This is what women earn, compared to men.

And it's worse for Black women, Hispanic women and Asian women.

And try living on Social Security or a pension that is paid out based on how much you earn in your lifetime. Or try caring not only for children, but aging and ill parents, as well on earnings that are just 74% of men's wages. And try being over 40 in this country and getting a decent job promotion. And god forbid you should lose a job at that age, because nobody wants to hire women when they hit "middle age."

You snarky, snot-nosed, bratty, spoiled young women -- or at least your comments are such -- have not one clue about living in the "real world" and it shows in this tragic hit piece against Hillary Clinton. You have no idea what Hillary Clinton has done because you continue to buy into the left hemisphere's lines of hatred and the right-wing vitriol against her; and you also use those tactics to judge her.

I happen to know Hillary Clinton; I worked in Washington, D.C. when Bill Clinton was president and experienced, first-hand, what Hillary Clinton did for women, for children and for families. She did more for women of all races and backgrounds in one year than you will probably ever do for women in your lifetimes. That you have no respect for her or for any woman who has gone before and shattered barriers that you don't have to makes me sick.

You are not feminists. You are brainless, spineless, selfish, self-abosrbed, ADHD, woman-hating women who would rather be men; you are so attracted to the chic new Black, Barack Obama, that you will sell out yourselves and other women, planting knives firmly in their backs, to climb aboard his train, which is filled to the brim with some of the most misogynistic "liberal" men I have encountered since the 60s and 70s. It takes no intelligence to do that. It certainly takes no courage. And it absolutely takes no conviction.

I can't wait until you both turn 65, so you will know exactly what it feels like to be unwanted, dismissed, and living in poverty, like bag ladies. Maybe then you'll understand that you had one great chance to support somebody who could make life better for the "least among us" around the world, and who actually has made life better for the "least among us". Maybe then you'll figure out that you blew it because you're too interested in winning a popularity contest.

What do you suppose your daughters and your granddaughters will think of you then?

I don't think that anyone doubts that Hillary has done good works in her lifetime. She is the most prominent woman in the nation, whether she becomes President or not. She will, no doubt, continue to do good work regardless of her office.

I doubt that your chances for political change all go out the window if Hillary doesn't win the nomination. If a Republican is elected again, you'll get the likes of this:

The AMT was designed to force very wealthy people to pay at least some income tax, despite their crafty accountants and lobbyists. Well folks, due to inflation, it now affects people who aren't actually super-wealthy. That leaves only one course of action -- it must be eliminated. It is not humanly possible for Congress to adjust the income level at which it will apply.

The priorities of the Republican Party are not in the best interests of most Americans. Many Americans want to hope that they will someday be wealthy enough for these policies to actually make a difference in their lives. 33% of Americans polled in 2000 believed that they were in the top 1% earning bracket.

Either Hillary or Obama would be a better choice than John McCain. The Democrats should concentrate on that, have the elections, and see who wins. Then back the winner. It's not that complicated...

Is it?

Nope. I want a Democrat in the WH and Democrats in Congress. I will have no problem supporting the Democratic nominee.

My point, as you can probably tell, is that the attitude expressed by the two women who wrote this article is pervasive and filled with such inaccurate and completely misleading information about HRC. I spend a lot of time working to set the record straight, but there seems to be this persistent "denial" or dismissal that goes on about the terrific things HRC has accomplished. This not only troubles me; it deeply saddens me -- especially coming from women who work in media and can and do influence others.

I believe that Barack Obama has done some terrific things and I certainly give him abundant credit for his accomplishments (in other blogs and letters). Sometimes, however, when I see things like this very negative article about HRC, it is just too much to ignore.

I haven't yet read this article. I came in here to comment on John's piece. You sure do seem to have an affinity for numbers.

;-)

I believe the poster's anger and rage at younger women is misplaced. I am "an older" woman too, and I am delighted that I helped pave the way for younger women. Times have changed, women work today, they build their own security, have their own investments and 401K's, and don't rely on their husband's. I was a stay at home wife until my late 30's when my husband died. I went back to work and rebuilt a career. I don't look to a man, or the government, to support me in retirement. Even women who don't work now have tax incentives to invest for their retirement. My point is that the view of a 65 year-old is not the view of a 25 year-old because things have changed, women have been urged to be self-reliant. In 40 years these young women will have the resources to retire.

The angry rantings of this poster supports the public image of older women as being self-absorbed, mindless, fanatics in their support of Hillary simply because she is a woman and has helped improve the plight of women. And frankly, I would hope her daughters and grandaughters have learned from all that went before them and understand a woman's right....and obligation, to be independent and responsible for themselves. After all, that was what the feminist movement was about.

Don't be so hard on older posters. They're afraid that Obama can't be elected because he is black. As soon as the Clintons pointed that little factoid out to electorate, many of them became nervous about taking a chance on him.

It's easy to say that Clinton would be better than McCain, and it seems like a safer bet. Many older Americans haven't realized how much the attitude of the electorate has changed. I was surprised by Obama's success. But then, I'm old.