Yes, Clinton's female and Obama's black. So what?

There's been an understandable focus on bias in this year's race for the Democratic presidential nomination, with the two remaining contenders vying to become either the first woman or the first African American to head a major-party ticket for the White House.

Many who back Barack Obama are still angry at what they saw as former President Bill Clinton's efforts to minimize Obama's victory in the South Carolina primary by comparing the Illinois senator with the Rev. Jesse Jackson, who twice won the same primary (in 1984 and 1988) but never was considered a front-runner.

At the same time, supporters of Hillary Clinton have taken umbrage at reports and comments that focus on the New York senator's hairstyle and clothing — in their view implying that because she is a woman, she should not be taken seriously as a potential president.

Those issues were addressed head-on ...

... on "Fox News Sunday" by Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), who is supporting Obama, and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who is backing Clinton.

"We have two extremely, extraordinarily qualified candidates, and either one of them will make history as the first African American president or the first woman president of the United States. And both of them have faced discrimination in the course of their personal and political lives," Durbin told host Chris Wallace.

"In terms of whether Sen. Clinton has faced some bias because she's a woman, of course she has. All of us who have worked hard to bring women into politics — and Dianne knows this personally — know the struggle that they faced even with other women in convincing people of their fitness.

"But secondly, understand that African Americans have also faced many, many burdens and obstacles, and Barack Obama has been facing that during the course of this campaign. Some of the rumors — and I know Dianne is well aware of them, we've talked about them on the Senate floor — about Sen. Obama are vicious and negative and totally false. And they are abounding across the Internet. Many of them leak into some of these reports and the like, these blogs, and even journalism that should be more discerning."

For her part, Feinstein said flat-out that there is gender bias in the Democratic campaign:

"I read a lot of newspapers. I read a lot of columns. I'm amazed at the number that are spent on really picayune things about Sen. Clinton — her hair, her suits," Feinstein said. "And I think some of this just drives toward the insecurity of having a woman running for this office. If anyone is qualified to run for this office, Chris, Sen. Clinton is — eight years in the White House. Sure, it's first lady. I know that.

"You know Hillary. You know her interest in policy. You know her care and concern about people. And most important right now, I think it's the economy and her knowledge of what's happened to the middle class in the last eight years and how you mend that and bring people up into becoming economically upwardly mobile.

"That's what we should be talking about, instead of — I read a lot of stuff which is really irrelevant to the kind of president she will be, and I think some of it is driven by the fact that it's easy to hit at a woman."

Clinton herself addressed the gender issue during a campaign appearance in Akron, Ohio, on Sunday afternoon, highlighting the support she has received from (male) generals, including retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark, the former NATO commander.

"I know we've never hired a woman for this job before, and I know for some people that's still a question mark," she said, wrapping up her stump speech in a packed gymnasium at Garfield High School. But, she continued, "why would [the generals] be supporting me unless they had concluded that I was the best person for the job?"

— Leslie Hoffecker

Comments

[smokey]

Skin tone doesn't matter until the right begins the attacks. Then.....how dare those racist bigots.

I'm also suspicious that race matters to the 90% of Africian-Americans that vote for Obama and not Hillary.

Of course that's not racism, it's "racial solidarity".

So what?

[Maria]

I have been particularly disappointed in the media handling of Hillary Clinton's candidacy. It seems that from Iowa going forward the primary question of the media has been, "Is she dead yet"? Is this the best the media can do? Is superficiality all they have to offer us?

[Independent]

For certain minority group Obama's blackness counts more than his policy and performance.

Claiming to have judgment without a shred of evidence. Change we can believe in without knowing what changes are we believing in.

Would like to see how well Obama does without a tele prompters and prepared speech.

Heard him today in Ohio where he said "he is going to open up congressional health care plan to the public with his Health care plan. Haven't someone else been saying that all along. Why today in Ohio?

[sara]

In regards to who is upset about Bill Clinton's behavior in South Carolina, it's not just blacks, many individuals I have spoken with and read about in interviews were not people of color who took great umbrage at his comments. To here those things come out of Bill Clinton's mouth were incredibly disturbing.

[Amjad Wyne]

Well laid out but that is not where the issue is. If both were white females or both were black males, we will not be discussing black or female issue at this stage. The issue will arise when either one of them is confronted by a male who is also white. So can we say that black or female would not matter at that time or that public will close its eyes when only one side is faced with that issue/challenge? One has to be living on a different planet to think that color or gender does not matter in America these days especially when the office of the president looks as male and as white as it could possibly be.

[wolf]

Actually, Obama started saying it in January. Hillary copied him a few weeks after. The same went for the work-for-tuition program, which he came up with. She (and others) modified their comments to embrace the concepts of 'hope' or 'change'. She even copied the 'Solutions for America' from Newt Gingrich's "American Solutions" idea.

She watches to see, what others do, then she copies it. That's why she's had so many conflicting messages in such a short time.

As far as the racism-gender bias, Hillary's campaign is pushing the concept of the first "woman president". They say so in their commercial. Ask an Obama supporter; They don't talk about race and even discourage it.

[John O'Brien]

As an independent voter I am sickened by the sexism and bias that has been displayed by our media gurus. Have we not been shamed enough as a country by Bush and the republican administration. Now we are publically showing our disdain for strong women that want to make a difference in this world and you refer to her as shrill and negative. How about courageous and diligent. She has my vote.

[Conn]

"That's what we should be talking about, instead of — I read a lot of stuff which is really irrelevant to the kind of president she will be, and I think some of it is driven by the fact that it's easy to hit at a woman."

BS. Many of us actually prefer the discussion of the issues...but HRC sets herself up when she stoops to negative attacks. To try to take the position that it is easy to hit her as a woman because of this actually sets women back.

[David]

So I thought this was going to be an interesting article that makes the point of how race and gender should not matter in this election but instead it was just a Hillary Clinton endorsement ad. I am so sick of hearing that people say she is so strong and diligent and that is why I am voting for her...and McCain who suffered as a POW isn't? Obama who fought up through the ranks of a racist society to become a front runner isn't? Even Huckabee has his strengths. To make that the reason to vote for the next President is ridiculous. Didn't we learn from re electing Bush about the cons of using flimsy reasons to elect Presidents?

[D.M.]

Oprah should run and take away both their advantages.

[Judith in NYC]

To smokey--Please don't point fingers at what you mockingly call "racial solidarity", women like me have been labeled gender traitors because we don't support HRC,. None of my fellow people of color have tried to persuade or guilt trip me into voting for Obama. (People of color is not used to avoid using black, it's just that we come in all shades from black to white and the beautiful cafe con leche.)

[Lisa White]

I think America would rather choose a white woman no matter how low she has to go to win this election/nomination.. Obama has run a clean campaign and their is no doubt that he represents someone who is honest, talks from his heart and knows what he is doing mainly positive agendas for America. He is someone who will make sure America is first. Hopefully Americans will see through the goodness, he is for real .

[Nyte]

This might be very hard for some people to understand, but the argument against Hillary isn't about her being a strong woman. I personally have nothing against strong women, as my future wife is a very strong woman.

I do have something against Hillary though, mostly because of how she attempts to strong arm people into doing what she wants. You can show strength without twisting arms. She represents what was worst about the Clinton era. I am also sick an tired of hearing how she is a woman, and because of her gender we should vote for her.

Her gender plays little role in policy decisions. If she has a good idea, and she has some, it is how she represents that idea. In my opinion, she does a poor job of positioning her ideas, and because of that she strikes out at those that do not agree with her. She belittles the competition instead of selling herself, just as she belittles those that do not agree with her.

This to me is not a sign of leadership or cooperation, it is a sign of weakness and stubbornest. It is also a sign of a person that is not comfortable with who they are.

There are other women who are just as qualified or better qualified currently running some states as governors. These are the best examples of strong, independent female leaders. This year Hillary isn't the best candidate. It is a shame that for all her qualifications, she does not possess the one quality we need right now, the ability to motivate and unify.

[stella]

let's face it, this race proved to us how sexist this country actually is. no matter how smart a woman is and how qualified to get the job, she wil never get hired for the job. a younger guy, with more charisma, and a lot less inteligence and qualifications, will get the job and the support. I think us women, we might as well forget about going to school, struggle to succeed and get ahead, we will just never get the top job.
yes this campaign has been very gender biased. just look how critical the media (and most of the people in the media are men) has been towards Hillary. It makes me sick to my stomach as a woman to realize that no matter how much I study and try to push myself towards success, it doesn't matter, a man will get my job. we have come along way, but there is still a big barrier to get to the top: men.

[Greg]

There has certainly been bias, against white men.

[JasonM]

Hilary has my vote even though the media has discounted her from the beginning.

The US media has shown their continued bias. This really has been out of control!

[james]

If we're going to discuss bias, why not include all the negative comments about McCain's age? Ageism, racism, or sexism: pick your prejudice.

[PaulFdot]

Hello. We are talking about the the most powerful position in the greastest nation in the world. It does not matter what race, greed or religion of this person. It does matter what they can bring to the world and the county. Really folks, none of the "forerunners" as
dictacted by others, offer anything new. More of the same. Are we happy with the same? Dr. Ron Paul, if you will examine his principles, is the only logical choice. Medical insight and experiance, economic background and a strick understanding and adhersion to the Constitution. Now that Ombama is talking about pulling our troops out in 90 days, really what is the differance in Pauls "crazy" ideas" about ending the policing of the world. He's right. We can no longer afford it. War forever McCain? Please consider and read www.ronpaul2008.com. Thanks.

[matt]

I am in Texas and the support for Hillary is amazing!

[Marks]

Media is harder on Hillary in what way? Statements made about her clothes? She should ignore those descriptions.

Her " I don't know how I'm doing it" whine and tears in New Hampshire! Over the top!

Women shouldn't be criticized for emotions. When its feelings about something horrible, tears should flow then.

Tearing up because its "hard"! What's hard in comparison to some other's lives? Some people do have a really hard daily life.

Hillary maybe tired and feeling pressure about the campaign, it was her choice to do this.

Crying because its been "hard", this campaign she should feel pleasure all the time. Look where she is and appreciate so many working on her behalf.

They take a picture of Hillary with her eyes wide and mouth open, a frown on her face. For a guy it doesn't matter. For the lady, it's not the time for her picture to be taken, but they do.

I saw a history of Hillary on the news, forgot how many hairstyles she's been through over the decades. How many she's going through in this campaign.

Some women get upset if guys don't recognize they have a new hair style. I've never looked at Hillary and thought for a minute about her hair.

Hillary, the politician, is the only view I've ever known of her! Her words is how I describe her. Her causes define her.

Anyone who question's Hillary's clothes or that's a bad picture of her, their being catty and meaningless.

Media can be catty and meaningless. They do it often, taking odd pictures of people, to sell a headline. To sell a paper or magazine. To run on TV and ridicule.

Worst dressed lists, some people actually read and care about.

When Hillary complains about all this in the Media, she's been too long in front of camera's saying that. People are listening to what she's says.

Isn't it, ladies go first, that's why she got the first question at debates. It's her fault not answering properly. Her complaint is Obama has a longer time to react, to what she said.

The audience never cared who went first! Hillary some paranoia and distrust about the media.

Her top campaign staff are women and they banter about this women bias in the media all the time!

--

Obama issues with the media. His name is being made fun of with implied fear and distrust of muslims reasons.

Ann Coulter, the Conservative screech, she labels him, as B. Hussein Obama.

She's inferring he's likely to "B. Saddam Hussein Obama"

The outright racism, of course. Some people won't vote for black or woman candidate. They are stupid voters!

It's time to get beyond negatively judging people that way.

Is he black enough conversation, stupid to talk about, even if black writers brought it up.

Obama doesn't have to fit the description of others! If he's happy in his own skin, let him be!

Let's just marvel at the place where Obama started, to how far he's gotten in a relatively short time.

He will be older than Bill Clinton was as President, so he's not too young. He never had to wait either.

Bill and Hillary complaining, he should have waited, they are feeling a lot of pressure believing that.

[Indian guy]

I like the article and the premise. I think the basic point here is that it's basically a draw in terms of how much discrimination comes by an African American and a woman. I do think that Hillary gets a lot of negative attention and people almost revel in speaking negatively about her, but she gets a lot of benefits as well... If you notice, she's always mentioning how great it would be for a woman to be in the white house, and she gets a lot out of that, but Obama doesn't try to draw attention to race, although he's dominating African Americans anyways... For those who think he has race-bated, I think it's just the opposite, and his not going to the State of the Black Union in New Orleans last week should speak to that, despite some criticism, he's not pandering to African Americans.

I've read stuff that says it's harder for women in society, and I think it's mixed. If you look around the world, there have been some women leaders, like Margaret Thatcher, Benazir Butto, Indira Gandhi to name a few, but how often do you see someone from a minority named to the top spot? Think about it.

In Hillary's case, I think she's definitely a trailblazer, and I think we should be very proud of the barriers that are being broken. Personally, I just prefer Obama is because of her baggage from the Clinton years and I think he's just better at bringing people together and more inspiring... as well as her stance on the war.

Personally, I think the press has tiptoed around both candidates because of the sensitivity here. There are a lot of things they could write about with either of them, and Hillary is not only better known by far, but was running as the inevitable candidate, and that helped and hurt her. But otherwise, what are the press supposed to say - she's been more negative in her campaign, she's lost 11 in a row, and Obama's legitimately inspiring people around the country. They have to write what they think, and calling out the press is a way to call attention away from the facts and that her campaign was poorly run... And saying she sometimes comes off cold and that he's more eloquent, some of that stuff is just true, has nothing to do with her sex or his race or vice versa.

[Jerry Tsai]

it would be great if we simply elect the best candidate. A lot of people say Clinton has more experience. They are misinformed by her, but the media seems to buy it, and Senator Obama has graciously not challenged it. But we all know just how inexperienced Clinton is. Does anybody really buy that being married to a person makes a person more qualified in that person's profession? With that logic, I don't need to go to medical school, because my wife happens to be a doctor.

For the record, Senator Obama has won four elections, and has been answering to voters for 11 years. Senator Clinton has won two elections, and has been answering to voters for 7 years. While in the Senate, Senator Obama has been much more productive than Senator Clinton in passing important legislation.

He passed an ethics bill with Reid and Feingold. He passed a transparency in federal spending bill with Coburn. He passed a curtailment of nuclear proliferation bill with Lugar. She has passed nothing of substance. That's right-- 7 years of nothing important.

You know why you haven't heard this? It's because Senator Obama runs a positive campaign. He touts his credential and qualifications, and a message that we Americans need to take ownership of our problems. He reasoned that if Clinton were the nominee that he would prefer not to give any ammunition to the GOP. Clinton has not returned the favor, smearing him and his reputation whenever she gets the chance.

After learning about all the corporate donations Clinton has taken, her willingness to attack negatively and often, her breaking of a public pledge to the DNC and the early voting states of IA, NH, NV, and SC, it is no wonder an educated voter seeks the better choice. It's not Clinton's experience we want in office, it's Barack Obama, because he has good judgment and because he has integrity. For all the noise from the Clinton campaign, we have seen no evidence, across all the years, that Clinton has either integrity or judgment. We need those qualities in a President. Vote Senator Barack Obama.

[RitaTorres]

The media have undoubtedly shown some sexist bias againt Hilary Clinton. But there has been a lot racial bias against Obama that is being easily subsumed.

The reasons cited by the pro-Clinton White feminists referred to in this article shows just how a combination of misrepresentation, insensitivity, and ignorance is deployed to perpetuate the marginalization of Blacks and other minority groups.

A lot of double standards are being brought into this matter. Since when has the presidency been about the "most qualified"?

Let us hear the definition of relative qualification for president and how Hilary Clinton should be voted because of this. My guess is that advocates of this view would have a hard time proving that Hilary is more qualified than Joe Biden, Chirs Dodd, and a host of others.

Besides, the whole experience or qualification argument will expire if and as soon as Hilary becomes nominee, up against McCain. What argument would the pro-Hilary White feminists come up with? That Hilary is more qualified to be president than McCain, based on experience, or abandon the experience argument? The truth is that it is American people who choose by voting who is more qualified. That is how JFK beat Nixon; that is how Reagan beat Carter; that is how Bill Clinton of Arkansas beat perhaps the best 'resumed" presidential candidate ever, i.e. George H. Bush.

Yet, people feel free to bring in the myth of qualification in favor of Hilary Clinton. The truth is that a lot of this qualification advocacy is tied to race and gender. That is why the proponents can argue that Hilary is more qualified than Obama
and did not advocate for Biden or Dodd being more qualified than Hilary. And, in truth, Obama's qualifications are being question largely because he is Black. How many people question John Edward's qualification to be president when he staged his first run in 2004? Was he more qualified than Obama is? Of course, not even close.

The pro-Clinton feminists cited in the article sound as if they are advocating for all women, whereas they are merely advocating for White women.

The subtext of the baseless assertion that Black men have been more privileged than White women is that this nomination is a competition between White women and Black men.

The idea that White women have "a tougher time" in "public and private spheres alike" than Black men is flat out false. It may be true for Asian, Latino, Native, and Black women, but anyone seeking to apply the assertion to White women must be delusional or are out to misrepresent the reality.

African American men got the right to vote before women, but has that translated to greater access to public office?

The answer, of course, is a resounding "No". Whereas the very diligent will be able to compile the list of all White women who have held state-wide offices across the nation, in the entire history of the U.S., there has been only four Black Senators (only three of them men) and only two governors.

It is only this kind of mental block in noticing minority oppression that makes it possible for so many people to believe that the media have treated Obama better than Clinton. By the way, I was flipping through the networks today (Sunday, March 2nd), and there is nothing of the sort. I would go to CNN and I would see Hilary, I switch to Fox it is either questioning why people cannot call Obama Hussein or his bona fides; I return to CNN, it is Chelsea Clinton on the stump and when a commercial comes and I flip back to Fox they would be talking about Obama's connection with Rezko; back to CNN and it is Bill Clinton, etc. Now, that looks like a pro-Obama press.

And when you think of it, if Obama has been the one that withholds his tax returns, wouldn't be all over the news and could he have survived it? Can he survive withholding eight years worth of documents as the spouse of a president, when that experience is supposed to form the main thrust of his claim to being more experienced? Can he survive declaring that electing a Black man would be "a sea change" as Hilary argued for women? Can he survive building his campaign around explicit appeal to ethnic, racial, and gender identities as Hilary has done?

The fact is that Hilary is by far the net beneficiary of media favor, but the fact that Obama cannot even get away by challenging this myth speaks volumes about the system. What the argument that Hilary is more qualified but being passed over--that sense of entitlement--demonstrates is the privilege White people have, which is not available to Blacks.

Yet, the system is inherently generous and even altruiststic. That is why people of all races are voting overwhelmingly for a Black guy whose name is Barack Hussien Obama.

[Gregory Lee]

'Tis the most blatantly falsehood of life you So Called Americans live in America. -- All of you who are actively contesting for the ownership of this land of the GREAT are IMMIGRANTS !

Look in the mirror and say aloud " You Are Immigrant !". - That's who you are. - Hey you've been here for few hundred years at most and that doesn't king make my friends ! -- Of course except for those poor natives kicked sideways ever since .

Can you believe this most callous and bizarre behaviour ? -- All of them are immigrants and yet they show never ending love affairs at catfight prejudice at each other calling the other of lesser of immigrant . - A prime example of human malenolence. I guess some pigs are more equal than others huh ? Specially in this land of the braves. -- I'd expect that in far east of europe.. -- You know where...they just had an election. - A jigged one to boot I hear...

AS for women leaders of the hystory has it that , in few rare instances , as llong as Queen is able to surround herself with right crowd for support the country will fare well. -- It will work so long as She exercises the negotiations from female point of view and let the battles be drawn by the qualified guards men. --That same presumption works for a king in a lot of instances however that's a different story.
But indeed it has been extremely rocky hill for females to be in charge so that is not new.

What's new is that the media keeps banging it in . -- Headlines a new daily. Repeat of yeterday's today. -- Name callings abound . -- For some odd reason I find it so confounding. -- It has to double clarify such differentiating head lines by saying that " WOMAN president to be" or that of " BLACK president to be" day after day, day after day, day after day.... Get the idea ?. They would've never pulled that stunt if it were for all white contenders as in yesteryears. Tsk Tsk !

Is media is run by back room moguls in heavy white gowns with clear intolerance for different color and gender ? Are they really very much racially motivated and dying to shows its dirty fangs every time they breath out? -- I certainly hope not. -- It gets very boring to watch non stop opera of old " Who's Coming For Dinner " again and again and again......

These same Media moguls are apparently tickled to death commemorating their lack of language skill or simply forgetten how to be civil themselves. --Don't they not realize they are the prime example of society they represent..-. They are denigrating their own proud land. -- Goodness gracious !.... - Keep on slandering raical issue every time they have to mention the merits of each of contenders .-- I'm getting sick of it . -- I am an eager beaver news consumer through this time around for the fact that I am so very much interested in how this US elections gonna make out. -- Hoping to see the glimpes of some sort of inteligence and humble force combined to reinvigorate America as land of fairness and prosperity after spin doctor's disastrous last 8 years on top of previous totally inadequate reign of senior of same family . -- Get out of your fish bowl America and look around !! This kind of daily race callings doesn't happen in other nations founded by immigrants like yours. -- Get rid of that chip off your shoulder.
-- But I believe word humble is not to be included in American dictionary again as ever. -- So go figure !

[JT]

Quite frankly, at least in my opinion, being of a colored race has always been more of a disadvantage then being of the female gender, especially in politics. However, people should not be complaining about the bias for either one in this election. Although right now the media may be critical of Hilary, when things were just getting started Obama was plastered with smear after smear such as hes being a secret Muslim who wants to destroy America, or how he didn't have a chance because of his race, etc, which continue to grow even now. And even though some people are being more critical of Hilary now, I believe the reason is more because of her ideas and tactics (which I might add many people including myself have disagreed with since her days as the first lady), rather then her gender. And another thing people who say that everyone is dividing along the gender lines, like is so popular these days, should remember that many black men AND women vote for Obama the same way many white women AND men vote for Hilary.

[MLE]

Many of you Obama opponents have proven how vastly closet racism, covert racism, and passive-aggressive racism exist. Expressing feelings in nuance, non-specific, or proxy language doesn't make your racism any more palatable. It's a transparent semantic game that people foolishly believe provides them a defense.

When 75% of blacks supported Clinton early on, everything was OK. When they start supporting Obama suddenly they are naive racists. Blacks routinely vote 90% Democrat; do you want these so-called "racists" supporting Democrats? Shouldn't you reject and denounce them?

It is racist to suggest a black person voting for another black is automatically a racist gesture. If you're upset that over 80% of blacks are voting for Obama (much like over 80% of Latinos voted for Villaraigosa), then I suggest you blame the Clinton campaign and/or the Republican Party. Blacks are not desperate sheep. They have a right to vote for a candidate who they feel will best represent and address issues that concern them, and not patronize, dismiss, disparage, and/or neglect them. Excuse them if they don't just shut up and vote like you want them to.

Meanwhile, over two-thirds of women vote for Hillary and you see nothing sexist/racist about it. I've seen women repeatedly on cable news talking about how it's time for a female president and they're not called sexist for it. A vast majority of Latinos consistently vote for Hillary, yet you don’t call them called anti-black or racist. That's despite even Clinton's campaign and some of her Latino supporters saying publicly that Latinos won't vote for a black candidate.

Playing victim, you are so quick to call every straight white man and black person who votes for Obama as sexist or racist, yet hypocritically turn a blind eye to similar voting patterns that would suggest sexism and racism amongst yourselves in Hillaryland or Redville.

At least Obama seeks to move beyond divisiveness and bring everyone together for common cause – solving this nation’s problems. To Hillary that’s a child-like dream so she just exploits race and gender for her own political pursuits, consequences be damned. Very Republican-like, and they don’t even care.

Have you ever heard of Obama complaining about racism? No. He knew what he would be up against and he came prepared and ready to campaign strategically and persistently. Hillary – with all her entitlement issues – starts whining and blaming when things don’t go her way. Obama faces as much or more of a disadvantage being black than Hillary being a woman. Many people will not vote for him because he is black. Most would never admit to, they'll just find other reasons – no matter how silly or unfounded – to discredit him. And when confronted or challenged on their bias, as always it’s deny, deny, deny or an attempt to flip the script with the "reverse racism card."

And if you wonder how people can be supporters of a relative newcomer like Obama: he’s written two books in English that are available online and in bookstores; he has a website www.barackobama.com which outlines his stances on issues and his plans for this country; he’s made numerous speeches nationwide that are available for viewing online if you weren’t able to see him in person; he’s participated in nationally televised debates; many journalists and bloggers have written about him.

Many Clinton supporters use the excuse that they don’t know Obama, so that’s why they don’t support him. Maybe that made sense 50, even 30, years ago before television, cable, internet (that thing you’re on right now). Any responsible voter has an easy opportunity to learn about the candidate if they are willing to learn. Any responsible voter would get to know who they are and are not voting for to ensure the best candidate wins, rather than using ignorance as an excuse to keep recycling the same politicians, or to avoid voting for someone you’d never vote for anyway.

[getPulledOverLately?]

Anyone who thinks that there is more bias against women than black men should try getting pulled over for speeding some time. Should try going to any court, civil or criminal, in this country on any issue. Then you'll see how much harder white women have it than black men. This whole debate is completely laughable.

That's all besides the point though, and that is clear from how Obama, Hillary, and McCain are running. We are afraid to even bring up racism in this country, but sexism can work out to be a plus. No one talks about Obama being black because for all of the candidates it would be a terrible idea. McCain and Hillary would look racist (as the Clintons are finding out, even code words are dangerous in this race), and Obama would morph from being a politician into being a black politician, which would turn him into what the Clintons called him: Jesse Jackson.

On the other hand, while Obama and McCain wouldn't dare bring up Hillary's sex, other than to praise it, she has the advantage that America is not as afraid of this issue. Why? Every person in the country deals on a daily basis with women and with sexism (being a victim of it, being accused of it, practicing it, or trying hard not to even appear to be practicing it). It is just not the same with race where white people do not have to think about it most of the time, and black people can never ever escape it. That dynamic puts the two candidates in different boats, and yes, gives an advantage to Hillary.

Objectively looking at them, Hillary has been negative, is fear mongering, and her claim of experience is dubious. Either her administration will be the Clinton administration part two, or her eight years in the White House don't count as experience. Either Bill's administration will be back, or we will have someone just as untested as Obama. It can't be both.

Obama seems to offer the first bit of hope-based politics in decades. He seems committed to not being negative, though he seems ready to answer any charges about himself. He is a bit of an unknown, and that can't be denied: he hasn't been in national politics for very long. But this is exactly what he is running as: a change candidate. He wants to change things, and when things change, there are unknowns. I don't know what his administration, if it comes, will look like, and I have much better idea of what the Clinton or McCain ones would look like. But I do know he's genuinely in favor of the rule of law, habeus corpus, civil rights, ethics in politics, a foreign policy committed to diplomacy and war only as a last resort. I also have a feeling that a candidate who actually has been in the room with drugs and admits it may have a much better drug policy then the Clintons ever did, and since our drug policy is currently destroying Afghanistan (not to mention Colombia and a host of other places, like Baltimore), I'd like to see some change on that but I can't really tell since he gives boilerplate political answers on these and other questions. He is a bit of a mystery, but since I happen to know that on every single one of these issues both McCain and Clinton has voted in absolutely the wrong way almost every time, I'll take this slight unknown every day of the week, compared to knowing that Clinton and McCain will be wrong about these things.

So there's why I've voted for Obama, and why I hope to vote for him in the general election. I'll take an unknown over the devil I know. It has not one bit to do with sex or race. Most of the people I've spoken to that are going for Clinton are doing it because they liked the Clinton administration and want it back, and not because she's a woman. Those voting for McCain are not doing it because they want to see the 44th white guy in a row, but because they honestly belive that McCain is most prepared to defend this country.

[Nimrod Loteng]

To say the media is bias againist Hillay is to forget history so fast,remember guys at the beginning of this presidental campaign,the democrats had Hillary,Obama and John Edwards but Hillary never wanted even debate moderators to ask Obama a question ,he even complained about it,so actually it's Hillary who called all that attention towards herself but am suprised some people forgot about that.

[Richard]

Hillary was the media darling until her special interest support surfaced and she resorted to dirty politics. Her gender has little to do with the lack of respect people feel for her just as Obama's color hasn't affected admiration for him.

[Kim]

ANYONE who thinks Hillary Clinton is not winning because people are SEXIST is WRONG!

Senator Clinton is NOT the right person right now! She is DIVISIVE! You want to bring out the MASSES of REPUBLICANS in November, then have Hillary as your nominee. I was SO ASHAMED of California for choosing CLINTON over OBAMA!

But THAT was REALLY due to EARLY VOTING because I spoke to SO MANY PEOPLE who WISHED they had WAITED, because AFTER THEY KNEW THE FACTS, they would have voted for OBAMA!

OBAMA is NOT RUNNING as a BLACK CANDIDATE! HE has the VISION and INSPIRATION to BRING THIS COUNTRY TOGETHER, while CLINTON will only TEAR THIS COUNTRY APART!

HE has the JUDGMENT, while Clinton only does what she thinks will get her ahead, rather what is GOOD FOR AMERICA!

Besides, she and Bill have become WAY TOO CHUMMY with the Bush family and are SELL OUTS!

This is the LAST STRAW for Feinstein! She votes against OUR FREEDOMS and calls herself a "democrat" NOT!

I hope and pray that there is a strong qualified DEMOCRATIC candidate who will run and TAKE Diane Feinstein's seat in the Senate! SHE may as well be a REPUBLICAN! She's OLD and LOST HER WAY! Or, she's been bought out by the lobbyists!

NO to CLINTON and NO to FEINSTEIN!

OBAMA 2008!

(And NO I'm NOT African American - I'm JEWISH!)

[Bob Anders]

Clinton is losing because she managed a very poor campaign. and instead of looking internally to figure out what's wrong or not working, she decided to blame the media. as long as she does that, she'll never overcome the hurdles.

remember, this is the same media that had crowned her the Democratic nominee before the primaries even started. why would a media biased against her do that?

hubris is the reason why she's losing. she believed her own PR about being the destined winner and didn't even bother with organizing her campaign past the first Super Tuesday.

also, if the argument that experience is why she should win, then there's someone else who's running who should be President. John McCain. he's been in office since 1982....and he was even a war hero. what has she done? she was in the White House because her husband won; not her. And her attempt at a nationwide health plan ended in a fiasco.

so far, she has managed to do what John Kerry did. Lose a race that was her's to win. She's choking big time.

[Robert]

Because Senator Barack Obama is biracial meaning that he is 50% white and 50% black, referring to him as a “black” presidential candidate or as potentially the first “black” American president is incorrect. Since his father was a black African from Kenya and his mother a white American from Kansas it would seem that African-American would be the most appropriate characterization of Barack Obama’s ethnicity. Because he looks more like his father than his mother does not change the fact that he is biracial. The issue is easily disposed of by simply referring to his ethnicity as African-American rather than “black.”

[Betty Martin]

Well how about now that Obama may be a liar? He has been knocking NAFTA for weeks. Now a memo surfaces saying he's had a secret meeting with Canadian officials to ignore his campaign speeches on NAFTA, it's just talk to win votes! Hasn't the bubble burst yet on Obama? He's dangerous with his radical views and now may have been exposed as a liar. How is this not dirty politics on his part?

[James Miller]

Hillary voiced her opposition to President Bush's pardoning of Mr. Libby, she failed to voice her opposition to her husband as he handed out 140 Presidential Pardons on their last days in the White House. Is this the first-hand experience she garnered while she was in the White House?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton_pardons_controversy

This list of Pardons include individuals charged with cocaine possession, cocaine distribution, bank fraud, medicaid fraud, tax evasion, wire fraud, tax evasion, securities fraud, armed robbery, etc etc..

http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pardonchartlst.htm

According to Wikipedia, "In March 2000, Bill Clinton pardoned Edgar and Vonna Jo Gregory, owners of the carnival company United Shows International, for charges of bank fraud from a 1982 conviction (the couple were already out of jail, but the prior conviction prevented them from doing business transactions in certain states). First Lady Hillary Clinton's youngest brother, Tony Rodham, was an acquaintance of the Gregorys, and had lobbied Clinton on their behalf.[11] In October 2006, the group Judicial Watch filed a request with the U.S. Justice Department for an investigation, alleging that Rodham had received $107,000 from the Gregorys for the pardons, in the form of loans that were never repaid, as part of a quid pro quo scheme.[12]"

How can we forget the substantial donations to the Clinton Library and Hillary's senate Campaign by fugitive Mark Rich, who was pardoned by the Clintons.

Susan McDougal was pardoned for her role in the Whitewater scandal.

Roger Clinton, Bill's half-brother was pardoned on drug charges.

The clemency of the FALN extremists. A political motivation to assist his wife's senate bid?

http://license.icopyright.net/user/viewFreeUse.act?fuid=ODA1MDMx

Does the Pardon process work or is it shamefully abused? What are Obama's thoughts on this topic?

[robinia]

Honey, if Hillary were a true woman, she would have divorced Bill and forged her own separate political reputation...However, if she were truly a woman, Bill would not have had to go other women for sexual satisfaction, if you know what I mean, honey! Hill was one of those young women in college who fell into the "she has a good personality and smart -category" when in blind dates.

[lina]

Do people see that Hillary is as evil as she is UGLY.

[j. forcier]

As I read the comments posted here, I wonder why these people are so sexist, bigoted, angry, and hypocritical. I like to think that the voting public will go to their perspective polls and vote for the candidate who, in their best educated opinion, will, if elected, provide America with solutions to the festering issues of our times. Please, vote with your mind, not your well trained rhetorical crap eating blog reader.

[dave]

clinton herself: 'i know we've never hired a woman for this job before...'
is she actually talking about hiring herself for some job?
is she for sale, or is there a job vacancy for sale in corporate fascist america?
is she counting on making the race to the safe haven of the white house before the alleged numerous skeletons in her closet explode in her face in a cloud of white dust?

[Ed]

Tuning in to C-Span recently, found Senator Barrack Hussein Obama, Jr. standing in the pulpit of a black
church in Selma , Alabama , and a dozen or so black ministers standing behind the senator, like the little head-bobbing dolls that people used to place in the
rear windows of their 1957 Chevrolets. If their reactions are any indication, the new "Schlickmeister" of the Democrat Party is actually a pretty accomplished public speaker.
However, as he spoke, I found my B.S. Alarm going off, Here's part of what he said: "...something happened back here in Selma, Alabama. Something happened
in Birmingham that sent out what Bobby Kennedy called, "ripples of hope all around the world." Something happened when a bunch of women decided they were
going to walk instead of ride the bus after a long day of doing somebody else's laundry, looking after somebody else's children.
"When (black) men who had PhD's decided 'that's enough' and 'we're going to stand up for our dignity,' that sent a shout across oceans so that my grandfather began to imagine something different for his son. His son, who grew up herding goats in a small village in Africa could suddenly set his sights a little higher and believe that maybe a black man in this world had a chance.
"So the Kennedy's decided we're going to do an airlift. We're going to go to Africa and start bringing young Africans over to this country and give them scholarships to study so they can learn what a wonderful country America is.
"This young man named Barack Obama got one of those tickets and came over to this country. He met this woman whose great great-great-great- grandfather had owned slaves; but she had a good idea there was some
craziness going on because they looked at each other and they decided that we know that, (in) the world as it has been, it might not be possible for us to get together and have a child. There was something stirring across the country because of what happened in Selma, Alabama , because some folks are willing to march across a bridge. So they got together and Barack Obama Jr. Was born. So don't tell me I don't have a claim on Selma , Alabama . Don't tell me I'm not coming home to Selma , Alabama ."
Okay, so what's wrong with that? It all sounds good. But is it?
Obama told his audience that, because some folks had the courage to "march across a bridge" in Selma , Alabama , his mother, a white woman from Kansas , and his father, a black Muslim from Africa, took heart. It gave
them the courage to get married and have a child. The problem with that characterization is that Barrack Obama, Jr., was born on August 4, 1961, while the first of three marches across that bridge in Selma didn't occur until March 7, 1965, at least five years after Obama's parents met.
Obama went on to tell his audience that the Kennedys, Jack and Bobby, decided to do an airlift. They would bring some young Africans over so that they could be educated and learn all about America . His grandfather heard that call and sent his son, Barrack Obama, Sr., to America .
The problem with that scenario is that, having been born in August 1961, the future senator was not conceived until sometime in November 1960.
So if this African grandfather heard words that ''sent a shout across oceans,'' inspiring him to send his goat-herder son to America , it was not a Democrat Jack Kennedy he heard, nor his brother Bobby, it was a Republican President, Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Obama's speech is reminiscent of Al Gore's claim of having invented the Internet, Hillary Clinton's claim of having been named after the first man to climb Mt. Everest, even though she was born five years and seven months before Sir Edmund climbed the mountain, and John Kerry's imaginary trip to Cambodia .
As one of my black friends, Eddie Huff, has said, "We need to ask some very serious questions of the senator from Illinois . It's not enough to be black, it's not enough to be articulate, and it's not enough to be eloquent and a media darling. The only question will be how deaf an ear, or how blind an eye, will people turn in order to turn a frog into a prince."

''Life's tough.....it's even tougher if you're stupid.''
~ John Wayne

[dave]

the race of and to power has its own code of (mis)behavior ruled by untainted, pragmatic brutality that is not only color blind, but also blindfolded like the goddess of justice herself. in this race 'anything goes' as long as deng xiaoping's rule applies: 'i don't care if it's a white cat or a black cat. it's a good cat so long as it catches mice.'
for the 'owner,' of course. so the cat, like the mouse,
is always on the run. and even when they take turns, and seem to be heading in different directions, they're running the same way, just the same. or so it seems.
to the 'owner,' of course.