Clinton Responds to Question on Wright Controversy

In a wide ranging interview today with Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reporters and editors, Hillary Clinton said she “would have left her church if her pastor made the sort of inflammatory remarks Sen. Barack Obama’s former pastor made.”

“He would not have been my pastor,” Clinton said. “You don’t choose your family, but you choose what church you want to attend.”

The Clinton campaign has refrained until now from involvment in the Wright controversy, but Clinton did respond to a question this morning from Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reporters and editors and denounced what she said was “hate speech.”

You know, I spoke out against Don Imus (who was fired from his radio and television shows after making racially insensitive remarks), saying that hate speech was unacceptable in any setting, and I believe that,” Clinton said. “I just think you have to speak out against that. You certainly have to do that, if not explicitly, then implicitly by getting up and moving.”

The Obama camp is up in arms (and progressive bloggers supporting him have gone off the deep end) about Clinton’s response to the question asked by the Pittsburgh Tribune. Here’s my thoughts on the subject. We all know the media loves to dredge up controversy and they did just that in asking Hillary Clinton about the subject today.

Sure, she could have not responded and instead she tastefully, in my opinion, said what many Americans have been thinking on the subject. When you hear hateful words like that spoken, you speak up, you speak out or you walk away. We don’t stop bigotry and hatred by sitting by and watching it happen. I don’t think Obama’s speech on race was enough to quell the subject of Wright’s remarks and anyone who thinks this won’t continue to play out for Obama in the general election with the right wing, is blind.

Taylor Marsh has more.

Bookmark and Share

About Pamela Leavey

Pamela Leavey is the Editor in Chief, Owner/Publisher of The Democratic Daily as well as a freelance writer and photographer. Pamela holds a certificate in Contemporary Communications from UMass Lowell, a Journalism Certificate from UMass Amherst and a B.A. in Creative Writing and Digital Age Communications from UMass Amherst UWW.
Bookmark the permalink.

35 Responses to Clinton Responds to Question on Wright Controversy

  1. Janis says:

    Why that horrible gorgon. How dare she not immediately concede.

  2. Jean says:

    I disagree. If you listen to Sen Obama speech he goes to great lengths to explain the divide in this Country and why people hold on to their anger. I think it was a speech any democrat and any citizen should be proud of. You expect nasty remarks from some right wing fanatics but it is time to lift our Country beyond that divisiness. If we support each other we have a better chance.

  3. Jean

    Obama’s speech was great, but a speech doesn’t heal wounds of hatred in one fell swoop. Likewise from where some of us sit, Obama has indulged in plenty of divisivness of his own.

  4. Kendall Johnson says:


    I hope you are being sarcastic!!! I think it is fair game and the Obama fans need to get off their high horses and stop with the whinning!!!! Wright is a racist, anti-american hate monger and if Obama chooses such a person to advise him, it is open season. It was very poor judgment on Obama’s part, and the american people should know about it!!!! To bring his children to that church to hear that spew of hate is worse than poor judgment, it is down right reckless!!!!!!!

    Grow a back bone! You have no problem defending this guy who continually partakes in sexist campaign tactics, but you run to defend Obama everytime Clinton attampts to defend herself. The Obama camp is full of hypocrits!!! Devisiveness, please!!!! How about the semen stained dress post by an Obama supporter!!!! I suppose we all are supposed to scorn Hillarry over Bill’s infedelity? Isn’t that like the girl who was raped so her village stoned her to death? Give me a break. That post was about humiliating Hillary Clinton’s womanhood once again over what Bill did!!! How fair was that? More and more sexism is coming out of the Obama camp everyday and now they want to call foal play.

    You people are sickening and we won’t let you control the discourse!!!! When the Obama camp stops playing the gender card against Clinton, we can talk about fair play. Meantime, if whites shy away from Obama because he is envolved with a black seperatist, racist and anti-american church, good for Clinton!!!!

  5. Kendall

    Please tone it down a few notches. Read the comment policy.

  6. Kendall Johnson says:


    I thought the speech was a weak attempt to guilt trip white people into voting for him anyway. There was nothing profound about that speech!!! Infact it was insulting on many levels. First , camparing a remark by Gareldine Ferraro that was clearly taken out of context, to the rants of Pastor Wright is rediculious and insulting. Then he throws his white grandmother under the bus in a similar fashion. He shocks our intellegence and our sence of fairness by comparing those reletively innocent acts, to the intentional and orchestrated hate mongering of Wright. Wright peaches, markets and sells anti-american, anti-white hatred and Obama embraces him, and has for 20 years. All I can say is that Obama has big balls to refuce to denounce this guy, and then ask white people to vote for him!!!!

    I can only conclude that underneath the sheeps clothing is the wolf!!!!!!! He’ll never get my vote!!!!

  7. Kendall

    I’ll ask again: Please tone it down a few notches.

    I personally have every intention of voting for the Democratic nominee whether it is Obama or Clinton and I hope that all of our readers will do the same.

  8. Kendall Johnson says:

    I’m sorry Pamala that I feel differently!!!! I don’t intend to vote for Obama as I stated above. I fully intend to continue to fight for Clinton as long as she is in this race!!!! I want her to win and I make no bones about it!!!!

  9. ec kostrubala says:

    Hillary was asked the question. She did not bring it up herself.

    Though I support Hillary’s candidacy, I did not have a problem with Barack Obama. I simply did not know anything of substance about him as a man, and thought he is inexperienced and unprepared to lead our country as President. (Though I knew I would support Obama if he is the Democratic nominee.)

    However, upon hearing a number of Obama’s pastor-of-20-years-sermons, in context, and after watching Obama’s speech addressing those sermons, I now have a problem with Barack Obama. So much of a problem that if he winds up the Democratic nominee, I will not support him. I’ll write in Hillary’s name on the ballot.

    Hillary’s answer is exactly what I have heard many a person say out loud since Obama’s pastor’s sermons came to light. Americans have choices on where to worship. Our clergymen are not old uncles who sometimes embarrass us, but our and our children’s spiritual leaders, mentors, confessors, educators.

    When Americans lay burned to death under the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the fields of Pennsylvania, Obama’s pastor did not offer Christ’s compassion to the bereaved, nor prayers for the souls of the dead. That is what most disturbs me – this pastor and his cheering congregations’ lack of compassion and love for these widows, widowers, orphans and those whose lives were cut so short. Many of whom are members of the body of Christ.

    I would not continue to worship, nor expose young ones, to this kind of thinking from church, because I disagree with it. I’ve left not just a church, but my denomination because of my disagreements with its more and more bizarre changes in its attempt to appeal to the massess. Cradle Episcopalian me attends a Roman Catholic church, quite happily. As an American who knows we have many churches to choose from, who knows one can change to another church when one disagrees with one’s own, I view Obama’s continuing his membership in that church to be an action that speaks louder than any apologetic words.

    And what about the unifying message in the Bible: (Galatians 3:26-28) “all of you who were baptised into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” I go to a large church where the clergyman preaches Christ crucified, buried, resurrected and glorified, where Christ’s love is shown in action through outreach, where men and women of all colors and socioeconomic backgrounds worship as one. I’ve left churches that were not like this, as soon as I discovered they were not either through the sermons or the parishoners. I know a number of Americans who do likewise. Why not Obama? He explains this pastor led him to Christ. Well then, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

    If Hillary Clinton is not nominated by the Democrats, John McCain will win the Presidency.

  10. kcowley says:

    I don’t know if Janis was serious or not, but I have noticed that on a few other blogs there is an effort to ignore the “trolls” and this keeps the dialogue at a more thoughtful level.

    I’m pleased that HIllary was finally able to address the “choice” portion of the speech, as here in my town that is how the typical american feels.

    As for the rest of the speech, I don’t think it was great. The fallacies in comparisons, generalizations and the sense of being lectured irritated me. Tossing in his own grandmother, who in fact raised him, was beyond the pale. It revealed in him a lack of loyalty and respect that I do not admire whatsoever.

    Pamela, I truly admire you and the other writers here who have continually encouraged us to keep the GE in mind. But I’m sorry, I’m with Kendall there. I simply cannot vote for Obama. He, his wife, his campaign and the media have so offended me that I’ll not be a part of his success. I have NEVER since 1976 felt this way, I always vote democrat, but he has certainly touched a nerve. I am also rethinking any future votes for a few my superdelegates here in MA. Although I live on an island, I know that I am not alone on that island.

  11. Andy Witmyer says:

    Where’s the news on Hillary’s Bosnia gaffe? Honestly – for as much as I respect her and thought that she’s done a better job these last few weeks, when will enough be enough? I feel as though that the longer this race continues, the more Kendall Johnson’s we’ll have this November – and a Democratic Party so deeply and disturbingly divided can spell out only one thing: a McCain victory.

  12. Kendall Johnson says:

    Once again you make the biased assumption that Clinton is the one who should leave the race. NO OBAMA should stop being a phoney and count the votes or revote. He is so crooked that he will didenfranchise millions of voters. Don’t you think DEMS. will remember that?

    As for Clinton’s exageration of her Bosnia trip, it is not nearly as bad as Obama’s blatent lies about Wrght or Rexko or disenfranchising millions. It’s Obama who needs to quit. America will never make him president!!!!!!!

  13. Peace Out For Unity says:

    The judgement and choices of Obama? They asked Clinton what she would have done personally and she responded .Good answer!! Now what’s going on with economics and the issues!

  14. Kendall A. Johnson says:

    Peace out for Unity,

    Clinton is the one with the answers for the economy. Her plans to stem foreclosures and green job development are detailed and sound. She has a great program!!!! I have the utmost confidence in her because she says what she will due, unlike Obama!!!!!GO HILLARY!!!!!!!

    But I have to tell you the Wright issue is not over. There will be no double standards in this party. And if there is, it will be that double standard that tears the party apart!!!!!!!

  15. proseandpromise says:

    I’ll buy that Clinton can help the economy when she pulls her campaign out of debt.

    On point though, I don’t have a problem with what the Clinton campaign said about Wright. As an Obama supporter, I respect the way that Clinton handled that situation.

    The Bosnia thing bothers me, not because of the initial speech, but the way she has handled it since. I don’t want to hear excuses. Just say you exagerrated and let’s move on. But when I hear that it was a “misstatement” etc. I get nervous about how we’ll be talked to as a country. Open honest communication is something I strongly desire in our next leader. I think HRC can be that leader, but I want to see her handle this as well as Obama handled Wright.

  16. Andy Witmyer says:

    It worries me that the most radical of loyalists of each side might abstain for voting for the other side’s candidate in November. Kendall, I realize that you like Hillary a great deal – I think she’s great as well – but to harbor such a pathological disgust for Obama is not going to help the party nor nation come November.

    I am happy that the primary season has extended into PA if only for the reason that PA is pretty much officially a blue state. Both Hillary and Obama have pushed voter registrations here through the roof (I’m from PA and have witnessed it – I’ve never seen anything like this before). So, for this I’m thankful, I just hope that by election day, our nominee isn’t going to be damaged goods.

  17. Kendall A. Johnson says:

    Prosand Promise,

    I don’t think that Obama handled the Wright thing at all. I found his speech disengenuous and off point. It was also insulting. Clinton at least admitted that she misstated the facts and that she made a mistake.She even apologyzed!!! Did you miss the news conference? Read my earlier posts about the problems I have with Obama’sspeach and handling of the Wright affaire. My point is that he hasn’t handled it. He has attempted to seize on white guilt and to convince whites that they are not in a positions to question!!!

  18. Janis says:

    Heavens sake, people — read my other comments. Do you really think I was being anything other than sarcastic?

  19. Kendall A. Johnson says:

    Thank you Janis for the clarification!!! I do read your posts as I’m sure you know and I find them very enlightening!!!!

  20. Hillary was asked the question. She did not bring it up herself. Her answer is exactly what I have heard many a voter say since Obama’s pastor-of-20-years sermons came to light.

    When Americans lay burned to death under the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the fields of Pennsylvania, Obama’s pastor did not offer Christ’s compassion to the bereaved, nor prayers for the souls of the departed. Instead, the man whom Obama says led him to Christ, preached just five days later, to a cheering congregation:

    We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America’s chickens are coming home to roost.

    (Rev Wright, Sept 16, 2001).

    Obama’s congregation and pastor’s lack of compassion for those widows, widowers, and orphans, and for those whose lives were cut so short in the Sept 11, 2001 attack – many of whom are members of the body of Christ, is what I find most appalling.

    Yet Obama said during a campaign stop earlier this March in response to questions about his pastor:

    I don’t think my church is actually particularly controversial.

    and that his pastor

    is like an old uncle who says things I don’t always agree with.

    (ABC News)

    American’s clergymen are not old uncles who sometimes embarrass us but our, and our children’s, spiritual leaders, mentors, confessors, educators. Like Hillary Clinton, I too would not continue to worship, nor expose young ones, to this from church. Indeed I’ve left not just a church, but my Episcopal denomination for another one, due to my disagreement with its changing theology and practices. A decision not easily made as I worshipped for over 40 years as an Episcopalian, was baptized, married, and buried my husband in the church. I know other Americans who too have left their much loved churches for other ones, after disagreeing with their clergy and congregants. Obama remains in his self-described “not particularly controversial” church. The same church and pastor that bestowed upon Louis Farrakan, who calls Judaism a “gutter religion,” the Rev. Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr. Lifetime Achievement Trumpeteer Award at the Nov 2, 2007 Trumpet Gala in Chicago.

    Americans have many choices on where to worship. Many churches from which to choose when one disagrees with one’s own. I view Obama’s continuing his membership in that church to be an action that speaks louder than words. I now attend a large church where the clergymen preach Christ crucified, buried, resurrected and glorified, where Christ’s love is shown in action through outreach, where men and women of all colors and socioeconomic backgrounds worship as one.
    Who embrace the unifying message of Christianity: (Galatians 3:26-28) “all of you who were baptised into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

    Why doesn’t Obama? I believe most voters will weigh the importance of Obama’s choice on where to worship based on their own experiences with their choice of places to worship. I know many an American who, as Hillary Clinton explained, vote with their feet and change churches when they disagree with their own.

    I fear that due to this choice he has made, if Obama is nominated instead of Hillary, John McCain will win the Presidency.

  21. Janis says:

    ec, it’s interesting to hear you say that as someone who is atheist. (I used to say “I’m spiritual but agnostic before I realized that was just softpedaling.)

    It’s always seemed to me that I was often more respectful or a given religion’s dictates, or at least took them more seriously, than a lot of people who claimed religion. I do not and cannot see how someone could sit in a place week after week, claim that it and its precepts are of such vast importance to one, and then shrug and blow off the question of whether or not they integrate those attitudes into their daily lives with a, “Well, I just don’t agree with it.”

    So your religion is a central defining part of your life upon which you think the eternal fate of your immortal soul rests, but hey no biggie when you disagree with something so fundamental as whether or not 3,000 people deserved to have been burned and crushed to death, not to mention questioning the humanity of women and gay people? I’m sorry, I just can’t get that to work out in my head. If it’s that important to you — this is rhetorical-you here, I’m not singling YOU-you out — then you either have to take it seriously and really live it, walk away and find something that does reflect your inner beliefs, or else come clean and admit that it’s just a fake show that doesn’t really mean anything to you but you’re participating in it for shallow reasons. To gain cred in your community, to make a nice picture, to curry favor with someone.

    I just cannot fathom how so many people who claim that religion means so much to them — that they are willing to carry out or sanction mass-murder — can turn around and in the next breath, blow it off and act like it’s nothing to get excited about.

    Does it mean something to you or doesn’t it? (Rhetorical-you, again — not you-personally.)

    *sigh* People who participate in religions seem to want it both ways — they want to act like it means the eternal fate of their soul, and then they want to act like it doesn’t matter and everyone sohuldn’t pay it any mind. Obama is just one of many hypocrites, seems to this outsider. Which makes it very interesting and frankly refreshing to read your post wherein you come up and call him to task for it.

  22. Andy

    I’m down and out here today (and actually have been since yesterday — see here, so there hasn’t been much from me in the way of posts.

  23. To everyone who says they can’t and won’t vote for Obama in the General Election I want to remind you all that if Obama wins the nomination, Hillary Clinton WILL work to help get him elected. The most important issue is putting a Democrat in the White House and regardless of whether Obama is your first choice, I know verbatim that Clinton will want her supporters to join her supporting the nominee.

  24. Kendall A. Johnson says:

    Well Pamala I won’t support Obama. And if men in this party F*ck Hillary over like the Judis Richardson, they will never be able to count on my vote. We are the oppressed majority. We also are the largest voting block in the democratic party!!!! How dare them screw Hillary out of the nomination by disenfranchising Florida and Michigan. Women, take notice, we are at the bottem of the totum pole!!! Every man comes before us. Go to the poles and say no, we will not stand for this rape job!!!!!!!

  25. Janis says:

    I udnerstand that, Pamela, but I also keep thinking of how women won the vote after a long, exhausting struggle that went on and on and ON —

    — right up until women realized that they had enough votes in the states that had enfranchised us to throw the election to the other party if we didn’t get it now.

    We got it now.

    Past history has shown that when we pretend we’re part of the system and we have to go along to get along, we get sidetracked for quite literally generations. When we finally said, “Fuck it, you give us what we want or else,” we got what we wanted.

    I don’t expect Hillary Clinton to either believe this OR say it out loud. It’s like when they say they’re pro-choice and then follow it up with “butabortionisaterriblethingandshouldonlybealastresort.” It’s just what they’re expected to say.

    This isn’t just about what she wants; it’s about what WE want. And I want a goddamned woman president.

    And history indicates that this is how we get shit — by playing hardball with our own party.

  26. Hillary may be in this to win but she WILL, I repeat support the nominee. She understands how critical it is to put a Democrat in the White House and Barack Obama is a damn fine Democrat who will deserve our support IF he is indeed the nominee. Don’t let the desire to see a woman in the White House overshadow the importance of not putting another Republican in the White House. On Monday Hillary stressed the importance of party unity once to nominee is chosen:

    Clinton was asked by a voter here Monday about the increasingly contentious race, and whether Democrats can manage to come together in the general election. Clinton re-emphasized that Democrats must unite after the primary battle.

    “I think we will have a unified Democratic party once we have a nominee, we will go into fall election very committed to taking back the White House,” she said. “None of the things I talk about will happen if Sen. McCain is elected.”

    She praised McCain and their work in Senate together, but added, “As he himself has said, he doesn’t know much about the economy.”

    The mostly female audience laughed as she ribbed McCain over his economic credentials, but she was serious as she urged Democrats to put aside their differences to defeat the presumptive GOP nominee.

    “I think that people that who would have voted for either me or Sen. Obama are going to ask themselves, ‘Wait a minute, there are really big differences between the Democrats and the Republicans.’ And let’s have a unified party and elect a Democratic president.”

  27. ec kostrubala says:

    Janis, thank you. What you wrote reminds me of my late husband, a baptized, church-going-three-times-a-week fundamental Baptist who left his church at age 18 because he no longer believed in the existence of a God, and disliked what he considered to be hypocrisy from members of his church. When I met him he was atheist. When I married him he was atheist. He was agnostic at the time of his passing. Many conversations we had through the years forced me to really know, and be able to articulate, what I believe, why I believe it, and examine how my actions show my beliefs.

    You are right – “you either have to take it (one’s religion) seriously and really live it, walk away and find something that does reflect your inner beliefs….”

    I know a number of Americans who do walk away from their church and find something that does reflect their inner beliefs. Many of America’s mainstream denominations have lost members because Americans have so many choices of where to worship that there is no reason to remain with a church where one disagrees with one’s pastor and congregants.

    Obama’s choice to remain with this church for 20 years, with that pastor, speaks volumnes to me about what he holds dear and believes. I now know something about him as a man.

    I prefer Hillary Clinton, hands down. I would never vote for the Republican nominee, as I fundamentally disagree with more of the Bush Republican agenda. Hillary Clinton as the Democratic nominee has a good chance to beat John McCain. Obama as the nominee will lose in the general election, because this issue is not going to go away.

    I believe Americans will will weigh the importance of Obama’s choice based on their own experiences when they were faced with a choice on places to worship. Every voter I’ve spoken with personally has said if their church did as Obama’s church did – bestowing a prestigious award on Jew hating Louis Farrakan; head pastor visiting dictator Ghadafi of Lybia; head pastor failing to show Christ’s compassion to the widows, widowers and orphans of 9/11 just 5 days later, and failing to offer prayers for the departed but instead preaches a sermon that borders on treason – that voter would walk out of that church to worship in one that preaches the love of Christ and embrassess the powerful, all inclusive, unifying message to those in the body of Christ: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

  28. Kendall A. Johnson says:

    Thank you Janis,

    I am tired of working twice as hard for half as much. We need to remind men that they can’t win without us and that we demand a level and fair playing field!!!!! Pamala’s attitude is exactly what they are counting on. We screw them, there just women and there come aeound. NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO!!!!!!!! I won’t!!! I won’t for my daughter, or my sister or my mother!!!!!! NO I WON’T. NO MORE BACK SEAT!!!!! THIS IS OUR TIME IF WE STICK TOGETHER. HILLARY HAS BEEN SENDING THIS MESSAGE FOR A LONG TIME. I don’t think it bagan to sink in until Texas and Ohio. Fuck Bill Richardson that piece of shit Judis!!!!!!!!

  29. Kendall A. Johnson says:

    I will wait for Hillary in 2012 first, even if we have to risk Roe v Wade!!!!!

  30. Eakarach says:

    I am really glad that Hillary finally say something about Rev.Wright comment. I think Barack Obama should be a ashame of himself for attending that church for so long.

  31. Kendall A. Johnson says:


    Excuse the typos and grammer of my last post, I was a little heated on that one. But I am with you!!!! I’ll go to the convention. Your reading of history with regard to women’s franchise is right on point!!!! We can do it again if we stick together!!! I have written to Howard Dean and reminded him that Women are the largest voting block in the democratic party and that we do have the networking skills to fight if they don’t square up on Florida and Michigan!!!! The more vioces the DNC hear from women the more serious they will take us. I am tired of hearing how the Blacks will riot if the superdelegates side with Clinton. If they don’t they will have to contend with women, who once again are the majority, not 13% of the nations population, but are 54%.

    Its time to get tough!!!!

  32. dgavidia3 says:

    I totally agree with what she said and didn’t find it controversial at all. I thought the same thing she did, if you dont agree with what the pastor is saying you leave. I think we can all agree that if it had been her pastor that said these things people would be calling for head.
    I myself have left my church because I do not agree with how they have conducted themselves and have known many people to do the same. Hillary was right when she said that we do not choose our family but we do choose where we worship and with who. I also dont’ agree that he handled the issue very well at all because he denied hearing any of these comments before then when more evidence came out he agreed that he had heard them and didnt agree with them. I strongly think that the only reason he tried to distance himself from it is because we all heard the comments. His speech was good in the sense that he did highlight the racism in this country but did nothing to really stop the chatter and the divisiveness of the comments or how much he knew about them before hand. I really question his judgement on this because he did stay for 20 years.

  33. Janis says:

    Pamela, I almost understand and agree — but I’m sick of it. The agttitude that got us in this mess stems from the same woman-dissing attitude that’s causing this mess — that’s suddenly caused a whole truckload of supposed Democrats to start going, “Well, so what about experience and qualifications? They’re not REALLY important,” the second the more experienced and qualified candidate is a woman.

    That attitude stems from exactly the same place in the recesses of the human mind as the attitude that says, “Hell, just put the problem off until we’re not in trouble anymore,” or “Who caeres about the environment? The planet’s here for us to use up however we want.” You just can’t solve those problems while cosseting the underlying attitude that creates them.

    I’ve said it before — if either McCain OR Obama gets in, it’ll be pretty much the same for women. The McCain crowd consists mostly of a bunch of indolent sexists who can’t be bothered to get out of the recliner to go dump on women any more than they already are. The Obama fans consist of those horrific creatures infesting DKos who are a lot younger, more violent, and more hateful — and who will be gleeful over having crushed the most powerful woman in American politics. Either we live in a country ruled for the former or the latter — and either way, we’re shafted.

    And a nation that shafts its women i>does not have the presence of mind and the heart to solve problems like war or environmental devastation anyhow.

    We need Hillary in the WH. And in the past, we have needed to play very hard hardball to get what we as women need, even within the party that supports us. While the suffragists were trying to be team players, they got sidelined. When they finally made threats to throw an election, that’s when the men in their party stood up and coughed up. After generations of effort. After those long, painful decades, it took the threats of women to get it done.

    I don’t like it either. I’d rather share a nation and a planet with people who were kind and undestanding and aware enough of my humanity (and yours) to simply see the necessity themselves without threats, wheedling, and legal help. But I don’t like on that planet. None of us do. As long as we can be taken advantage of, we will be taken advantage of.

    I’m just tired of it. I just can’t do this “cave in for the good of the team” garbage anymore. I can’t do it. I respect your feelings, and I respect Hillary’s opinions as well. But I just can’t force myself to swallow “someday” anymore. I just can’t.

  34. Janis says:

    Think of it this way — do you expect the Kos-bots to celebrate in November with (and I’m being generous here) things lke “the bitch is dead!” and “goddamned whore got what was coming to her!” then wake up the next day and suddenly start with, “We must find a peaceful and sensitive way to resolve our differences!” and “We must respect Mother Earth!”

    It’s warmongering or warmongering if she doesn’t get in. Traditionally defined party lines don’t matter in this one.

  35. Andy Witmyer says:

    I low how males who aren’t really big fans of Hillary are automatically sexist. I’ve clarified this before – I’m a male and I say that my reasons for not being an all out Hillary fan have everything to do with her last name and nothing to do with her gender. I would be delighted to have a woman president – I would just prefer that the woman be someone other than a Clinton. But, as Pamela has pointed out, I will support either candidate. And, Kendall/Janis, you should consider this as well.