Kristin Breitweiser "This One's For the Girls"

If its good enough for Yahoo! and Huffington Post, and for a hero of Dems for 9-11, its good enough for DU.








http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20080229/cm_huffpost/089254

thanks

Why do DU mods dislike Kristin Breitweiser?

one-went on for while--dissing but not think it was locked--may have been. i will check. ok

just checked--you are right. i did not know.


vile comments on there that it was sexist. for gawds sake. What has DU become!

everything from utter disgust to shear hate.

will check around---well maybe not. as i have seen far enough hate.

Send her to a forward Marine Recon unit for a month in Iraq where she can walk point. Then we can discuss this.

She whined because she always gets the first question. WTF's she going to do when McCain starts going after her. Sheesh!

Tougher? Give me a break.

then tell us what you think.

Here's a partial list of names of those involved - Jackson Stephens, Dubai and Saudi royals, Bin Ladens, Marc Rich, AQ Khan, Adnan Khashoggi, James Bath......just to name a few.

Then ask WHAT HAPPENED to that report and all its many outstanding matters throughout the 90s.

There was a REASON BushInc and some powerful Dems agreed the 9-11 commission would only be allowed to track back to 1998.

So glad you're around to remind people of former prez Clinton's complicity in that.

And our party needs to deal with being the party of Open Government. Or perish.

Clinton had NOTHING to do with BCCI. The only criticism that can be lodged against him concerning it is the one Bob Parry has. Parry will never forgive Clinton for not opening investigations into BCCI and Iran-Contra, which would have led to multiple convictions of some of the same villains we are still struggling against today. I mostly agree with Parry that Clinton was stupid and wrong not to do prosecute these wingnuts.

But if you will remember, Clinton was trying to "reach across the aisle to Republicans" in those days. He wanted to bring a new era of Hope and Change to Washington and he knew that the GOP would never cooperate if he opened those investigations. So instead, Clinton did what Obama is today promising to do -- reach across the aisle, find common ground, work together for the future, etc., etc., ad infinitum.

Like Obama is now suggesting, Clinton even appointed Republicans to his cabinet in an attempt to heal and unify our nation. He might as well have been chanting, "YES WE CAN!"

Clinton's problem then -- which is the same problem Obama unknowingly faces today -- is that Republicans are scorpions whose natures never change. You can reach out to them if you want, but that just makes it easier for them to reach you in order to sting you.

I've learned my lesson about conservative Republicans -- there is no dealing with them. They must be crushed, defeated, removed from any power forcibly, or they will delay, oppose, obfuscate, lie, deceive, cheat, demagogue and slander till the cows come home.

Obama will learn that one day -- the hard way.

came and BCCI was beginning to be unraveled.

Dec 1992 the final report was released to the outgoing and incoming administrations.

Just read the 20 questions left unanswered, and it is apparent that had they been a priority for ANY administration, a 9-11 event would never have happened, and NO BUSH would ever be even allowed near the White House.


Matters For Further Investigation

There have been a number of matters which the Subcommittee has received some information on, but has not been able to investigate adequately, due such factors as lack of resources, lack of time, documents being withheld by foreign governments, and limited evidentiary sources or witnesses. Some of the main areas which deserve further investigation include:


1. The extent of BCCI's involvement in Pakistan's nuclear program. As set forth in the chapter on BCCI in foreign countries, there is good reason to conclude that BCCI did finance Pakistan's nuclear program through the BCCI Foundation in Pakistan, as well as through BCCI-Canada in the Parvez case. However, details on BCCI's involvement remain unavailable. Further investigation is needed to understand the extent to which BCCI and Pakistan were able to evade U.S. and international nuclear non-proliferation regimes to acquire nuclear technologies.


2. BCCI's manipulation of commodities and securities markets in Europe and Canada. The Subcommittee has received information that remains not fully substantiated that BCCI defrauded investors, as well as some major U.S. and European financial firms, through manipulating commodities and securities markets, especially in Canada, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg. This alleged fraud requires further investigation in those countries.


3. BCCI's activities in India, including its relationship with the business empire of the Hinduja family. The Subcommittee has not had access to BCCI records regarding India. The substantial lending by BCCI to the Indian industrialist family, the Hindujas, reported in press accounts, deserves further scrutiny, as do the press reports concerning alleged kick-backs and bribes to Indian officials.


4. BCCI's relationships with convicted Iraqi arms dealer Sarkis Soghanalian, Syrian drug trafficker, terrorist, and arms trafficker Monzer Al-Kassar, and other major arms dealers. Sarkenalian was a principal seller of arms to Iraq. Monzer Al-Kassar has been implicated in terrorist bombings in connection with terrorist organizations such as the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. Other arms dealers, including some who provided machine guns and trained Medellin cartel death squads, also used BCCI. Tracing their assets through the bank would likely lead to important information concerning international terrorist and arms trafficker networks.


5. The use of BCCI by central figures in arms sales to Iran during the 1980's. The late Cyrus Hashemi, a key figure in allegations concerning an alleged deal involving the return of U.S. hostages from Iran in 1980, banked at BCCI London. His records have been withheld from disclosure to the Subcommittee by a British judge. Their release might aid in reaching judgments concerning Hashemi's activities in 1980, with the CIA under President Carter and allegedly with William Casey.


6. BCCI's activities with the Central Bank of Syria and with the Foreign Trade Mission of the Soviet Union in London. BCCI was used by both the Syrian and Soviet governments in the period in which each was involved in supporting activities hostile to the United States. Obtaining the records of those financial transactions would be critical to understanding what the Soviet Union under Brezhnev, Chernenko, and Andropov was doing in the West; and might document the nature and extent of Syria's support for international terrorism.


7. BCCI's involvement with foreign intelligence agencies. A British source has told the Bank of England and British investigators that BCCI was used by numerous foreign intelligence agencies in the United Kingdom. The British intelligence service, the MI-5, has sealed documents from BCCI's records in the UK which could shed light on this allegation.


8. The financial dealings of BCCI directors with Charles Keating and several Keating affiliates and front-companies, including the possibility that BCCI related entities may have laundered funds for Keating to move them outside the United States. The Subcommittee found numerous connections among Keating and BCCI-related persons and entities, such as BCCI director Alfred Hartman; CenTrust chief David Paul and CenTrust itself; Capcom front-man Lawrence Romrell; BCCI shipping affiliate, the Gokal group and the Gokal family; and possibly Ghaith Pharaon. The ties between BCCI and Keating's financial empire require further investigation.


9. BCCI's financing of commodities and other business dealings of international criminal financier Marc Rich. Marc Rich remains the most important figure in the international commodities markets, and remains a fugitive from the United States following his indictment on securities fraud. BCCI lending to Rich in the 1980's amounted to tens of millions of dollars. Moreover, Rich's commodities firms were used by BCCI in connection with BCCI's involving in U.S. guarantee programs through the Department of Agriculture. The nature and extent of Rich's relationship with BCCI requires further investigation.


10. The nature, extent and meaning of the ownership of shares of other U.S. financial institutions by Middle Eastern political figures. Political figures and members of the ruling family of various Middle Eastern countries have very substantial investments in the United States, in some cases, owning substantial shares of major U.S. banks. Given BCCI's routine use of nominees from the Middle East, and the pervasive practice of using nominees within the Middle East, further investigation may be warranted of Middle Eastern ownership of domestic U.S. financial institutions.


11. The nature, extent, and meaning of real estate and financial investments in the United States by major shareholders of BCCI. BCCI's shareholders and front-men have made substantial investments in real estate throughout the United States, owning major office buildings in such key cities as New York and Washington, D.C. Given BCCI's pervasiveness criminality, and the role of these shareholders and front-men in the BCCI affair, a complete review of their holdings in the United States is warranted.


12. BCCI's collusion in Savings & Loan fraud in the U.S. The Subcommittee found ties between BCCI and two failed Savings and Loan institutions, CenTrust, which BCCI came to have a controlling interest in, and Caprock Savings and Loan in Texas, and as noted above, the involvement of BCCI figures with Charles Keating and his business empire. In each case, BCCI's involvement cost the U. S. taxpayers money. A comprehensive review of BCCI's account holders in the U.S. and globally might well reveal additional such cases. In addition, the issue of whether David Paul and CenTrust's political relationships were used by Paul on behalf of BCCI merits further investigation.


13. The sale of BCCI affiliate Banque de Commerce et de Placements (BCP) in Geneva, to the Cukorova Group of Turkey, which owned an entity involved in the BNL Iraqi arms sales, among others. Given BNL's links to BCCI, and Cukorova Groups' involvement through its subsidiary, Entrade, with BNL in the sales to Iraq, the swift sale of BCP to Cukorova just weeks after BCCI's closure -- prior to due diligence being conducted -- raises questions as to whether a prior relationship existed between BCCI and Cukorova, and Cukorova's intentions in making the purchase. Within the past year, Cukorova also applied to purchase a New York bank. Cukorova's actions pertaining to BCP require further investigation in Switzerland by Swiss authorities, and by the Federal Reserve New York.


14. BCCI's role in China. As noted in the chapter on BCCI's activities in foreign countries, BCCI had extensive activity in China, and the Chinese government allegedly lost $500 million when BCCI closed, mostly from government accounts. While there have been allegations that bribes and pay-offs were involved, these allegations require further investigation and detail to determine what actually happened, and who was involved.


15. The relationship between Capcom and BCCI, between Capcom and the intelligence community, and between Capcom's shareholders and U.S. telecommunications industry figures. The Subcommittee was able to interview people and review documents concerning Capcom that no other investigators had to date interviewed or reviewed. Much more needs to be done to understand what Capcom was doing in the United States, the United Kingdom, Egypt, Oman, and the Middle East, including whether the firm was, as has been alleged but not proven, used by the intelligence community to move funds for intelligence operations; and whether any person involved with Capcom was seeking secretly to acquire interests in the U.S. telecommunications industry.


16. The relationship of important BCCI figures and important intelligence figures to the collapse of the Hong Kong Deposit and Guaranty Bank and Tetra Finance (HK) in 1983. The circumstances surrounding the collpase of these two Hong Kong banks; the Hong Kong banks' practices of using nominees, front-companies, and back-to-back financial transactions; the Hong Banks' directors having included several important BCCI figures, including Ghanim Al Mazrui, and a close associate of then CIA director William Casey; all raise the question of whether there was a relationship between these two institutions and BCCI-Hong Kong, and whether the two Hong Kong institutions were used for domestic or foreign intelligence operations.


17. BCCI's activities in Atlanta and its acquisition of the National Bank of Georgia through First American. Although the Justice Department indictments of Clark Clifford and Robert Altman cover portions of how BCCI acquired National Bank of Georgia, other important allegations regarding the possible involvement of political figures in Georgia in BCCI's activities there remain outside the indictment. These allegations, as well as the underlying facts regarding BCCI's activities in Georgia, require further investigation.


18. The relationship between BCCI and the Banca Nazionale del Lavoro. BCCI and the Atlanta Branch of BNL had an extensive relationship in the United States, with the Atlanta Branch of BNL having a substantial number of accounts in BCCI's Miami offices. BNL was, according to federal indictments, a significant financial conduit for weapons to Iraq. BCCI also made loans to Iraq, although of a substantially smaller nature. Given the criminality of both institutions, and their interlocking activities, further investigation of the relationship could produce further understanding of Saddam Hussein's international network for acquiring weapons, and how Iraq evaded governmental restrictions on such weapons acquisitions.


19. The alleged relationship between the late CIA director William Casey and BCCI. As set forth in the chapter on intelligence, numerous trails lead from BCCI to Casey, and from Casey to BCCI, and the investigation has been unable to follow any of them to the end to determine whether there was indeed a relationship, and if there was, its nature and extent. If any such relationship existed, it could have a significant impact on the findings and conclusions concerning the CIA and BCCI's role in U.S. foreign policy and intelligence operations during the Casey era. The investigation's work detailing the ties of BCCI to the intelligence community generally also remains far from complete, and much about these ties remains obscure and in need of further investigation.


20. Money laundering by other major international banks. Numerous BCCI officials told the Subcommittee that BCCI's money laundering was no different from activities they observed at other international banks, and provided the names of a number of prominent U.S. and European banks which they alleged engaged in money laundering. There is no question that BCCI's laundering of drug money, while pervading the institution, constituted a small component of the total money laundering taking place in international banking. Further investigation to determine which international banks are soliciting and handling drug money should be undertaken.

She's demonstrated that she's prone to get overly agitated. He stays calm.

Sorry, Kristin, no sale.

s even in times of crisis. Let's form a committee to decide which button to push.

the loss of innocents in Iraq... something your girl, Hillary, supported with her IWR vote and more until 2006 when such support was clearly unpopular and could (indeed has) hurt her POTUS bid?!

one who wasn't afraid to stand up and hold Bush and the GOP in Congress accountable over 9-11 while Obama was calling them for donations for his senate campaign.

HRC went along with Bush to get ahead PERIOD and it's costing her now thank God.

The most outrage she has shown since becoming NY Senator has been over some campaign flyers. Where was all that fight when it came to Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, loss of habeas corpus...?!

as do many others. I realize its personally threatening to some Dems to contemplate the idea of having a woman president. But they need to come to terms with that fear or we will continue to lose half of our most skilled and experienced leaders.

What smart, strong Dem women will want to run for office if they know they will always have to take a back seat to less qualified men?

was specifically directed to not look before that time frame.

You really think Kristen or anyone who read the BCCI report and noticed all the same names involved with 9-11 would be supporting Hillary now, knowing how BCCI matters were swept under the oval office rug throughout the 90s in Bill's efforts to protect Poppy Bush and his key benefactor Jackson Stephens?

whatever hillary has done about the toxicities of the wtc attacks for lower manhattan, she has done NOTHING about the absence of a real investigation into those attacks. kristen breitweiser of all people should know that. neither democratic candidate can be endorsed for their position on the 9/11 attacks.

Karl Rove would be proud.

and team Hillary's blind loyalty

OMG. What the hell is happening to DU?

on edit, alerted. This is freeper crap.

Did he demand hearings when he got to the senate? Did he participate or lead any?

who also lost family members on 9/11 to demand some sort of accountability from our government.

Why are you bringing this argument into it?

and its time we faced reality here. Some Dem voters are uncomfortable with strong, assertive women who seek and hold power on their own. That doesn't fit in the Democratic Party.

What does it matter? Here, on this board, it shouldn't be tolerated.

and Ms. Breitweiser will probably be the first to tell you she supported Clinton's efforts after 9-11 and no doubt expects her to do more if elected.

Oh yeah, Ann Coulter.

I guess when someone DARES not to support Obama they when become trash in the eyes of the Obama faithful around here.

I bought and read Kristen's book and admire her for what she DID, note the past tense.

But "This one's for the girls" bullshit is sexist crap, and I say that as a woman.

Kristen's husband -- an innocent died on 9/11. Untold thousands of innocents have died in Iraq thanks to ALL -- including HRC -- who supported an invasion and use of military force against a nation that was never an imminent threat and had absoulutely nothing to do with September 11th

Freeper, my ass!

both clinton and obama parrot the official line which is a lie.

I bought and read Kristen's book and admire her for what she DID, note the past tense.

But "This one's for the girls" bullshit is sexist crap, and I say that as a woman.

Kristen's husband -- an innocent died on 9/11. Untold thousands of innocents have died in Iraq thanks to ALL -- including HRC -- who supported an invasion and use of military force against a nation that was never an imminent threat and had absoulutely nothing to do with September 11th!

I am trashing her article not her personally, however, I find her ethics somewhat situational.

IWR was an authorization.

an authorization for war against an innocent people who happened to live in a nation that had nothing to do with 9/11 and was never an imminent threat should give anyone who lost an innocent relative pause.

The Jersey girls push for an investiagtion into 9/11 was laudable. Silence on Iraq and support of its supporters is not.

I for one--and assume others think these strengths far outweigh any faults.

Unlike W., they are smart as a whip. Not a good article at all.

What a steaming crock of horseshit.

k? thx.

...think of the kittens.

the woman who had the guts to stand up to Bush and the GOP on 9-11?

I suspect she knows a whole lot more about strong women than you do.

more than HRC, supports her. I guess gender trumps all for some people... Sheesh, the whole premise of her article is so insulting.

There's no such thing as reverse racism. That also means there's no such thing as reverse sexism.

Let's employ the "foxhole rule." Imagine yourself in the heat of war. Bombs dropping everywhere. You're dug in. You've got limited ammo. All hell is breaking loose. Who would you rather have getting your back? Barack or Hillary?

Hands down, I would personally choose Hillary because she would fight to the death. She would get the job done. She is one tough, smart cookie. In essence it's the difference between "can" and "will."

Sure, we all can do anything -- this is after all America. But what "will" we do -- that's what matters most. (Barack's "Yes We Can" mantra annoys me because it's too passive. I don't want to know what you can do. I want to know what you will do, dammit!)

Hillary is a will-do person not a can-do person.

What is the exact reason given? Because it hurts the feelings of Obama supporters? Because it inflames the emotions of men who can't begin to accept that women can be smarter and stronger than men?

If that kind of sentiment is unacceptable to DU, I'd say the future of the Democratic Party on this forum is in peril.

Sorry, that's not a good enough argument.

Kristin goes straight to the core of the Dem party's discomfort with women candidates - that some in the party refuse to accept that some women are smarter and stronger than men.

"Opiate69 knows the same simple truth that all men know: when it comes to solving problems and using logic, men are better than women."

Misogynist or not?

Still waiting on that.

She says "Women are better than men at cleaning up".

Did the editor accidentally delete the word "some"?

For starters, it would seem that Ms. Breitweiser is woefully ignorant of world history:

A cursory glance through history shows us that women (and indeed, mothers) are indeed capable of waging wanton or unecessary wars. Cleopatra, Queen Hapshetsut, Wu Zetian, Queen Elizabeth I and Catherine II are of course some of the better known examples.

Sigh

in this particular race, the woman candidate is smarter, stronger and better qualified than the male candidate.

Is that better?

She says "women are better at cleaning up", which somehow manages to be anti-male and bring up misogynistic images at the same time.

What's your point? As I pointed out in the locked thread I really don't get the impression she wants to be President.

Suggesting that only women can multitask or that they work harder?
If an article said men are tougher, or able to maintain their cool, or one the
hundreds of other stereotypes, y'all would be screaming sexism. :eyes:

I say that as a woman, BTW.

piece

*sarcasm*

"Barack knows the same simple truth that all men know: when it comes to getting work done and cleaning up messes, men are better than women.

This is part of the reason of why Barack Obama is the better candidate in '08. Aside from the fact that he has more experience; he is a man. It's time we recognize what a strength that is in a Commander in Chief.

Barack is smarter, more capable, a harder worker, better multi-tasker, and most importantly, tougher than Hillary.

see what I did there?



and hey, I am a guy and I don't think its a big deal, but extremely ironic that this is the kind of stuff Hillary supporters pretend to hate, but then they post articles on it in a positive way.

And oh so true.

Team Hillary wants it both ways: pro-HRC sexism is just dandy but ALL anti-HRC thought and opinion is sexist! Sheesh.

'Nuff said.

engage in the most blatant sexism imaginable. Any woman who tells you different is lying.

And then we whine and cry because the boys are picking on us and calling us names.

Waaaa!

that's an admirable trait, one Kristin had to learn the hard way.

women gain power on their own...and without whining or throwing fits.

I'm sure her husband will be the first one to agree.

As for "whining" and "throwing fits" - that's another double standard applied to women. Behavior admired and respected in men is often denigrated in women with childish labels. Old trick. I'm sure you know that.

Gee, where would she be without Bill and 20 years experience as First Lady...?!

"He knows the same simple truth that all men know: when it comes to getting work done and cleaning up messes, men are better than women.

This is part of the reason of why any man is the better candidate in '08. Aside from the fact that he has more experience; he is a man. It's time we recognize what a strength that is in a Commander in Chief.

He is smarter, more capable, a harder worker, better multi-tasker, and most importantly, tougher than her.

Let's employ the "foxhole rule." Imagine yourself in the heat of war. Bombs dropping everywhere. You're dug in. You've got limited ammo. All hell is breaking loose. Who would you rather have getting your back? A man or a woman?

Hands down, I would personally choose a man because he would fight to the death. He would get the job done. He is one tough, smart cookie. In essence it's the difference between "can" and "will."



I repeat, supporting this in any way is sexism at its very worst.

its time to stop passing over more qualified women to support less qualified (and in this case weaker) men.

and they accuse Obama supporters of being sexist?

but refusing to support them because they are a woman is.

Not everyone is choosing Obama for that reason, but Dems have to come to terms with the fact that many of them are. We can't tolerate that in this party and make it very far into the future.

and to disagree is ignorant.

please dispute it if you can.

about blacks as a whole. Should we not elect Obama since he is black?

please dispute it if you can.

are we done now?

has has the experience of being a Black.


These experiences bring strengths to each.
I wish i could find a credible article talking of the experience of blackness for Obama--I am sure they are out there.

zero effect on my decision (I am white anyways). He doesn't have any advantage by being black. I vote for the better candidate.

Neither Obama nor Clinton has any significant executive experience, and Obama has slightly more legislative experience, though neither have a whole lot of that, either.

And I'm still waiting to hear what crises Hillary Clinton has confronted in her career that show how she has such great judgment.

And I reject your 'more' or 'less' qualified meme as flawed.

If that is the criteria, we should be voting for any one of the other candidates that already dropped out. Their qualifications surpass Obama and Clinton by a mile.

and I think you are wrong to trivialize it as such.

You rationalize everything in blind allegiance in order to support a massively flawed precept supporting a massively flawed candidate.

And then been shocked when told that the fighting in the Ardennes was different than the figting in the Silicy.

"I have grown men crying about it," said President Clinton when informed of the difficult terrain in the hill country of Belgium.

That's EXACTLY what would have happened. :eyes:

That actually happened in regards to the Texas delegate system. Nothing as miniscule as a war.

:P

Thanks for clarifying, :rofl: :toast:

If you can't run a campaign, I question if you can run a country.

Vote for her ONLY because shes a woman! :eyes:

Thanks -- but I don't want my President in fox holes. I want them leading the country.

"Michelle knows the same simple truth that all women know: when it comes to getting work done and cleaning up messes, women are better than men.



seems to me that, that line is a double standard, inherently sexist.

Finally, the thread was locked.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4831298

because it isn't sexist.

because you can't, and this is sexist.

You disagree. Too bad. That happens.

glad I won that argument :)

glad you have a sense of humor at least. :)

and have 2 of them as children. A sense of humor is essential. :)

edit: on the sense of humor part (I'm not married to a man lol)

This is completely sexist!

Just turn it around and substitute men for women and you will get it.

I agree with her on this and many other positions she has taken.

:applause:

I am so glad my candidate is going to be the nominee. :)

I can't wait to stop hearing from ignorant Obama/men haters.

:p, don't take that seriously.

whatever you say.

I do not believe in Barack Obama.

Think what you will. I don't care.

I have been voting for Democrats my entire adult life - over 35 years - and this is the first time I am considering not voting. I know of many who feel as I do. Perhaps that should be a signal to the Democratic Party.

I went through this process when my candidate lost, but by November my harsh feelings towards the other were gone.

I can't imagine why any Demo could possibly want McCain over Obama come the election (I understand the feelings now though).

Its sad that some Dems prefer her to stay in her role as a victim and trash her when she speaks out and supports a woman as our Democratic president.

That has been one of the primary reasons my support goes to Hill

I see at least 4 "I'm a woman but I'm voting for BO" threads a day - a DAY - on DU.

If someone were to post a thread saying they were voting for BO because he's a brother, few would have a problem.

Today we see a post laying out the strengths of a female candidate and oh my! You'd think Pepe le Pew fouled up the whole place.

If you replaced man with woman in that article, the whole MSM would be on this. who are you kidding?

The US and the Dem Party have struggled with the way women are viewed - many women still harbor deep fears of challenging the old, accepted roles and behaviors. That comes as no surprise, but there are far more liberated women today than 20 or 30 years ago. These things take time.

As a woman, like many of my Dem sisters, I'm not afraid to stand up and say that the most qualified and experienced candidate in this race is being given short shrift by some Dem voters simply because she is a woman. Its a healthy thing - it needs to be encouraged and supported.

OTOH, if this were a contest between Obama and another male Dem candidate who was as qualified, intelligent, experienced and compelling as Clinton, no one would be questioning the choice.

It has to do with her being such a... well I won't say it in case people yell I am sexist, but you get the point. time after time again, she says an incredibly ignorant thing that does not make people want to vote for her.

Their positions are so similar, that personality is a big part of this believe it or not.

Just face it, most people like Obama more. He is 10 times more likeable. That is why he will be the next President of the United States. People are more willing to vote for him. Even my mom, who is pro Clinton, won't vote for her because she was fed up with Hillary the past few weeks. She doesn't like her attitude towards losing and wants to go with the positive guy.

But that is just my opinion, like you are entitled to yours. I won't get into a long debate about this, just wanted to give my 2 cents.

the the same got locked yesterday. taboo!!


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=4831298#4842127

Especially a woman who is capable, strong, progressive, pro health care, pro choice, and more experienced.

The Clinton campaign is the biggest, mishandled, unprepared mess since the Bush administration.

and it all goes back to a sense of entitlement (like Bush) rather than working the grass roots.

It goes back to her choices, judgment and decisions. Exhibit A: IWR, her campaign team of Penn and Wolfson.

She is not the best, she is not ready on day one, and she has shown poor judgment repeatedly.

It's not her gender, it's HER!

I disagree with her assessment.

Can't that be said without trashing or fighting?

If she is so much smarter why has she run such an incompetent campaign? Obama, on the other hand, has run one of the most intelligent campaigns in political history.

:hi:

of Ann Coulter's remarks on the 9/11 victim wives who spoke out against *.

Why are some people so ready to tar and feather their own just because they support a different DEMOCRATIC candidate.

After she lost healthcare in '94 she stopped talking about universal coverage for over a decade. Now she has a plan for the insurance companies. She's a compromiser and panderer. I don't know what planet anyone who thinks she's a fighter is living on.

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm tired of the image being pushed on me of Hillary as National Cleaning Lady, who on her first day as president is going to tie on her apron, put on her frilly white hat, grab a mop and a broom, and start cleaning up America, which she is best qualified to do because, as we all know, WOMEN ARE SUPERIOR TO MEN AT CLEANING! :puke:

It is sexist and it is senseless. Think about it: One could just as easily say that Barack Obama is more qualified to "clean up America" because black men have a long history in the janitorial profession!

Anyone who said such a thing would be called "racist," and rightly so. But somehow, it's OK to perpetuate this meme that Hillary Clinton will make a better President because we need someone who's good at "cleaning up messes," and when you want someone good at cleaning up a mess, you're better off picking the woman over the man every time!

Besides which, I can tell you personally that anyone who assumed I was a superior cleaner to a man would be barking up the wrong tree.

Which is really something of an accomplishment.

"Come on 'girls', we know women are made for cleaning up after men. So vote for this candidate because she's a woman."

There's plenty wrong with the reasoning, but I'll just focus on the sexism:

"...our country is a mess. It's going to require a lot of unglamorous, grunt work and perhaps a bit of a bad rap to clean it all up. To me, it sounds like a job for a woman because if there were ever a house that needed cleaning up, it would be our current WH."

(Why? Because men only want to do glamorous work and keep their reputations clean?)

"As the saying goes: a woman's work is never done. Indeed women are the ones who tirelessly and (and perhaps truly miraculously) clean up the messes, unplug the toilets, nurture the children, and make sure everyone is as happy as can be at day's end. Michelle Obama gets that. I get that. You get that."

(Um, no, I don't get it. The way I see it, I wasn't put on this earth to work miracles cleaning up messes, unplugging toilets, nurturing children and making sure everyone else is happy. You can be damn sure that if I were married with children, I would NOT be the sole person doing all those things.)

"Every woman has some degree of experience with men -- their husbands, boyfriends, fathers, brothers, colleagues, etc. And collectively we all know the truth: women are better. We are better at getting work done. We are better at cleaning up messes. We are tougher and more tireless. We are smart and strategic."

(Speaks for itself. Reverse sexism, but somehow with the implication that because women are "better" than men, we were born to be Housemaids to the Universe, cleaning up after the messes of those sloppy, lazy, weak men--of whom, of course, Kristen Breitweiser would have us believe Barack Obama is one. Just ask his wife, right?)

good analysis.

not surprising from an Obama supporter. They would prefer a GOP president over a woman Dem.

I would much rather have a woman Dem than a GOP president. But that's a false dilemma, because those are not my only two choices.

Excellant points...especially your quote. Hill would fight to the death for you. This is a truth. She is not running and hiding right now either.

Vote Margaret Thatcher for president! :crazy:

...she is female. How stupid.

Yes. I did just call Kristin Breitweiser a dumbass.

It's all fair when it comes to attacking a Hillary supporter.

Only in Obama world.

:puke:

WTF!?

J

because she's a woman.

We're voting for the most qualified and experienced candidate who happens to be a woman. We don't agree with supporting a less qualified one just because he's a man.

Clinton is the superior canididate, not because she's a woman, but because she has the most experience and qualifications. She's also obviously spent a lot more time thinking through and developing her policies and ideas. She's put a lot of hard work into creating her ideas and agenda if she wins the WH.

Those are traits I admire and they're what makes her superior to Obama.

Women have seen it happen millions of times on the job - the qualified and experienced woman getting passed over for the young guy who is good at sucking up to the bosses.

Our country is too important to let gender bias dictate our choices for president.

Inspiration is extremely important. A president is a leader, not a manager. It is the PEOPLE of America that make it great, not the government.

and cleaning up messes, women are better than men."

Please. I didn't work my butt off all those years to swallow this cr@p.

Eta: I'm being rude, OD. No need for that, sorry.

"women are better than men".

Seems pretty unambiguous to me. The OP was making the case that she's better because she's a woman, not a woman who happens to be a better candidate.

I happen to believe that she is a better, more pragmatic, more experienced leader, but I'm not going to smile and nod when I hear misandrist bullshit.

Her book is fantastic! Yeah Kristin! Thank you!

Your points about her gender are true, and while race and gender certainly matter, I believe that generation is the most important variable in this election cycle. Hillary is not helped by the fact that she is a Baby Boomer; many in the country are burnt out on Boomers. Obama was born in 1961, but he really isn't a Boomer, nor is he a GenXer, notwithstanding some attempts to categorize him that way. Barack is part of Generation Jones, the heretofore lost generation between the Boomers and Xers. Several major media outlets, including The New York Times, Newsweek Magazine, and NBC, have made the argument, in recent weeks, that Obama is specifically a Joneser, not a Boomer or Xer. I just heard a panel of generation experts discuss this exact issue recently, and the overwhelming conclusion was that Obama is part of Generation Jones. This isn't really surprising when you consider that Obama was born in the middle of the 1954-1965 GenJones birth years, and those born toward the middle of a generation tend to most personify that generation. Hillary may be helped by the fact that she is a woman, but she isn't helped by the fact that she's a Boomer. Obama is very helped by being the first Generation Jones candidate, and will be even more when he is up against Silent Generation member John McCain.

Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Rupert Murdoch. Who will you guys trot out next?

The OP is the kind of sexist garbage that makes me blush as a woman.

she'll work and fight to improve americans' lives

obama just runs out in a snit when things don't go his way