<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Clinton Responds to Question on Wright Controversy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/03/25/clinton-responds-to-question-on-wright-controversy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/03/25/clinton-responds-to-question-on-wright-controversy/</link>
	<description>Political News, Progressive Commentary, Liberal Opinions and Common Sense Conversation...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 May 2012 11:50:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy Witmyer</title>
		<link>http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/03/25/clinton-responds-to-question-on-wright-controversy/comment-page-1/#comment-8170</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy Witmyer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:10:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/03/25/clinton-responds-to-question-on-wright-controversy/#comment-8170</guid>
		<description>I low how males who aren&#039;t really big fans of Hillary are automatically sexist.  I&#039;ve clarified this before - I&#039;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.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I low how males who aren&#8217;t really big fans of Hillary are automatically sexist.  I&#8217;ve clarified this before &#8211; I&#8217;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 &#8211; 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.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Janis</title>
		<link>http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/03/25/clinton-responds-to-question-on-wright-controversy/comment-page-1/#comment-8121</link>
		<dc:creator>Janis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2008 22:25:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/03/25/clinton-responds-to-question-on-wright-controversy/#comment-8121</guid>
		<description>Think of it this way -- do you expect the Kos-bots to celebrate in November with (and I&#039;m being generous here) things lke &quot;the bitch is dead!&quot; and &quot;goddamned whore got what was coming to her!&quot; then wake up the next day and suddenly start with, &quot;We must find a peaceful and sensitive way to resolve our differences!&quot; and &quot;We must respect Mother Earth!&quot;

It&#039;s warmongering or warmongering if she doesn&#039;t get in.  Traditionally defined party lines don&#039;t matter in this one.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Think of it this way &#8212; do you expect the Kos-bots to celebrate in November with (and I&#8217;m being generous here) things lke &#8220;the bitch is dead!&#8221; and &#8220;goddamned whore got what was coming to her!&#8221; then wake up the next day and suddenly start with, &#8220;We must find a peaceful and sensitive way to resolve our differences!&#8221; and &#8220;We must respect Mother Earth!&#8221;</p>
<p>It&#8217;s warmongering or warmongering if she doesn&#8217;t get in.  Traditionally defined party lines don&#8217;t matter in this one.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Janis</title>
		<link>http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/03/25/clinton-responds-to-question-on-wright-controversy/comment-page-1/#comment-8120</link>
		<dc:creator>Janis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2008 22:21:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/03/25/clinton-responds-to-question-on-wright-controversy/#comment-8120</guid>
		<description>Pamela, I almost understand and agree -- but I&#039;m sick of it.  The agttitude that got us in this mess stems from the same woman-dissing attitude that&#039;s causing this mess -- that&#039;s suddenly caused a whole truckload of supposed Democrats to start going, &quot;Well, so what about experience and qualifications?  They&#039;re not REALLY important,&quot; 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, &quot;Hell, just put the problem off until we&#039;re not in trouble anymore,&quot; or &quot;Who caeres about the environment?  The planet&#039;s here for us to use up however we want.&quot;  You just can&#039;t solve those problems while cosseting the underlying attitude that creates them.

I&#039;ve said it before -- if either McCain OR Obama gets in, it&#039;ll be pretty much the same for women.  The McCain crowd consists mostly of a bunch of indolent sexists who can&#039;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 &lt;i&gt;horrific&lt;/i&gt; 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&#039;re shafted.

And a nation that shafts its women i&gt;does not have the presence of mind and the heart to solve problems like war or environmental devastation anyhow&lt;/i&gt;.

We need Hillary in the WH.  And in the past, &lt;i&gt;we have needed&lt;/i&gt; 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&#039;s when the men in their party stood up and coughed up.  After &lt;i&gt;generations&lt;/i&gt; of effort.  After those long, painful decades, it took the threats of women to get it done.

I don&#039;t like it either.  I&#039;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&#039;t like on that planet.  None of us do.  As long as we &lt;i&gt;can&lt;/i&gt; be taken advantage of, we &lt;i&gt;will&lt;/i&gt; be taken advantage of.

I&#039;m just tired of it.  I just can&#039;t do this &quot;cave in for the good of the team&quot; garbage anymore.  I can&#039;t do it.  I respect your feelings, and I respect Hillary&#039;s opinions as well.  But I just can&#039;t force myself to swallow &quot;someday&quot; anymore.  I just can&#039;t.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pamela, I almost understand and agree &#8212; but I&#8217;m sick of it.  The agttitude that got us in this mess stems from the same woman-dissing attitude that&#8217;s causing this mess &#8212; that&#8217;s suddenly caused a whole truckload of supposed Democrats to start going, &#8220;Well, so what about experience and qualifications?  They&#8217;re not REALLY important,&#8221; the second the more experienced and qualified candidate is a woman.</p>
<p>That attitude stems from exactly the same place in the recesses of the human mind as the attitude that says, &#8220;Hell, just put the problem off until we&#8217;re not in trouble anymore,&#8221; or &#8220;Who caeres about the environment?  The planet&#8217;s here for us to use up however we want.&#8221;  You just can&#8217;t solve those problems while cosseting the underlying attitude that creates them.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve said it before &#8212; if either McCain OR Obama gets in, it&#8217;ll be pretty much the same for women.  The McCain crowd consists mostly of a bunch of indolent sexists who can&#8217;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 <i>horrific</i> creatures infesting DKos who are a lot younger, more violent, and more hateful &#8212; 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 &#8212; and either way, we&#8217;re shafted.</p>
<p>And a nation that shafts its women i&gt;does not have the presence of mind and the heart to solve problems like war or environmental devastation anyhow.</p>
<p>We need Hillary in the WH.  And in the past, <i>we have needed</i> 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&#8217;s when the men in their party stood up and coughed up.  After <i>generations</i> of effort.  After those long, painful decades, it took the threats of women to get it done.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t like it either.  I&#8217;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&#8217;t like on that planet.  None of us do.  As long as we <i>can</i> be taken advantage of, we <i>will</i> be taken advantage of.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m just tired of it.  I just can&#8217;t do this &#8220;cave in for the good of the team&#8221; garbage anymore.  I can&#8217;t do it.  I respect your feelings, and I respect Hillary&#8217;s opinions as well.  But I just can&#8217;t force myself to swallow &#8220;someday&#8221; anymore.  I just can&#8217;t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dgavidia3</title>
		<link>http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/03/25/clinton-responds-to-question-on-wright-controversy/comment-page-1/#comment-8115</link>
		<dc:creator>dgavidia3</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2008 20:04:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/03/25/clinton-responds-to-question-on-wright-controversy/#comment-8115</guid>
		<description>I totally agree with what she said and didn&#039;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&#039; 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.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I totally agree with what she said and didn&#8217;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.<br />
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&#8217; 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.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kendall A. Johnson</title>
		<link>http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/03/25/clinton-responds-to-question-on-wright-controversy/comment-page-1/#comment-8064</link>
		<dc:creator>Kendall A. Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 22:47:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/03/25/clinton-responds-to-question-on-wright-controversy/#comment-8064</guid>
		<description>Janis, 

Excuse the typos and grammer of my last post, I was a little heated on that one. But I am with you!!!! I&#039;ll go to the convention. Your reading of history with regard to women&#039;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&#039;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&#039;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!!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Janis, </p>
<p>Excuse the typos and grammer of my last post, I was a little heated on that one. But I am with you!!!! I&#8217;ll go to the convention. Your reading of history with regard to women&#8217;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&#8217;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&#8217;t they will have to contend with women, who once again are the majority, not 13% of the nations population, but are 54%.</p>
<p>Its time to get tough!!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eakarach</title>
		<link>http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/03/25/clinton-responds-to-question-on-wright-controversy/comment-page-1/#comment-8058</link>
		<dc:creator>Eakarach</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 21:17:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/03/25/clinton-responds-to-question-on-wright-controversy/#comment-8058</guid>
		<description>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.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kendall A. Johnson</title>
		<link>http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/03/25/clinton-responds-to-question-on-wright-controversy/comment-page-1/#comment-8057</link>
		<dc:creator>Kendall A. Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 21:01:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/03/25/clinton-responds-to-question-on-wright-controversy/#comment-8057</guid>
		<description>I will wait for Hillary in 2012 first, even if we have to risk Roe v Wade!!!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I will wait for Hillary in 2012 first, even if we have to risk Roe v Wade!!!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kendall A. Johnson</title>
		<link>http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/03/25/clinton-responds-to-question-on-wright-controversy/comment-page-1/#comment-8056</link>
		<dc:creator>Kendall A. Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 20:58:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/03/25/clinton-responds-to-question-on-wright-controversy/#comment-8056</guid>
		<description>Thank you Janis, 

I am tired of working twice as hard for half as much. We need to remind men that they can&#039;t win without us and that we demand a level and fair playing field!!!!! Pamala&#039;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&#039;t!!! I won&#039;t for my daughter, or my sister or my mother!!!!!! NO I WON&#039;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&#039;t think it bagan to sink in until Texas and Ohio. Fuck Bill Richardson that piece of shit Judis!!!!!!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you Janis, </p>
<p>I am tired of working twice as hard for half as much. We need to remind men that they can&#8217;t win without us and that we demand a level and fair playing field!!!!! Pamala&#8217;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&#8217;t!!! I won&#8217;t for my daughter, or my sister or my mother!!!!!! NO I WON&#8217;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&#8217;t think it bagan to sink in until Texas and Ohio. Fuck Bill Richardson that piece of shit Judis!!!!!!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ec kostrubala</title>
		<link>http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/03/25/clinton-responds-to-question-on-wright-controversy/comment-page-1/#comment-8055</link>
		<dc:creator>ec kostrubala</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 20:50:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/03/25/clinton-responds-to-question-on-wright-controversy/#comment-8055</guid>
		<description>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 - &quot;you either have to take it (one&#039;s religion) seriously and really live it, walk away and find something that does reflect your inner beliefs....&quot;  

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&#039;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&#039;s pastor and congregants.

Obama&#039;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&#039;ve spoken with personally has said if their church did as Obama&#039;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&#039;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:  &quot;There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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.</p>
<p>You are right &#8211; &#8220;you either have to take it (one&#8217;s religion) seriously and really live it, walk away and find something that does reflect your inner beliefs&#8230;.&#8221;  </p>
<p>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&#8217;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&#8217;s pastor and congregants.</p>
<p>Obama&#8217;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.   </p>
<p>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.  </p>
<p>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&#8217;ve spoken with personally has said if their church did as Obama&#8217;s church did &#8211; bestowing a prestigious award on Jew hating Louis Farrakan; head pastor visiting dictator Ghadafi of Lybia; head pastor failing to show Christ&#8217;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 &#8211; 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:  &#8220;There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pamela Leavey</title>
		<link>http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/03/25/clinton-responds-to-question-on-wright-controversy/comment-page-1/#comment-8054</link>
		<dc:creator>Pamela Leavey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 20:14:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thedemocraticdaily.com/2008/03/25/clinton-responds-to-question-on-wright-controversy/#comment-8054</guid>
		<description>Hillary may be in this to win but she &lt;strong&gt;WILL&lt;/strong&gt;, 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 &lt;strong&gt;IF&lt;/strong&gt; he is indeed the nominee. Don&#039;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:

&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/24/clinton-stresses-party-unity-in-pennsylvania/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Clinton was asked&lt;/a&gt; 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.

&quot;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,&quot; she said. &quot;None of the things I talk about will happen if Sen. McCain is elected.&quot;

She praised McCain and their work in Senate together, but added, &quot;As he himself has said, he doesn’t know much about the economy.&quot;

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.

&quot;I think that people that who would have voted for either me or Sen. Obama are going to ask themselves, &#039;Wait a minute, there are really big differences between the Democrats and the Republicans.&#039; And let’s have a unified party and elect a Democratic president.&quot;&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hillary may be in this to win but she <strong>WILL</strong>, 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 <strong>IF</strong> he is indeed the nominee. Don&#8217;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:</p>
<blockquote><p><a href="http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/24/clinton-stresses-party-unity-in-pennsylvania/" rel="nofollow">Clinton was asked</a> 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.</p>
<p>&#8220;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,&#8221; she said. &#8220;None of the things I talk about will happen if Sen. McCain is elected.&#8221;</p>
<p>She praised McCain and their work in Senate together, but added, &#8220;As he himself has said, he doesn’t know much about the economy.&#8221;</p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>&#8220;I think that people that who would have voted for either me or Sen. Obama are going to ask themselves, &#8216;Wait a minute, there are really big differences between the Democrats and the Republicans.&#8217; And let’s have a unified party and elect a Democratic president.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

