I am a 65 year old white professional woman (Hillary's demographic) with a history of over 40 years of investment in women's issues. If you do the math, you realize I worked on this before it was trendy. While I would like to see a woman in the White House, I supported Barack Obama because I believe we do need to turn the page and move beyond the current practices in politics and governance in the US. I have never understood the deep aversion people feel for the Clintons. During the primaries, I had an awakening. I was not only surprised but ashamed of the tactics the Clintons used and began to understand the concerns of others. By the end of the primaries, I began to think of both of them as opportunistic and without moral anchoring. Their behavior since reinforces this view for me. Their willingness to sacrifice the well being of the country to their ambitions is deeply unsettling for me. The phrase that haunts me in their responses to the Obama candidacy is "damning with faint praise". Their need to be the centerpiece at the convention demonstrates this further. I know they are popular with many people; I am not one of them at this point.

We need a change in our government, and we need to protect Roe v Wade for our children and grandchildren (I have two females in each category). I am a lifelong independent and have voted on persons as they relate to policy. I have worked hard to be a discerning voter, and have always attended to women's issues in my voting. I have an overdeveloped radar for sexism and do not think that in the main the media was overwhelming sexist; on the contrary, they have and continue to focus on Hillary repeatedly, and this worries me more than their inevitable lapses into mindless sexism. In effect, their persistent fixation on the Clintons puts Obama's election in jeopardy, serves as a distraction, and continues a willingness to give McCain a "buy" on a whole host of disturbing messages. By way of comparison, imagine if all the coverage of McCain included a fixation on someone in the primaries he defeated who was a woman.

When I most anxious about all of this, I picture McCain as president, with his message that in the name of national security he would treat the presidency as a military campaign, that David Petraeus would be the first "wise person" he would turn to for advice, that he would be committed to overturning Roe v Wade, that he would continue to coddle the rich and let the middle class become even more at risk, that he would lie as needed as he has during the campaign, that he would have "right" answers for everything and impose them on us...there is a long list here and this is not exhaustive.

It worries me that women disgruntled about the outcome of the Democratic primaries would actually let this happen and not see that they have created this disturbing state of affairs.

I would like to encourage discernment as an option.

By the end of the primaries, I began to think of both of them as opportunistic and without moral anchoring.

The Clintons have been on the national stage since at least 1988. It took you 20 years to figure this out? Discernment indeed.

It took me until the end of the primaries to figure it out. The attacks on the Clintons were always so over the top and well funded I ignored them. However when they went to the dark side to damage the likely nominee and validate the ugliest republican smears in an election to the future of the nation I was appalled. Not forgivable. Hillary woke something dark that doesn't seem inclined to go back to sleep. Maybe we'll call the next years of US history "After Hillary Woke the Balrog"

She didn't wake anything. You just opened your eyes to it after having them closed for 20 years. Go back and read some newspapers from the Clinton Presidency.

By waking I don't mean herself, I mean the vicious memes that have been taken up by the PUMAs and Republicans. A few months back Republicans were afraid that they couldn't play on racism (or exoticness) due to backlash. Hillary & PUMA have legitimized it.

"A few months back Republicans were afraid that they couldn't play on racism (or exoticness) due to backlash. Hillary & PUMA have legitimized it."

You're giving Hilary and PUMAs way too much credit here. Obama is black and running for Pres. That's all bigots need to invoke racist memes in the media. Blaming Hillary for media treatment of Obama this way is ridiculous. The same ppl would have used it wether Hillary was running or not.

Just as racists won't vote for Obama, no matter who he is running against. Is that HRC's fault, too?

(and no I'm not supporting HRC)

apropos1:

You're giving Hilary and PUMAs way too much credit here. Obama is black and running for Pres. That's all bigots need to invoke racist memes in the media. Blaming Hillary for media treatment of Obama this way is ridiculous. The same ppl would have used it wether Hillary was running or not.

And the same goes for the sexists in the crowd who wouldn't have voted for a woman in a million years.

I think PUMA is a great, humorous summation of the HCR's supporters 'right back at you' attitude. They want to criticise and then blame 'us' for not backing their empty shirt.

I can't imagine a board room of directors, or a war room of generals, listening to a 48 year old with such a thin resume declare his vision of 'change' was why he should be put in charge of the 'huge corporation' or the entire military--(as president you are both, with the economy and the security) currently engaged in war on two fronts with an old deadly enemy also on the move. Joe Biden DID sum him up, he's articulate and clean. Anything else?

wrb:

By waking I don't mean herself, I mean the vicious memes that have been taken up by the PUMAs and Republicans. A few months back Republicans were afraid that they couldn't play on racism (or exoticness) due to backlash. Hillary & PUMA have legitimized it.

I think it's a GOOD thing that Hillary/McCain aren't afraid to "play on racism". Obama would NEVER get elected if the average white voter thought that the next 4-8 years would be walking on eggshells every day to avoid upsetting the ultra-sensitive *President*!

Presidential politics is hardball, and Obama is better off treating this stuff openly rather than trying to look like a victim. Who wants a U.S. President who's a victim?

I can't imagine a board room of directors, or a war room of generals, listening to a 60 year old empty pantsuit with such a thin resume, who hadn't even held a job for years before being given the safest senate seat in the country, who is only there due to her husband & nepotism declare her vision of 'change' was why he should be put in charge of the 'huge corporation' or the entire military--(as president you are both, with the economy and the security) currently engaged in war on two fronts with an old deadly enemy also on the move. However it would be better that a senile ill-tempered elitist misogynist warmonger who graduated at the bottom of his class and claims to not understand economics