i don't know if this particular story is true or not

i DO know i crossed emily's list (along with n o w) off of MY list a while ago (after all they said and did to diss barack obama. i did hear a rep from emily's list on npr the other day. she was making all nice nice about barack. it's TOO DAMN LATE. i personally will NEVER forgive them for their words AND their actions). i've said it before and i'll say it again, i would NEVER vote for someone (or want someone in power) based only on their gender. that not only is stupid IT'S DANGEROUS

Why is EMILY's List endorsing anti-semitism, racism and homophobia?
Filed by: Bil Browning

EMILY's List, known for funding female candidates for public office, has two main qualifications for getting their endorsement. You have to be female and you have to be pro-choice. The organization recently endorsed Nikki Tinker in her run for Congress from Tennessee.
Tinker is running against sitting Representative Steve Cohen, a fellow Democrat. Cohen is one of the most liberal members of Congress with a history of supporting pro-choice and LGBT issues. Why would EMILY's List work to defeat an incumbent Congressman with a history of working in favor of their chosen issue? The answer has to be sexism; he's a man. No other explanation can possibly make sense.
After all, Tinker's campaign has been engaging in one of the most vitriolic anti-Semitic, racist and homophobic campaigns in Tennessee history. Black Baptist ministers have publicly called for Cohen's defeat because of his race, a flier declaring "Steve Cohen and the Jews Hate Jesus" has been circulated throughout Memphis, and Tinker's campaign has refused to denounce or repudiate these tactics. EMILY's List has invested resources in this campaign - and they did in 2006 too.
"In 2006, EMILY's List endorsed Tinker and spent $500,000 on her behalf in the form of negative direct mail pieces with scores of lies about Cohen's record," Cohen campaign director Jerry Austin told me. Austin suggested that more of the same could be expected before the August 7th primary. One flier condemned Cohen for missing a few votes as a state legislator, but neglected to mention that the Congressman was in the hospital recovering from an illness......

oh i'm not just pissed at THEM

i'm pissed at now and any other group or individual who/that thinks someone should get the job JUST because of their gender. i demand equality, i do NOT demand special treatment. i do not want special treatment. i want the SAME treatment. i do NOT like hillary. i DO like barack. it has NOTHING to do with one being a woman and one not being a woman. it has NOTHING to do with one being black and one being white. it DOES have to do with one (at least in my eyes) being MORE HONEST than another. with one caring more than another. with one not owing favors more than another. with one MORE SINCERE THAN ANOTHER. and on and on.

Women are pissed at EMILY's List
by John Aravosis (DC) ·
I wrote late last night about an op ed in today's Washington Post, written by Ellen Malcolm, the head of EMILY's List (an organization that supports pro-choice Democratic women for elected office). The thrust of Malcolm's piece was that Hillary hasn't lost yet and is only being asked to leave the race because she's a woman, and, you know, we all hate women. Well, our female readers had something to say about this, I excerpted some of their 67 Comments below.

As an aside, as an organization that claims it cares about the right to choose (I mean, pro-choice Democratic women is EMILY's List's reason for existing), EMILY's List doesn't seem that interested in the fact that John McCain plans to overturn Roe v. Wade. No, EMILY's List is more interested in helping Hillary destroy our nominee, Barack Obama, so that McCain can win the election and ban all abortions, without exceptions. If you donate to EMILY's List, think twice. And rather than just take my word for it, Chris Bowers did a fascinating, and disturbing, analysis of EMILY's List's success rate (or should I say "failure rate") in the last election. It isn't pretty. Though maybe now we're understanding better why EMILY's List isn't winning more races. But I'm sure Ellen Malcolm will blame that on men too.
................

wwafd?

(what would a feminist do of course you silly goose!). i've talked YELLED about this subject before. now supporting hillary JUST because she is a woman. that's effing insane AND effing stupid on top of insane.

Except for Her Anatomical Features, Clinton is No Feminist. But George Wallace Would be Proud of Her Today.

BUZZFLASH EDITOR'S BLOG
by Mark Karlin
Editor and Publisher

Maybe we are naive, but we have always thought of progressivism -- in its ideal form -- as gender neutral. Men and women, people of all faiths and colors join together to promote the common good, peace and justice.

BuzzFlash has long championed the equality of people regardless of race, gender or religion.

So, as a male, it has taken me by surprise that so many avowed "Feminists" support Hillary Clinton merely because she has the anatomical features of a woman, when her policies and political style more closely mirror the more detestable side of "male" politics.

Does a true Feminist support "obliterating Iran"? Senator Clinton didn't even discuss the complexities behind the whole notion of Iran hypothetically attacking Israel, an ally with enough nuclear capability to "obliterate" the entire Middle East on its own. In short, wasn't it more Texas macho (think Bush and the Neo-Cons) for Clinton to offer her "obliterate" comment than reassuring Feminist diplomacy?..........

...................

Wouldn't a Feminist have voted for the banning of cluster bombs in civilian areas, instead of for their continued use in populated communities, where they particularly kill children?

Wouldn't a Feminist be supporting MoveOn.org's anti-war work and party activists for peace instead of denouncing them as extemists?

Would a Feminist have stood by and said nothing during the slaughter in Rwanda?

Would a Feminist have sat back and let the Bush Administration run roughshod through our civil liberties?

Would a Feminist, today, May 8th, channel the ghost of George Wallace and openly run as the candidate of "white" people "who are hard-working" (as compared to those "other" non-white ones -- we are to assume -- who are not)............

might as well post this too

and i'm just sitting here wondering what NOW thinks of this. they come down on people (in a VERY nasty way) for supporting obama JUST BECAUSE HE HAS A PENIS and hillary has a vagina. well, if they were really serious about being f**king feminists, they'd come down on hillary for this, vagina or no f**king vagina.
Hillary Keeps Funds from Firm Accused of "a Brazen Pattern of Sexual Harassment" and "Sexual Assaults"
Posted by Lucinda Marshall, Feminist Peace Network


I guess this is what we can expect of someone who once served on the board of Walmart:
"Sen. Hillary Clinton has declined to return $170,000 in campaign contributions from individuals at a company accused of widespread sexual harassment, and whose CEO is a disbarred lawyer with a criminal record, federal campaign records show.
"This is by far, hands down, the worst case I've ever experienced," said Diane Smason, one of the EEOC lawyers handling the lawsuit. "Every woman there experienced sex harassment, they were part of a hostile work environment of sex harassment. And this occurred from the top down."
Sen. Clinton's spokesman, Howard Wolfson, told NBC News in a statement that the senator decided to keep the funds because the lawsuit is "ongoing" and because none of the sexual harassment allegations has been proven in court."
The sad thing is, as Kavita Nandini Ramdas points out in The Nation, throughout this entire campaign, the welfare of women has been off the table as a topic of discussion,
"There is something profoundly wrong when a conversation about qualifications to be President of the most powerful nation in the world ignores the reality facing most of that world's inhabitants. While American pundits debate whether Clinton is being targeted unfairly, for example, thousands of women and children in Gaza are being collectively punished as Israel, a neighboring state and former occupying power, withholds food, fuel and electricity. Yet who is talking about that? In the face of such a travesty of human rights and international law, not one of the presidential candidates, regardless of race or gender, has the gumption to speak out and say this is wrong. Not one has said that he or she will not tolerate such behavior by any ally of the United States.
............

i wonder if 'now' cares about this?

i sure as shite do. that's fo' sho'

Special Report: Clinton vs. Obama on the Cluster Bomb Vote
"[Cluster bombs are] the single greatest risk civilians face with regard to a current weapon that is in use." -Marc Garlasco, senior military analyst at Human Rights Watch
David Rees, the man behind the hilarious and trenchant Get Your War On, reminded me yesterday of another especially egregious - yet much less known - vote cast by Senator Hillary Clinton, which no one in the mainstream media is talking about:
But in the autumn of 2006, there was a chance to take a step in the right direction: Senate Amendment No. 4882, an amendment to a Pentagon appropriations bill that would have banned the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas.
Senator Obama of Illinois voted IN FAVOR of the ban.
Senator Clinton of New York voted AGAINST the ban.
Analysts say Clinton did not want to risk appearing "soft on terror," as it would have harmed her electibility............

this seals it

even if i WAS affiliated with NOW (which i never was), i would resign immediately. this pisses me off something FIERCE
NOW Again Attacks Obama's Illinois Voting Record on Abortion Bills

By Matthew Mosk
Washington Post Staff Writer
A national women's rights group supporting Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) distributed an e-mail yesterday accusing Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) of being soft on abortion rights, revisiting an eleventh-hour attack that some analysts credited with swaying female voters in New Hampshire.
The e-mail from Rosemary J. Dempsey, president of the Connecticut National Organization for Women, told members that Obama's record during his time in the Illinois Senate included several instances in which he voted "present" instead of yes or no on abortion-related legislation. ........

i was fuming when i read this yesterday

what a giant steamin' load o' shite. how DARE now accuse senator kennedy of 'SELLING OUT' simply because he endorsed someone with a penis. that is a RIDICULOUS thing to say. one should NOT endorse ANYONE for their gender. isn't that what we have been fighting against all along? it sure is what I'VE BEEN FIGHTING against all along. i would NEVER vote for someone JUST BECAUSE they are a WOMAN. NEVER NEVER NEVER. i'd vote for someone if i felt they were HONEST, COMPASSIONATE, MORAL, HAD A GOOD HEART, WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THEIR COUNTRY AND IT'S PEOPLE, HAD SOUND PLANS AND IDEAS, and of course many more attributes. as far as i can see, hillary falls short on many of these. FAR SHORTER THAN BARACK OBAMA. you don't have to like ted kennedy. i don't care if you do or don't. but to endorse a candidate based on their gender is reprehensible to me. (and i'm talkin to YOU, 'now')
now can take a flyin' leap as far as i'm concerned. we can effing vote for or endorse whomever WE THINK IS THE BEST CANDIDATE. penis or not

Women's group slams Kennedy for 'betrayal'
CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Moone
WASHINGTON (CNN) – Massachusetts Sen. Ted Kennedy is under heavy fire from a state chapter of the National Organization for Women for his decision to back Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton.
In a sharply critical statement, the New York state chapter of NOW took aim at Kennedy Monday for what it called an "ultimate betrayal," and suggested the Massachusetts Democrat "can't or won't" handle the idea of Clinton becoming President of the United States.
"Sen. Kennedy’s endorsement of Hillary Clinton’s opponent in the Democratic presidential primary campaign has really hit women hard," said the statement. "Women have forgiven Kennedy, stuck up for him, stood by him, hushed the fact that he was late in his support of Title IX, the ERA, the Family Leave and Medical Act to name a few.".......