Have a peaceful day;)

How can you think for one minute that electing John McCain will help gender equality? How can you hold Obama responsible for a stupid joke Brenie Mack uttered at a fund raiser - especially since Obama chastised him for the remark?

Are you sure that you are not being a sore loser. I'm a very poor loser myself. I sore many times during the primary that I could never support Hillary, but I never really meant it. I was just venting my anger. There is no way that a McCain Presidency would not hurt people of every gender, race, sexual orientation, you name it. We will miss having you with us in November. I hope you will reconsider.

I love these diaries. I can always spot those republicans who are posing by their comments. Here is a clue if the commentor blames the victim or tries to rationalize calling women Ho's they are republicans and most likely they are the real Ho's, political that is.

OK, we get it. The Republican party is the party of equality. They are much more caring about women's issues and would never engage in sexism or racism to the extent that certain members of the Democratic party do.

You have made it crystal clear to me. Now I can vote for John McCain with a clear conscience.

The next time I read about another death in Iraq or I see a nightmare health story about the treatment received by someone without health insurance I can comfort myself with the thought that jokes told by a comedian are more important and justify voting for the Republicans.

Thanks, you've made it much easier for me to reject everything I feel is important.

I have never said anyone should vote for McCain.

I have never said I should vote for McCain.

I have never said the Republican Party was better at equality.

I have said the Democratic Party doesn't appear to be concerned about sexism or my equality.

Thank you for the examples of how sexism is so often dismissed by my fellow democrats as a less important issue or not important at all.

If the presidential election were a popularity contest (where the winner got a gold medallion and went home) what you're writing would make some sense.  Come January 20, though, the country will be governed by the Democratic or Republican party for the next four years.  Whomever wins, that's what the election will be about.  

By my read, the president is probably responsible for less than 10% of what happens in government.  He's only one person.  Most decisions aren't made in the oval office.

Which party is in power, though, influence decisions across the board.  First, the political appointees who steer the bureaucracy are drawn from the elites of whichever party wins.  You can;'t elect McCain without getting the Dobsons, Wolfowitzes, and those who are lesser-known (that's just a fact).

Second, those who work for the permanent bureaucracy quickly come to understand what the political appointees will permit or shoot down (and since this has enormous consequences for their careers they adjust).

Will give a small example.  I know someone who works for the State Department who is applying for a job connected to improving the status of women across the world.  She's in a curious position, because under a Democratic administration this would be the sort of job where she could make a big difference.  In a Republican administration, though, she'd be in Siberia.

She strongly supported Clinton during the primaries, btw, and doesn't like Obama at all.  But, like many, she's going to vote for him anyway because she knows (going with her opinion) a flawed Democrat is better than the best Republican when it comes to the issues she cares about.

If you have sympathy for the Republican positions on these issues that's whole other deal.  Many do.  I'm not a Democrat who thinks most Republicans are evil, or simply out for themselves, etc.  They have their own narrative by which they reach the conclusions they do.

Part of that narrative, though, is that Democratic-leaning feminists are humourless control freaks who have misapplied Marxist rhetoric to a host of rather petty issues (again, I'm describing a point of view I don't share).  I don't know the extent to which McCain shares these views.  I do know, however, that this question doesn't really matter all that much (because this is part of the standard Republican narrative).

It's a free country.  We all get to vote for the candidate we want for whatever reasons we choose.  I think you're kidding yourself, though, if you believe you have a third choice here.  If McCain wins, that will be seen as the country's endorsement of the Republican narrative.

I've never seen a protest vote have the effect its participants intended.  Nader voters in 2000 wanted to send a message to the Democratic party that their votes shouldn't be neglected, and instead Republicans, after a deeply flawed election, were able to leverage their victory into a winning argument that the country had endorsed their ideas instead.

That always seems to be the way this plays out.  The side which wins gets to write the story of why they won.  You have complete freedom to vote for whom you want, but don't be surprised when the winners use the authority they gain to pursue the agenda they want.

outraged by sexism propounded by MSM, DNC and  by anti HRC folks. Unfortunately sexism and racism are two elephants in our country that we seem to knowingly and unknowingly perpetuate. Even very educated knowledgeable folks fall prey to these kind of behavior.

I would urge to consider this: during the heated primary as it was, many things were said, which better should not have been..on both sides which are prejorative and rather unfortunate. And if you follow this blog, you'll find many (both Obama and HRC) supporters regretted earnestly things they said or repeated during the heated primary battle.

I'm asking you to forget what happened. I'm not asking you not to be angry or not to be vocal about the sexism within Democratic party. I'm requesting you to see that if McCain wins, he will be continuing another 4 years of Bush Presidency..personally I think it would be a disaster for our country and the World. Please consider this note before you decide further.

Thanks and have a good evening.

People are free to become one issue voters.  You own your vote and certainly decide how to spend it.

My problem with many PUMA is that deny that they have become single issue voters.  They rationalize that McCain and Obama will be the same on all other issues (clearly not true) so their issue is the only one that will change.

If you think that sexism is more important than all the other policy issues combined, then you certainly should abstain in this election.  But it is necessary for you to recognize that you are making the calculated risk.

Hope this makes sense and will stick around to discuss my points and any rebuttal you wish to put forward.  Hopefully we can keep this civil and on the up and up.  I have no interest in name calling or flame  warring.

Imagine one Dem telling another that a black person had no reason to complain about racism and that there are more important things for Dems to focus on than racism.

The shoe isn't very comfortable when we put it on the other foot, eh boyz?

of all the wingnuts who claimed Democrats didn't care about sexism because they defended Bill Clinton.

It's all about slights, perceived and actual, against one person.  Actual policies that affect millions of women don't matter - one political figure becomes the symbol of all issues deemed important to women.

Fortunately, most women have a much more sophisticated and intelligent view of sexism.

I'd have an easier time with this if one of your professed conditions for supporting Obama was that he renounce all claims that there was racism in the primaries.  He would probably do it, but he doesn't have that right.

I just get tired of people deciding what other people have the right to be offended about, and you top the list, and as your diary was complaining about that very phenomenon it smacked me in the face.