in the world. "At work, you think of the children you’ve left at home. At home you think of the work you’ve left unfinished. . . . Your heart is rent." This of course was Golda Meir.

Another: She was born in a family at war with itself and the reigning power outside. As a child she carried word from her important father to his fellow revolutionaries, smuggling the papers in her school bag. War and rumors of war, arrests, eight months in jail. A rise in politics — administering refugee camps, government minister. When war came, she refused to flee an insecure border area; her stubbornness helped rally a nation. Her rivals sometimes called her "Dumb Doll," and an American president is said to have referred to her in private as "the old witch." But the prime minister of India preferred grounding her foes to dust to complaining about gender bias. In the end, and in the way of things, she was ground up too. Proud woman, Indira Gandhi.

And there is Margaret Hilda Roberts. A childhood in the besieged Britain of World War II — she told me once of listening to the wireless and being roused by Churchill. "Westward look, the land is bright," she quoted him; she knew every stanza of the old poem. Her father, too, was a shopkeeper, and she grew up in the apartment above the store near the tracks. She went to Oxford on scholarship, worked as a chemist, entered politics, rose, became another first and only, succeeding not only in a man’s world but in a class system in which they knew how to take care of ambitious little grocer’s daughters from Grantham. She was to a degree an outsider within her own party, so she remade it. She lived for ideas as her colleagues lived for comfort and complaint. The Tories those days managed loss. She wanted to stop it; she wanted gain. Just before she became prime minister, the Soviets, thinking they were deftly stigmatizing an upstart, labeled her the Iron Lady. She seized the insult and wore it like a hat. This was Thatcher, stupendous Thatcher, now the baroness.

Great women, all different, but great in terms of size, of impact on the world and of struggles overcome. Struggle was not something they read about in a book. They did not use guilt to win election — it comes up zero if you Google "Thatcher" and "You’re just picking on me because I’m a woman." Instead they used the appeals men used: stronger leadership, better ideas, a superior philosophy.

You know where I’m going, for you know where she went. Hillary Clinton complained again this week that sexism has been a major dynamic in her unsuccessful bid for political dominance. She is quoted by the Washington Post’s Lois Romano decrying the "sexist" treatment she received during the campaign, and the "incredible vitriol that has been engendered" by those who are "nothing but misogynists." The New York Times reported she told sympathetic bloggers in a conference call that she is saddened by the "mean-spiritedness and terrible insults" that have been thrown "at you, for supporting me, and at women in general."

Where to begin? One wants to be sympathetic to Mrs. Clinton at this point, if for no other reason than to show one’s range. But her last weeks have been, and her next weeks will likely be, one long exercise in summoning further denunciations. It is something new in politics, the How Else Can I Offend You Tour. And I suppose it is aimed not at voters — you don’t persuade anyone by complaining in this way, you only reinforce what your supporters already think — but at history, at the way history will tell the story of the reasons for her loss.

So, to address the charge that sexism did her in:

It is insulting, because it asserts that those who supported someone else this year were driven by low prejudice and mindless bias.

It is manipulative, because it asserts that if you want to be understood, both within the community and in the larger brotherhood of man, to be wholly without bias and prejudice, you must support Mrs. Clinton.

It is not true. Tough hill-country men voted for her, men so backward they’d give the lady a chair in the union hall. Tough Catholic men in the outer suburbs voted for her, men so backward they’d call a woman a lady. And all of them so naturally courteous that they’d realize, in offering the chair or addressing the lady, that they might have given offense, and awkwardly joke at themselves to take away the sting. These are great men. And Hillary got her share, more than her share, of their votes. She should be a guy and say thanks.

It is prissy. Mrs. Clinton’s supporters are now complaining about the Hillary nutcrackers sold at every airport shop. Boo hoo. If Golda Meir, a woman of not only proclaimed but actual toughness, heard about Golda nutcrackers, she would have bought them by the case and given them away as party favors.

It is sissy. It is blame-gaming, whining, a way of not taking responsibility, of not seeing your flaws and addressing them. You want to say "Girl, butch up, you are playing in the leagues, they get bruised in the leagues, they break each other’s bones, they like to hit you low and hear the crack, it’s like that for the boys and for the girls."

And because the charge of sexism is all of the above, it is, ultimately, undermining of the position of women. Or rather it would be if its source were not someone broadly understood by friend and foe alike to be willing to say anything to gain advantage.

It is probably truer that being a woman helped Mrs. Clinton. She was the front-runner anyway and had all the money, power, Beltway backers. But the fact that she was a woman helped give her supporters the special oomph to be gotten from making history. They were by definition involved in something historic. And they were on the right side, connected to the one making the breakthrough, shattering the glass. They were going to be part of breaking it into a million little pieces that could rain down softly during the balloon drop at the historic convention, each of them catching the glow of the lights. Some network reporter was going to say, "They look like pieces of the glass ceiling that has finally been shattered."

I know: Barf. But also: Fine. Politics should be fun.

Meir and Gandhi and Mrs. Thatcher suffered through the political downside of their sex and made the most of the upside. Fair enough. As for this week’s Clinton complaints, I imagine Mrs. Thatcher would bop her on the head with her purse. Mrs. Gandhi would say "That is no way to play it." Mrs. Meir? "They said I was the only woman in the cabinet and the only one with — well, you know. I loved it."

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

61 Responses to

  1. andy g says:

    Different women. They kicked the doors in by having bigger “balls” than many of the men around them. No PC at that time either. They showed their mettle the old fashioned way. no guilt, just hard work in arguably more male dominated societies than ours with one exception. Golda Meir was a product of a society that mandated civil service by all, male and female, and israeli women led the way to the battlefield. Much in the same manner as soviet women in WW2.

  2. Vertigo says:

    TSK TSK, Billy. Another blatantly biased attack against Clinton using a pundit with no actual basis of reality. OF COURSE THE FIRST WOMAN CANDIDATE IS GOING TO COMMENT ABOUT SEXISM, ITS AN ISSUE! Peggy Noonan didn’t even bother to use the quote she was attacking Clinton with in context. Here it is.

    “There should be equal rejection of sexism and racism when it raises its ugly head,” she said. “It does seem as though the press at least is not as bothered by the incredible vitriol that has been engendered by the comments by people who are nothing but misogynists It’s been deeply offensive to millions of women.”

    This could be dismissed as a loser grumbling were it not so manifestly true. (Sunday Herald.May 27, 2008)

    Note she is not claiming sexism against herself, she is comparing the presses bias between sexism and racism.

    There is so much in that little attack editorial that is just… well. If you think Goulda Meier, Margaret Thatcher and Indira Ghandi didn’t experience sexism in their own lives and political campaigns; and comment about it, I have a 6 ft section of the Brooklyn Bridge to sell you… AT A DISCOUNT!

    The biggest difference in political campaigning now and then is that everything is easily recorded and documented… easily used out of context for any kind of attack your opposition might want to make on you. This is obviously the case… a specious attack on Clinton with no real basis in reality… of COURSE THE FIRST WOMAN CANDIDATE IS GOING TO COMMENT ABOUT SEXISM IN OUR SOCIETY, ITS AN ISSUE!

  3. Linda Coates says:

    This one’s right on the money, as far as I’m concerned – couldn’t agree more. Good one, Billy.

  4. Vertigo says:

    So Com. Coates, if an interviewer were to ask YOU about sexism in our society, what would you say? None of your Business? It doesn’t exist?

    This is why Context is so important This was obviously part of an interview which she MUST answer the questions, and the pundit took the quote out of context.

  5. Avatar of billybones billybones says:

    me i’m just tired of victims…and people who profit financially or through gaining power by pimping victimhood. no more poverty pimps.

  6. Vertigo says:

    So how, Billy, is castigating Hillary Clinton by pushing out of context punditry on us going to stop this.. er.. Pimping Victim Hood?

    You know, I can understand your not wanting her in office, but my point isn’t about her gaining the office. This is just another Rovian style attack to undermine a person who really hasn’t done anything wrong.

    Sexism, just as Racism isn’t victimization, although it HAS victims. Its an issue that MUST be addressed through dialogue in our society. In MY opinion, your posting this Rhetorical Punditry victimizes Clinton more than her personal claims do.

    Why?

    Because she isn’t claiming to be discriminated against. She is one of the highest paid attorneys in the country and has had all the opportunities. GET A CLUE, she is running for president! We ALL know if she were discriminated EVER in her life, she would have sued em.

    She is simply addressing an issue, and in my opinion, if she were to avoid it THAT would make her look bad…. just like I am waiting for Com. Coates answer.

  7. Linda Coates says:

    Vertigo, I’m asked that question a lot. Of course it exists, but in my experience the way you help it finally die its overdue death in our society is to demonstrate competence, and don’t blame one’s own screw-ups, unfortune, or failure to achieve on sexism (although sometimes it may in fact be the case). Also, to consistently work to eradicate institutional and systemic sexism (equal pay for equal work, benefits, etc.).

  8. Vertigo says:

    Thank you Com. Coates, for the great answer…

    How, if you don’t..

    “blame ones…failure to achieve on sexism (although sometimes it may in fact be the case);

    when it actually IS the case… how can you

    “consistently work to eradicate institutional and systemic sexism (equal pay for equal work, benefits, etc.)????
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Now here is the next question, more for Billy, but for Com Coates also since she endorsed the punditry.

    Could you please show me where Sen Clinton has

    “blame(d) one’s own screw-ups, unfortune, or failure to achieve on sexism”?

    This is, after all, the foundation of this thread. Please use full, in context quotes, if you don’t mind.

    I cannot deny the foundation of Billy’s frustration, living in a litiguous society where “victims” are constantly on display. We get tired of seeing people being given advantages because they create an aura of pity, but that doesn’t make it right to castigate a political candidate because they use verbage associated with a victims plight.

    This minimizes the true problem; in this case sexism. By deliberately and falsely painting Clinton as taking a victim role, it makes it so those people who really ARE a victim of sexism will not be taken seriously. This makes you guilty, Billy, of creating that “Pimping Victimhood”

    The only way you can stop the pimping is by ignoring it: don’t sell the whore. Not by putting it on display with out of context punditry.

  9. Grootch says:

    I’m with Vertigo on this one. It’s pretty obvious Billy really, really hates Hillary Clinton, but I don’t see how ignoring sexism and pretending to be above it helps to solve anything.

    Would you tell a black woman being called a “nigger” to just grow a thicker skin and shut up?

  10. existentialist says:

    Is it sexism because people are calling her out on the massive amounts of bullshit she’s spewed throughout the campaign? I know, she’s the victim of sexism because her horribly run campaign is in debt and losing to a junior senator from Illinois even after she was pretty much crowned the presumptive nominee when she announced her candidacy. And am I the only one who finds it funny that she’s mentioning this now that she’s facing nearly insurmountable odds of securing the nomination? Desperation is a stinky perfume, and Clinton smells like she’s been bathing in it. Call me crazy, but I think if a woman like Kathleen Sebelius were running, this wouldn’t be as big of an issue.

  11. Avatar of billybones billybones says:

    Yes I really really dislike Hillary as a politician. Can you tell me how she is suffering from sexism? Bill has already claimed that she is suffering reverse racism…hillary will play whatever role she needs to further her political ambitions. Vertigo…by your logic, the best way to make something go away is ignore it…we ignored racism for centuries, it didn’t go away until people what…sat and cried…feel sorry for me i’m a victim? no, they stood up, said hell with it, we aren’t taking it anymore. the same with sexism. Any moron knows that a glass ceiling existed….the solution wasn’t people who cried victim…it was people who fought and scrapped and did it. Jackie Robinson broke into the major leagues by busting his ass, not by whining when the fucking crackers slid into him spikes up trying to take him out. you can let shit beat you down or you stand up. calling hypocrisy when i think i see it (notice the think, i’ve admitted mistakes before and will do so again, i’m sure)is not pimping victimhood. Ignoring white supremacist bullshit doesn’t make it go away…but check out the punks who post that shit on the in-forum…they spout off until someone challenges them, and they fucking disappear. it may not change their minds, but it may make someone else think.

  12. remrafdn says:

    Margaret Thatcher was known as “Attila the Hen”. Hillary could be “Attila the pullet” or Golda Lite.

  13. andy g says:

    you deal with the boys by kicking them in the balls whenneeded and show them you belong. Just be competent, when all else fails..win on fucking merit. I agree with exy on this one big time. She is up against charm and cute…it does not sit well with her. Remember, she has been setting the table for this run for 8 years. Obama came out of nowhere.

  14. Vertigo says:

    I will repeat my question, and I guess this extends to all of you who are claiming Clinton is using the Sexism card INNAPROPRIATELY.

    “Now here is the next question, more for Billy, but for Com Coates also since she endorsed the punditry.

    Could you please show me where Sen Clinton has

    “blame(d) one’s own screw-ups, unfortune, or failure to achieve on sexism”?

    This is, after all, the foundation of this thread. Please use full, in context quotes, if you don’t mind.” (Verts quote,5/27/2008)

    Quotes if FULL CONTEXT please.

    Billy, you haven’t been able to come up with this… the closest you have come up with is

    “Bill has already claimed that she is suffering reverse racism…hillary will play whatever role she needs to further her political ambitions.” (Billy’s quote)

    Note, it says BILL claimed it, not Hillary; and racism, NOT sexism (still no quote). I have been searching for this myself, and all I find is one quote.. the one above that does not, in ANY way say “Feel Sorry For Me” It decry’s both racism and sexism from the perspective of a feminist.

    You know, Billy, I keep trying to fathom the complete antipathy you have towards Clinton. Issue wise, she is almost identical to Obama. She has shown herself to have IronClad integrity, the worst that can be found against her is she followed through on her wedding vows and stood behind Bill even when he cheated on her. Its not simply because she is a Clinton, is it.

    I am beginning to suspect its that misogyny she refers too. Could it be that YOU simply don’t want a woman in the White House? Please come up with SOME defining reasoning behind this extreme hate you have that brings you to the point of committing character assasination through inference. I am sorry, but Rhetorical Punditry isn’t enough to assasinate someones character over.. unless you are Karl Rove.

    Politics as usual here in the Corner Bar, who needs issues when you can……

  15. andy g says:

    ..Condelisa Rice in a heartbeat…go sell your foolishness at another stall Vertigo..politics as usual….like you don’t play that fucking game..
    “judge ye not goofius maximus, unless ye your own self want to judged..variously I speaketh Vertious Goious”
    Opinions are all like assoles..everybody elses is pungent as hell, except of course our own, which inevitably smell like fucking roses…
    I got no problem with a broadoamerican, afro american, mexican american, norwegian american, or a what the fuck ever american in the damn whitehouse..as long as I can deal with their principles of leadership and the horse they rode in on…
    get a grip, and by the way..lighten up Francis..

  16. Avatar of billybones billybones says:

    Iron clad integrity? hmm, “i landed under sniper fire” ooh, shake that shit off. back to your full quote in context. She was talking about how there should be an equal examination of racism and sexism by the press, and the implication is clearly that she feels that the press is ready to jump all over things that appear to be racially motivated in regard to comments about Obama, but are giving little examination to the “incredible vitriol that has been engendered by the comments by people who are nothing but misogynists It’s been deeply offensive to millions of women.” She is clearly talking about her campaign, and not simply racism and sexism in general. If she were, there would be a difference. As far as who said what in the campaign, a campaign is ultimately responsible for it’s message and it is clear that the clinton campaign has interjected race on numerous occasions, and used it to suggest Obama cannot win..he can’t win the white working class vote, remember? However, I can find no instance where the Obama campaign has said Hillary cannot win because she is a woman. Because she is bill’s wife…maybe. because she represents politics as usual..certainly. but they have never suggested that she is not up to the task because she is a woman.

  17. Vertious Goious, goofius maximus says:

    BEEP BEEP……

    I kinda like that… I may keep it,

    I might change Vertious to Vertuous though!

    Wow, Yahoo musta bought up AltoVista, I went to Bablefish to find the real translation of Vertigo to latin… and its Yahoo now!

    BEEP BEEP…………

  18. Vertious Goious, goofius maximus says:

    Um, you didn’t give me ANY quotes in full context, in fact you tried to give the one quote back in an even MORE distorted context with a huge personal misinterpretation!

    As much as you want to read something into it, unless it says IN MY CAMPAIGN, she is talking about sexism in general. Thats the joy of CONTEXT, Billy. If you want to show me greater context, then bring in the entire document that shows she is referring to the campaign and not sexism in general.

    “As far as who said what in the campaign, a campaign is ultimately responsible for it’s message and it is clear that the clinton campaign has interjected race on numerous occasions” Billy’s quote)

    Um, race is not the topic is it… bait and switch may work in prime time TV law shows, but we are smarter than that… in fact, since you interject it… please show me some quotes from her campaign that say race is an issue, or even campaign statements that say “Feel Sorry For The Poor Woman”! It would say it in her website!

    PLEASE, this is a highly documented process. It should be EASY for you to find this stuff! Jay Leno would be making streamers over his stage with this stuff!! YouTube would be having a field day!

    You know, we should be arguing about issues… you know what they are; the things that MATTER to the people…. not about shallow character assasination. THATS my beef here! I don’t even know who I am going to vote for myself, nobody is out yet. Nader is still in the running too! When I choose, its going to be based upon the issues, not about your (or any pundits) opinion of her character.

    I get so tired of this crappy political process that ultimately discourages the best candidates from running for office because they don’t want to be put under a microscope by myopic people like you who don’t give a crap about the best interests of the constituancy; only driving a stake through the heart of someone you don’t like.

  19. Vertious Goious, goofius maximus says:

    Oh, and Andy, I didn’t call you a misogynist, although the term you used.. er..broadoamerican, says otherwise, (but we can let that pass).

    I too would seriously consider voting for Condoleeza Rice, she has more political capitol in the international arena than anybody at the table!

    If Billy’s repeated attacks on the multiple topics posted are truly simply because she is a female, and he has not shown.. or made any effort to show otherwise, then her quote of..

    “incredible vitriol that has been engendered by the comments by people who are nothing but misogynists. It’s been deeply offensive to millions of women.” (Clintons Quote)…

    Is totally true, because his repeated posting of topics attacking her are attacks on all females. He validates her point every time he posts another topic or cartoons of big breasted snarly faced “Hilary’s” attacking her character.

  20. Avatar of billybones billybones says:

    What females do i admire? On a local level, the case manager at churches united for the homeless. Linda Coates. On a national level? Condi Rice. Barbara Boxer. Diane Feinstein. For me to be mysoginistic, wouldn’t I have to dislike Hillary because she is a woman? I wouldn’t like her if she was hung like a porn star, talked like Dirty Harry and gave me lots of money. Her gender means fuck all to me. women have helped bring about some of the most important social changes in history…their contributions have been under-reported and under-appreciated. I simply do not like Hillary Clinton. She is too much of a political animal. and yes, i absolutely believe that she was suggesting that sexism is playing a role in her not getting the nomination. and bringing race into it is not irrelevant…she made the comparison, not me. Oh, and if you do your damn research, it is about the fucking campaign..it was in response to a question about whether the campaign has been racist: (I believe this is the original article, not a secondhand quote like you provided) Later, when asked if she thinks this campaign has been racist, she says she does not. And she circles back to the sexism. “The manifestation of some of the sexism that has gone on in this campaign is somehow more respectable, or at least more accepted, and . . . there should be equal rejection of the sexism and the racism when it raises its ugly head,” she said. “It does seem as though the press at least is not as bothered by the incredible vitriol that has been engendered by the comments by people who are nothing but misogynists.”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/19/AR2008051902729.html
    he shoots…he scores…your ball vertigo.

  21. Grootch says:

    Andy G:

    I’ve decided upon a new nickname for you. From now on you are “Puff the magic Drag-on.”

    Why?

    Well, I’m sure an old war buff like you knows the history of this gun, but for our younger initiates:

    http://www.1stcavmedic.com/glossary-files/ac-47-puff.htm

    Because instead of addressing points in an argument, you instead get frustrated, take flight and blanket the entire area with insults and vitriol for, usually 4-5 unecessary paragraphs in length.

  22. Vertious Goious, goofius maximus says:

    Um, don’t slip in your own drool, or slip on your tongue when you try that shot, Billy.

    The only quote you put in there, Billy, was the exact same as the one I had, original source or not… the meaning and context of it hasn’t changed, even if you………

    “absolutely believe that she was suggesting that sexism is playing a role in her not getting the nomination. and bringing race into it is not irrelevant…she made the comparison, not me.”(Billy’s Quote)

    Your personal beliefs are distorted by some unfathomable reason…. Your only given reason is its because

    “She is too much of a political animal.” (Billy’s quote)…

    but so is Obama, McCain, Dorgan, Bush, Reagan, Carter, ad finitum… yet you don’t declare the same hate for THEM. There is a reason you don’t like her, and you hedged around it although I suspect I slam dunked it.

    I read the article 3 times, and not once did I see anything that came close to implying….”I am loosing and its all those horrible mens fault for thinking I am a female” In fact, the overall tone of the article is optimistic and says she thinks she will WIN!

    She just states, at one specific point, that Media people like YOU are attacking her for sexist reasons, and you ARE: LOOK AT THE TOPICS! As if attacking her for being a whiney female isn’t sexist…

    I still think she is more on the money than you are, that some of the media is being sexist. This beconsback to the punditry you originally posted. Its all about attacking her for being a whiney female! I have seen nothing, and you have not proven that Clinton is a whiney female who is playing the sexism card.

    Please go through the article or any other source and find a direct quote from Clinton (or even her campaign) where they feel the media has caused her to lose the campaign because of sexism!

    I am STILL waiting for that specific quote!

  23. Avatar of billybones billybones says:

    Vertigo said “As much as you want to read something into it, unless it says IN MY CAMPAIGN, she is talking about sexism in general. Thats the joy of CONTEXT, Billy. If you want to show me greater context, then bring in the entire document that shows she is referring to the campaign and not sexism in general.”
    Hillary Said “The manifestation of some of the sexism that has gone on in this campaign is somehow more respectable, or at least more accepted, and . . . there should be equal rejection of the sexism and the racism …”

    You said it wasn’t about the campaign..that it was a general statement…the article i cite, and the quote prove otherwise. as far as saying hillary is a whiny female…i didn’t say that. i posted the column by ms. noonan because i found it interesting. I find the comparisons valid. If you disagree..fine. i could care less if i change your mind. i make no claims at being right all the time…but i was right about the facts as i asserted them, she was indeed referring to the campaign ant the coverage by the press, and not making a general comment. I have heard little if any comment from mr. obama about the difficulties posed by his race..either in general or in regard to “unfair treatment” by the press…in fact the majority of comments have been regarding the clinton campaign injecting race into the equation.

  24. existentialist says:

    So Sayeth Vertigo:
    “In fact, the overall tone of the article is optimistic and says she thinks she will WIN!”

    There’s only one thing wrong with her optimism, it doesn’t take into account the reality of her mathematical inability to surpass Obama in pledged delegates. Delusion is a funny thing, isn’t it?

  25. Tye says:

    Vertigo, I’m not so sure that it was the marrage vows that kept Hillary with Bill throughout his scandals. I think the real reason may have leaned more towards staying in a place that provided a nice foot up. I’m actually going to go as far as to suggest that there may be some kind of a back-office deal for Bill if Hillary gets the presidency…Supreme Court Justice Bill Clinton anyone? Seems more like a relationship based on political step ups than marrage vows at this point.

  26. Vertigo says:

    “or at least more accepted, and . . . there should be equal” (Billy’s quote, and note the omitted paragraph… er…phrase in the middle)

    Full context Billy… full context, I expect no less…..

    This means you have to dig a little further than just tearing apart the same quote I gave YOU. Frankly, this one is getting a little overused, don’t you think? Can’t you find at least ONE more to validate your lame assertion?

    Even if this quote WAS in full context, you cannot claim its representative of the entire tone of the campaign, unless there are OTHER representative statements. Even THEN, you cannot get past the blatant fact that what she is saying is not only true, but she is not stating its AFFECTING her campaign at all.. she is stating a fact of the media, not being a whining female as you assert in such a sexist manner that IS representative of the media. I am sure I can find a lot more cartoons, articles and editorials just like the one you headed this topic with if you want me to prove it.

  27. Vertigo says:

    Perhaps so, Perhaps she is delusional, or perhaps there is something she is going to pull out of her hat. Thats not what we are discussing here, though, is it.

    It doesn’t matter, because, as I said before, she isn’t using it as a crutch, she directly states that she can win and the sexism is irrelevant. Vastly different than what the pundit at Billy used to attack her is saying.

    I agree Tye that there was probably more deal making than loving nurturing wifedom in not divorcing Bill. Bill Clinton is a KingMaker!!! I was just saying that if thats the worst you can find, she is pretty pure, don’t you think? BUT… Thats not the point either, is it.

    I am not even trying to defend Clinton! Billy is forcing me to do this, I am just SICK AND TIRED of this nasty style Rovian Attacks in our political system. We should be discussing ISSUES HERE. Which of the Medical Systems they are proposing is better…. How to deal with Iraq.. you know… things that MATTER…

    Not if Hillary’s feelings are hurt by the poor cartoonists who are SOOO victimized by her bitchy retorts.

    This approach Billy is taking is the worst part of our political system. It discourages the best candidates from running because they know people like Billy will destroy their families and lives.

    Its wrong.

  28. andy g says:

    grootch: You forgot humor…key component in any AC 47 /110 Mission. It can’t be all about body count..got to have a reason to lean back and chuckle….BTW: Thanks for the timely tech tip.

    Vert: It beats “fear of heights”, and you do max out from time to time..this bar has a tendency of doing that. BTW: I was mocking the tendency of our society to label people..pigeonholing..the point I was making (and I am disappointed that you left it on the floor) was (fill in the fucking blank)american…never mind…

  29. existentialist says:

    Seriously, Vertigo, Hillary has been engaging in the Rovian tactics you just decried throughout this campaign, and anyone who has been paying attention can attest to that. Then when the chips are down and she’s on the verge of defeat, what do we hear? That’s right, claims that the media or anyone who doesn’t support her is somehow sexist. Was that her magic bullet? Her ace in the hole? Or is she planning on having Florida and Michigan save her ass (even though any equitable solution would still result in an Obama victory)?

  30. Vertigo says:

    Please verify this, Exy. I am sure I can find many examples of character assassination towards Bush’s opposition, There was even one Senator who was branded a Lesbian when she wasn’t! I would be interested if you can show me any, non issue oriented personal attacks originating from Sen Clinton’s office.

    While you are at it, “claims that the media or anyone who doesn’t support her is somehow sexist.”(Exy’s quote)

    would YOU please find me anything that carries Claim to ClaimS.. you know… MORE THAN ONE on the sexist issue. To take one quote and turn it into a full out frontal attack is specious, which is one of the points I am making here. I could understand if she were using this as a platform for her campaign. I wouldn’t say a single thing. But thats not the situation. Its taking ONE LOUSY QUOTE and turning it into armegeddon to attack someone. Its specious and worthy only of the National Enquierer…. and apparently Billy.

    To say its OK because Clinton does it too only endorses a system thats wrong.. that needs to be stopped.

    THATS my beef. I want good politicians running for office. Politicians who have honor and integrity. Instead we get these carreer lawyer politicians (including Clinton) who prefer to sue people to protect their names than maintain their good names with integrity. Why? Because people with honor and integrity know that no matter how careful you are, you WILL say or do SOMETHING that someone like Billy and his ilk will use to tear the very testicles out from your anus and display your corpse in a family picture on the front page. Even if its one very minor mistake.

    People with honor and integrity don’t put their families through this, and we need to take a stand and STOP IT.

  31. Vertious Goious, goofius maximus says:

    Andy, I knew you really didn’t intend anything with the “Broad” statement… thats why I said I would let it pass.

    Nonetheless, its actually no different than saying NiggerAmerican, or getting Jewed on a deal. Calling a woman a Broad is as sexist as you can get.

  32. andy g says:

    Vert: i am one of the few top senior mgrs in the business who actually treats women right and equally in the last bastion of male dominance..high rise construction. I work well with women and understand what they are up against in the business. when I ran structural opns at McCormick Place South, I had the first female deck superintendtent in the city of Chicago. It didn’t hurt that she road a Harley…but she had a lot of obstacles to gete over. Leadership is a big thing, you cannot just decide to be a leader, those you have to lead need to accept you as a leader or you are not a leader..she survived and did well. The firm I currently work for, assigned me to direct field opns on two projects that had a senior manager on the contract side who was woman. The last one wasn’t to good, but this one I am with now is sharp and hard working. She has won the respect of most of the neandrathals and that is hard to do. These guys comprise the toughest audience in the world outside of the military to truly command. The younger sections of our staffing is a little more diversified, but at the senior level there are only a few. That being said, there are only a few males who are truly exceptional too. We have our cults of personality in this business too unless you are a mercenary like me, I work for operations chief who recruited me. I understand my role here at this point of my career is to transition young people & train them in the old way operationally to take advantage of their wonderful technical skills. At that level there is no difference. In the field with the men on the other hand, it is still a struggle. The women are not a force in the strength trades. Point being, I announce to all that I do not believe in political correctness, but I treat everyone the same…If your ass is assigned to me, you will get rode hard and put up wet by rule..you will learn to lead or I will send you back and get another. No matter what the length of day I make them work..I greet them every morning and say goodnight when they leave. I work the weekends. They will learn to lead from the front. No excuses. Apparently it is working, I am one of the most requested mentors despite my reputation for being a “hard case”. The youngsters that come through my operations and go on to other projects, have to date been very successful in the next rung of responsibility.
    Vert: It is a matter of perspective I guess. I know the fundamental rule is that the only thing I cannot teach is the ability or willingness to give a fuck. If some one cares or is passionate about this shit, I will take them on in minute, regardless of pedigree. I don’t see color or race, I see potential and willingness to contribute. A little ambition and pride is a nice addition as well. The smug little fucks who come out of college thinking they know it all wither fairly quickly, as reality of the business does not even come close to what they were taught. Amazing. They forget that their professors are not signing their paychecks.
    Basically most of the chirping is coming from the “camps” of the politicians anyway, as each camp has a dirty play division, you just have to see who they are.
    The candidates have to be above the fray. Each team has a group of firebombers though. It is actually what makes this shit fun to watch as they are all basically the same anyway.
    Getting back to the theme, my take is that the Clintons were not prepared for Barack, and he quickly stole Hollywood from them. The shit between the two camps is almost like a squabble between the new love and the old love interest. They are basically the same person, only Hillary thought it was her turn and didn’t see Obama coming. Neither did anyone else.

  33. Avatar of billybones billybones says:

    Vertigo, I am forced to come to the conclusion that either you do not read other people’s posts in their entirety, or you suffer from a narcissistic personality and are unable to acknowledge the fact that the other person made a point and you were wrong. You keep talking about context. I provided the best context available..the original article. I do not have access to the fucking notes taken by the fucking reporter, or the recording of the interview. The quote I provided was the quote from the interview…and included context that your reference, which provided a more abbrieviated version of her statement, did not. That context being that yes, the statement was indeed in regard to the campaign, and not a general statement as you stated. I had stated that it was in reference to the campaign, you said no, i provided context to prove it. as far as columnist and cartoonists lampooning candidate…that’s their job. I find political humor funny…even when it pokes fun at people i like. and if i don’t find a particular piece funny, i don’t blame the ills of the political system on cartoonists. Oh, and a person of honor and integrity doesn’t have to embellish shit and flat out lie..(Damn that fucking sniper who wasn’t really there, and damn you fuckers for not believing that he was because i, hillary clinton said he was)

  34. Vertigo says:

    Your problem, Billy, is that I DO read all the posts thoroughly, and analytically. I also expect you to be able to back up your assertions with facts if need be.

    “I provided the best context available..the original article. I do not have access to the fucking notes taken by the fucking reporter, or the recording of the interview.” (Billy’s quote)

    You admit these are the only facts available, yet you continue to commit a character assasination in spite of the fact that there are no other facts. No other facts than this ONE quote that is out of context in the first place. You obviously couldn’t find any others and its easy to find them if they exist, even you know how to use the internet.

    Your burdon of proof that she is a whiney female and undeserving of being a President has been patheticly unproven, even if you DID find the one word “Campaign” in the one quote you have. To be a whiney female, she needs to be doing it ALL the time, and you can’t prove that!

    On the other hand, your accusing her of being a whiney female (and unfounded at that), is a VERY sexist assertion. This validates HER claim that the media… yes, this blog is the media, Billy… makes sexist attacks on her. Even that one “whine” you want to beat her over the head is actually a statement of fact, and not a whine at all. You have proven her right!

  35. Avatar of billybones billybones says:

    is it impossible to admit that i had the context right…it was in reference to the campaign and not a general statement? That is my main argument with you. as to whether this is media…well there are a handful of people who post here, and probably a few who come and read out attempts at dialogue. character assasination? wow, if this is character assassination, you should read history. Oh, peggy noonan accused her of sounding like a whiner in comparison to those other women…i posted it because i found it amusing, and was hoping to stir discussion. That i happen to agree, makes me, in your eyes mysoginistic. You accuse me of taking the quote out of context, but i provided context to prove the one assertion that i have continued to make. Here is the falat out bottom line. I do not like hillary clinton. I do not find her to be trustworthy, i believe that if she will repeatedly lie about something like landing under sniper fire to make herself look good, then she will lie about more important things. it has nothing to do with her gender, race, religion etc. it has nothing to do with her party affiliation. Please give me a politician who is honest …about their fuckups as well as their success…who says something and means it…and i will support them. I find very few of those out there. but i refuse to give up the right to yell “bullshit” loudly and often when i smell it.

  36. Vertigo says:

    Don’t buy it Billy, you were doing full out frontal attacks against her long before she….

    “if she will repeatedly lie about something like landing under sniper fire to make herself look good, then she will lie about more important things.”

    You have deeper, more personal issues with her than what you stated. If lying were the litmus test… why aren’t you attacking every single Republican who signed the Contract with America. You would be attacking every single politician in the arena because… guess what… THEY ALL LIE. It doesn’t wash, Billy. Every rationale points back to misogyny. You don’t want a woman in the White House and you are using your Media Forum to undermine her.

    As to the Blogging, you are reaching out to a worldwide audience where ANYBODY can view what you read… that makes this media even if the audience is small… but you may be surprised who actually does look but not post.

  37. Avatar of billybones billybones says:

    vertigo…i have access to the numbers…our audience is small.

    You continue to slip past my point. you said the comment was not about the campaign. i proved it was.
    as far as you thinking it has to do with her being a woman, me being a misogynist…think what you want. i still welcome you here, enjoy your posts etc. as far as hillary..yes…ongoing issues…namely i don’t like her, don’t trust her, don’t find her to be credible. I flat out will not vote for her. I flat out will not vote for a Bush or a Clinton ever again…unless something drastic and unforseen happens. irrational? ok. unfair? don’t care, it’s my vote. unintelligent…no more so than anyone else, since we all vote based on our personal opinions.

  38. andy g says:

    It is all about the horse boys…fuck the rider…Clinton is a politician, so is the Golden Kid, as is the Old Man. The agenda they are supporting is what to look at, with Obama and Clinton being so close ideologically pick the pants suit that suits you best. They all lie and cast aspertions at the other guy..pick your poison, hold your nose and vote..not voting is worse.

  39. Grootch says:

    I agree with Andy… I don’t care who they are what they say to get elected (within reason), as long as a progressive agenda is pushed.

    Has Hillary said some outlandish shit? Yeah, she has. I don’t make a big deal out of it because Obama is going to be our next president by a landslide, so in my mind she’s already been marginalized.

    I could literally go apeshit posting flip-flops, lies, shady endorsements and the like for John McSame, but I don’t.

    Billybones, if it’s not misogyny then I assume it’s simply that you bought into the right-wing rhetoric. She’s a “bitch” and blah blah blah… I bet you sat enthralled, glued to the TV set 6 years ago when Fox news began airing their hilarious HILLARY WATCH! ™ segments.

    Two words for you: John McSame.

  40. Avatar of billybones billybones says:

    I don’t watch TV. no fucking cable. interesting…because i’m male and i dislike Hillary, then i automatically have an issue with women in general…since when is she the fucking paragon of womanhood? or for that matter the paragon of female politicians? I don’t fucking call you names based on your opinions…and i think if you review our conversations, i have been willing to look at ideas i spout off and say i was wrong occasionally. I certainly have learned things from talking to you..but i had to ignore you trying to paint me into some fucking neo-con corner. Look at my views on poverty…neo-con? hardly. I think obama is a boy wonder who is getting a pass on where he stands on issues, and i think mcCain is a continuation of the current administration which i flat out despise. so if I think mccain is an unpredictable bastard..what does that make me? or is it just disliking a woman candidate that makes me worthy of a generalized label.

  41. Bryan K says:

    I don’t like Hillary either, but I will vote for her if she wins the nomination.

  42. Grootch says:

    No Billy, that’s not the point. The point is where is your ire for Barak Obama?

    Where is your ire for John McSame?

    Where is your ire for Chimpy McFlightsuit and his “Mission Accomplished” all-stars?

    You seem to have a special place in your heart for Hillary Clinton. Can we, as the Corner Bar, collectively ask why? As I recall, despite a few small “scandals” and the downsizing of an invasion size force that we no longer needed or should have been asking the taxpayers to maintain due to our technical capabilities (it’s not like Lockheed Martin was out of work during the Clinton administration), things were pretty good socially and economically. The only smudges really were the one military blunder he made, and the dot.com bust, but that was hardly his fault.

    So why does Hillary deserve your constant ire and scrutiny?

    lol, captcha: “Ralph Krumscheld”

    Who the fuck is Ralph Krumscheld?

  43. Ralph Krumscheld says:

    I’m Ralph Krumscheld, you jerk.

  44. Vertigo says:

    Billy, I am not trying to paint you into some “Neo Con Corner”, I am not calling you names. I am doing exactly what you are doing to Clinton. I am using your own words to show you in the worst light. This is what the pundits do, and its what you seem to think is OK for you to do, even if your audience IS small in a media outlet that can be accessed by millions…. no BILLIONS of people.

    If you make shallow unfounded attacks against people who aren’t even here to defend themselves, its only fair to throw those same attacks right back into your lap.

    There is nothing wrong with being….

    “irrational? ok. unfair? don’t care, it’s my vote. unintelligent…no more so than anyone else, since we all vote based on our personal opinions.” (Billy’s quote)

    But to translate that “Personal Opinion” into a public forum in endorsing personal ATTACKS and it shows bad character.

    Its OK to put these “Irrational, Unfair” opinions down in personal posts, but to head topics in a blog as you do with them is worthy only of Rush Limbaugh.

    Call me “Irrational, unfair”, but thats MY opinion, and I also make my vote by posting and taking a stand… small as it seems to a small audience, but its still a stand. This is Democracy at its fundamental foundation.

  45. andy g says:

    Vertigo:
    John McCain-Maverick, scary to conservative right, starting to pander to neo con base to be “acceptable..” Old guy..watch out for who VP is due to advanced age of the old horse
    Barack Obama-Flash in the pan, golden boy, harps on change yet cannot shake the fact that he was Madigan and Daleys hand maiden in his real political life. Being pimped shamelessly by Hollywood and Oprah (the real queen of the US) and had great misfortune of sleeping in the wrong church…has wife with big mouth and custom fitted foot. Change anyone? Well maybe loose….

    Hillary Clinton-Sense of entitlement due to fact that she was 1st lady and a carpetbagger senator of NY. (Pick a nice place to land..or Bill, we ain’t living in Arkansas when this shit is done), stayed with philandering husband due to political efficiency or indifference (bad trait for president)..consumate politician gender nuetral..

    A modern day odd squad these three, the only fucking thing missing is Aaron Spelling..oh wait he is dead, maybe tory will do as director..quincey jones is still around to arrange the theme music isn’t he?

    The American public deserves better..if this is an example of the best we have, we are is such deep shit guys…really. That scares me far more than any skit or documentary on american politics..it is at times beyond hold your nose..it is shake yur head in fucking wonder.

  46. Vertigo says:

    I agree with all you posted Andy, especially about Obama. Flash in the Pan; he is like JFK, a beaming smile with lots of money and movie stars behind him… but no actual substance he can execute without political capitol.

    Clinton is announcing she is no longer viable today. This leaves Obama- McCain. The cycle is Democrats on the upswing.. Obama will win, and it will be by a landslide because everybody is sick of the Republican shit.

    Whats sad is, as I said before, its Clinton who has the political Capitol. She is the only candidate who can pull the strings to get things done, whether you like her or not. Crossing party lines, within the party, and internationally, she has had many years of bridgebuilding no other candidate has been able to approach. Nobody has had access like Bill Clintons first lady; carpet bagger or not.

    Obama is going to try to start new programs which will need to dissassemble the present system before implementing and he will find he will have great support at first (especially from the “Smaller Government conservatives).. things will get torn apart… then he will flounder with segmented, ineffective programs he cannot carry to fruition because political agenda’s will overpower his lack of political capitol. This will be his legacy.

  47. Avatar of billybones billybones says:

    if personal attacks are pointing out things i don’t like about a political candidate, whether it be what they stand for, the things they say, how they handle themselves, how their campaigns are run…then i will continue to do personal attacks. If by personal attacks, you mean completely unfounded, no basis in fact “mcCain is a senile old fathead cracker, Obama is a stupid empty suit with a pretty face, Hillary Clinton is a big bitch” name calling…i try not to engage in that. I’ll go back to my point…I stated Hillary was referring to the campaign with her comments about sexism…and at your insistence that i prove it, i did so. Does sexism exist…absolutely….i’m sure there are many males out there, and probably some females who would not vote for her simply because she is female, and they don’t want a female president….and there are women and probably men out there who will vote for her simply because she is female (which by definition is also sexist). Obama certainly has people who will not vote for him because he is an african american male, and certainly it could be argued (as hillary did) that he lost some of the recent primaries in predominantly white working class areas because of his race….but i didn’t hear him saying that….or complaining that it wasn’t fair. would it be different if he were losing…who knows. I have made no attempt to hide my dislike of Hillary Clinton….but I have never referred to her as ignorant…i have never said she is incompetent…in fact in the past i have said that while i personally don’t want her as president, i don’t think she would do any worse than mccain or obama. Oh, and this is an opinion blog….if people come to an opinion blog for news and straight facts they are fucking dimwits. I am not Fox News…I don’t claim to be “fair and balanced” although I certainly include a diversity of opinions here, and have only censored one individual in the entire history of the bar.
    One last point, my dislike, antipathy or issues with Hillary, do not, despite the two of your attempts to paint it otherwise, make me misogynistic. That is a personal attack. also, please feel free to submit things and i will post…almost anything. billybones.01@hotmail.com

  48. existentialist says:

    Vertigo, that’s quite the crystal ball you’ve got there, I had no idea you were a long-lost relative of Nostradamus. Care to tell me what I’ll be doing in five years? Let me guess, I’ll be living in a cardboard box because Mr. Bad Man Obama destroyed the country…am I right? Just one question, do you foresee the Boogeyman and Dracula ever teaming up? I mean, they’re an unlikely pair, I know, but your clairvoyance would be appreciated.

  49. Vertious Goious, goofius maximus says:

    BEEP BEEP

    (Looks into his crystal ball)

    I see.. no wait.. is more of a clicking of a keyboard…. oh.. here it comes… I See Exy sitting at a computer… guzzling coffee .. trying to figure out how to make wry comments on political blogs in the throes of the onslaught of alzhiemers disease……

    BEEP BEEP……..

  50. existentialist says:

    Alzheimer’s Disease at 30? It seems unlikely, but I’ll take your word. And another thing, I live in Utah…it’s incredibly difficult to find good coffee out here, so are you insinuating that Starbucks is going to buy out the LDS Church? =)

  51. Bryan K says:

    You mean there is somewhere on earth that Starbucks hasn’t completely oversaturated yet? Hell…I drive by 3 of them on my way home from work every day, and for the record…Starbucks is decent (not necessarily “good”) coffee.

  52. andy g says:

    ..point being is that Obama will get the nod..he party will pull apart..very quietly on election day when people get behind the curtain and execute in private thier feelings on this.
    The deep divisions that still exist in the party will show themselves then. The new voters brought in by the Obama push will not be enough to offset the loss of the Reagan democrats again. Hillary, believe it or not could carry that part of the party that Obama cannot.
    Obama has no juice in the chambers of the Senate were he is viewed as a kid who did nothing but appear on talk shows and run for president. He will have very little help in the house where the lines are even more dramatic. everyone for now until November will duck and cover, look to CYA until elections are over. Some very serious “layin’ low” will be done until after elections. There are not enough progressive lefties to carry the freight in the house and senate, with the fall out from Kennedy’s ailment not taken into account, Pelosi & her faction will become a liability as the spector of raised taxes in the face of raises in cost of living will reflect poorly on the timing of the key components of their agenda…that is assuming that Obama can carry the day against McCain, which I for one, do not view as the slam dunk many of you think it is. I think he is much closer to the middle than Obama is, and that is the demographic who will decide the election.
    Right know it look like Lenin vs Truman in one of those old celebrity death matches. McCain will carry Hispanic vote and it won’t be close..women will decide this one…not all women are Oprah or Rosie fans…..

  53. existentialist says:

    “Obama has no juice in the chambers of the Senate were he is viewed as a kid who did nothing but appear on talk shows and run for president.”

    And how the fuck are you so certain of this? Please point out some on-the-record comments (or off, I don’t give a shit) by Senators who have even mildly insinuated this. Honestly, your doom and gloom scenarios are so teeming with bullshit that I don’t even know where to begin.

  54. andy g says:

    The insinuations were even alluded to in Clintons campaign, it will be an “unspoken” issue exy and you know it. You also know exactly how our congress works. The network is still very much intact. With very little “capital” and a very staid congress (there are very few left of him BTW)it will be dicy for him if he gets elected to prosecute his agenda. No change will be possible until 2010 anyhow. I feel there will be a resurgence of the “reagan democrat” defecting to the Mccain camp due to the animosity engendered in this primary and the far left agenda that is being pushed. He still has not sold himself to middle america. That may be the greatest hurdle facing Obama.
    As far as the experience angle, that is being discussed in every corner and in every local ward as the area galvanizes itself for a very spirited summer and fall. It is the primary point of concern, that and his tax agenda..at least out here in the NW suburban collar counties that Daley and Stroger do not control. The control of the country rests in the middle, no matter how badly the far left and far right idealogues wish it wasn’t.

  55. Vertigo says:

    Exy, your pretended naivete’ may be charming, but I don’t buy it. You know how the system works as well as I do.

    Politicians make and return promises to accomplish their personal agenda’s. Its more important for them to have these “promises”.. or political capitol, than it is for them to have a moral highground on an issue. In this way they can sway votes by neutral people in their direction to get their bills passed. Obama has little of this Capitol, he hasn’t been in office for very long.

    This is why the Rovian Party machine is attacking Clinton, they know Obama will start his term as a lame duck with no power. Clinton has a TON of capitol on the other hand; not only her own personal capitol which is about the same as Obama’s plus what she garnered as first lady, but Bills too.. and his is HUGE.

    THIS is why the Republican Pary is attacking Clinton so ardently and leaving Obama alone. They won’t admit it though.. They would rather die than admit they are only talking heads thus invalidating everything else they may say in the future on ANY other issue. (looks slyly at Billy)

  56. existentialist says:

    I’m honored to be in the presence of pundits with such prescient insight. Seriously, guys, why not use your clairvoyance to help me win the lottery? And where were you guys back in 2000? If you could have predicted the whirling shit storm that is the Bush Administration, perhaps we would all be better off. Here, let me make a couple predictions:

    1. If McCain is elected, he’ll continue Bush’s failed foreign policies, perhaps doing enough sabre rattling to get us into a third quagmire in Iran.

    2. If Hillary is elected…well, let’s face it, she can’t be elected unless she’s the party’s nominee, and mathematically speaking, it will never happen. Sorry, Hill-Dawg.

  57. Vertious Goious, goofius maximus says:

    BEEP BEEP…..

    See Exy??? you ARE prescient!!!

    I believed in you, and I suspect you are right on the money!

    and you thought it would be hard!

    BEEP BEEP…..

  58. andy g says:

    exy: Its not how it is…ever…it is how things appear..otherwise Hubert H. Humphrey, the best president this country never had would have got elected. Humphrey was painted with the LBJ brush and Reagan called Mondale out when he said we had to raise taxes. BTW: The idea of star wars started with Mondale, cleverly lifted by reagan. Mondale was a big believer in using our technological prowess in our favor.

  59. Bryan K says:

    And let’s not forget that Mondale completely slaughtered Reagan in all of the political debates. It wasn’t even close. Reagan looked more stupid than Bush, Jr. up behind his microphone sweating bullets because he couldn’t figure out the answer to the question. Mondale was a debater by trade while Reagan was, erm, an actor.

    And yet, Reagan somehow managed to destroy Monday in the election amidst one of the most corrupted administrations in the history of this nation.

  60. andy g says:

    it taught me that you can never, I mean never tell the truth to the american public and get elected…american public, by and large can’t handle the truth. thats why they listen to Oprah, Rosie, Bill O, Hannity, Limbaugh,et al…

  61. Vertigo says:

    which is why Obama’s win will come down to Oprahs endorsement… She took the middle class female vote right out from under Clintons thumb.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>