What The Reaction To NARAL's Endorsement Says About Hillary's Supporters

I have been pretty appalled by the response of Hillary supporters to NARAL's endorsement of Obama yesterday. They instantly flooded NARAL's websites with vitriolic attacks and threats, like sharks to chum-saturated water. It was a sad sight. Let's take a little stroll and see what people wrote (these are representative of the whole), and I'll respond as we go:

Traitors!!! I will never again support anything relating to NARAL. As such, remove me from your e-mail list and mailings! Organizations like this are the reason why women will always remain 2nd class citizens.

Okay, first what I'd like to point out, and it seems to be a point that most of these people somehow didn't pick up, that this was a GENERAL ELECTION endorsement, NOT a primary endorsement of Obama over Hillary. At no point do they do anything but praise Hillary's support of women's rights and reproductive rights, and they never said Obama is more committed to these issues than Hillary. They focus on the future, they acknowledge what everyone already knows, that Obama is the Democratic nominee, that the fight ahead is against McCain and the Republicans who want to take away reproductive rights, and so they made a call for unity around the Democrats, and against the Republicans, as they did when Kerry was the presumptive nominee in 2004. This has nothing to do with Hillary. She has lost the nomination, and every pro-choice group will inevitably endorse Obama over McCain, so this outrage is completely misplaced. Did they expect pro-choice groups to sit out this election and pout on the sidelines just because Hillary isn't the nominee? Is it Hillary or nothing for them? That begs the question, does this have anything to do with reproductive rights, or is it all just about identity politics, all about blind support for Hillary? It looks like the latter is the case. So NARAL apparently betrayed the pro-choice movement, because they supported the only pro-choice candidate (and one who has a strong and consistent record of support) in the general election? How is that betrayal? Oh wait, they didn't betray the pro-choice movement at all did they? Even though they are a pro-choice organization, their supporters seem to think that NARAL should be an extension of Hillary's campaign! They apparently betrayed not their values, but Hillary, who her and her supporters seem to think has some entitlement to the support of all feminist or pro-choice organizations, even after the primary is decided, just because Hillary has a vagina and Obama does not. This is what it comes down to. They both have been strongly committed to defending reproductive rights, but it all comes down to Hillary having a vagina and Obama not having a vagina. This is what so-called "feminists" have regressed to, petty, superficial identity politics, essentially a cult of personality around someone who isn't even a viable candidate anymore, yet supporting the actual nominee is treachery. This has nothing to do with commitment to the issues, nothing to do with feminist values, and has everything to do with a cult of personality. They responded to Oprah's endorsement of Obama the same way, they called her a gender traitor, to which she responded:

You know, after Iowa, there were some women who had the nerve to say to me, 'How could you Oprah? How could you? You are a traitor to your gender!'

crowd boos loudly

Yes, that's how I felt. I was both surprised by that comment and insulted, because I've been a woman my whole life, and every part of me believes in the empowerment of women, but the truth is I'm a free woman. I'm a free woman, I'm a free woman, I'm a free woman, and being free means you get to think for yourself, and you get to decide for yourself what to do. So I say I am not a traitor, no I'm not a traitor, I'm just following my own truth and that truth has led me to Barack Obama.

And then later...

And then, then this election has just brought out the best in folks, because I heard from some narrow minded folks, who said I was just voting for him because he was black and I said, that too is insulting to me, don't play me small, I'm not that small, I'm not that small, don't play me small, I would never vote for anyone based on gender or race, I'm voting for Barack Obama not because he is black, I'm voting for Barack Obama because he is brilliant! He's brilliant. He's brilliant.

Oh ya, so, just like a lot of you in here, I've run into a lot of women who say, that they already made up their mind before this race started, they say, 'I'm a woman, I have to vote for a woman.' I say, that's one way to go, but as free women you have a right to change your mind, as free women you have a right to change your mind, that's in this election and in all things, you have a right to change your mind...You're not a traitor because you believe and see a better way.

She was right on, she is a woman, and woman didn't struggle for over a century for suffrage just to be constrained by their gender when they got to the ballot box. She is a free woman, and she is free to vote for whoever she thinks is best. And NARAL didn't even do that, because once again, this endorsement was NOT them choosing Obama over Hillary, that wasn't a choice they could make anymore because there IS NO CHOICE anymore, Obama has won, Hillary simply CANNOT win, so there was NOTHING treacherous about this, unless they are upset that NARAL endorsed Obama over McCain. Yet somehow this (and by this I mean reality) is totally overlooked by these hardcore Hillary supporters. To them, and Hillary, this election was never about the Democratic Party, or Democratic values, or the voters, or the states, or the United States, it was about Hillary, Hillary and her sense of entitlement, and her quest for power and fame. We have seen this time and time again throughout this campaign, Hillary disparaging states, voters, demographics, regions, people, officials and groups that didn't support her. She has been backstabbing our party for months now, without any care of the potential damage she could be doing to our chances in November, all she could see was her political ambitions, and nothing else mattered, even long after the math made it virtually impossible for Hillary to win, she never even eased up on her attacks, she just kept going with more and more vitriol, borrowing more and more Republican tactics and Republican talking points to use against Obama and other Democrats. Even now that nearly everyone (but her hardcore supporters like the ones now attacking NARAL) acknowledges that it is over, she is still in denial, she simply cannot accept that she could have failed, and so she keeps on going, like a modern day Don Quixote, battling against her own professed values and against her own party. And even though it is all settled, we know Obama will be the Democratic nominee, NARAL is attacked as being a traitor because they didn't get the memo that it was all about Hillary Clinton and not the pro-choice movement, and they didn't get the memo that they weren't allowed to endorse the Democratic nominee, just because there was a candidate with a vagina who is essentially no longer in the race. There is no race anymore, it is over. So moving on to the next comment:

Wow. Am I glad I never wrote a check to your organization. Are you really that full of yourselves that you think your "endorsement" was going to change the outcome of the nominee? It's symbolic at best and a slap in the face of a person who has crusaded for womens rights her whole life.

So this one is actually quite interesting. It sounds like the Hillary supporter is attacking NARAL, and saying that their endorsement won't keep Hillary from being the nominee. Perhaps the denial of reality is strong in her more hardcore supporters, because the nomination is settled, it is over. Also, they again miss the point, that their endorsement was CLEARLY not meant to endorse Obama over Hillary, it was simply an acknowledgment of the reality that Obama is the Democratic nominee, and we need to come together and go after our common threat which is John McCain. This is why NARAL waited until now to endorse, they thought it was so obviously over that they could endorse the Democratic nominee, and move on to the real work of taking on the Republicans. Apparently the only mistake NARAL made was underestimating the insanity of Hillary's hardcore supporters. Just like John Edwards, NARAL took the safe route, only endorsing after the writing had been on the wall for a long time, and everyone had had a chance to read it and commit it to memory. They thought they were being safe, hell, I thought they were being safe, it should have been a safe move at this point in the game, yet somehow being in touch with reality lends a false sense of security, because we apparently don't understand how out of touch with reality some really are. Apparently they really do want everything to go into suspended animation until Hillary officially acknowledges that she has lost the nomination, in a month, or two months, or in October, or by Easter next year, or never, who the hell knows. I don't know what sign from the heavens these people were waiting for to make it "OK" to endorse the person everyone knows is the nominee, but it is beyond ridiculous that NARAL and everyone else has to sit and wait for the rest of these people to catch up to reality before we move on with life and the general election. Talk about playing to the lowest common denominator.

And yes, Hillary has been a strong supporter of women's rights throughout her life, but contrary to what these people like to believe, she hasn't been a "crusader", she hasn't made women's rights her life's work. Indeed she has nearly the same record as Obama, minus the fact she gave a short speech in China once as First Lady, which she continually hails as incontrovertible evidence of her feminist bona fides. Yes, she supported the issues, but just because she had a vagina and was the first viable female presidential candidate doesn't mean she is inherently the Joan of Arc of the feminist movement. She supported the causes, but never made them the cause of her life. Likewise Obama has a strong and consistent record of supporting reproductive rights, and his record on the issues is just as impressive as Hillary's, and like Hillary he hasn't made these issues his only issue. My point is, there is absolutely nothing inherent to Hillary that makes her such an unbelievable supporter of reproductive rights or women, despite the fact that she has a vagina, and there is no reason, based on the issues (and not shallow identity politics), that she is any more deserving of the support of pro-choice groups than Barack Obama. You need only look at Phyllis Schlafly for an example of how there is NOTHING inherent being a woman that elevates women to a higher plane above men when it comes to women's rights, feminism and reproductive rights. It is despicable that so many people would take out their frustration on Obama, when Obama has always been a strong and principled defender of reproductive rights and women. Moving on:

You can take me off your mailing list, your email list and anything else where my support has been offered these past years. I will not contribute to you again. I feel betrayed and do not want to associate with this org. in future. You can no longer count on my support.

All I can think of to say is I am disappointed in your lack of moral backbone to stand with our candidate; the one who has always been there for women. I am sending all of my friends this news of your Obama support and they too will write you off.

I'm done with you and the Democratic Party, once again the qualified women is stabbed in her back. I just thought I could count on you, but like all of the democrats, your jumping ship.

Again, we see the misplaced sense of entitlement. It isn't about women's rights, it is about "our candidate" (quite presumptuous given how many feminists and women support Obama, especially among the more recent generation of feminists) vs all other considerations. Somehow they believe that Hillary didn't have to follow the same rules as everyone else. Somehow they believe that Hillary had an entitlement to the presidency (does Pelosi have the same entitlement, does Barbara Mikulski or Condoleezza Rice have the same entitlement? Or do you have to be married to a former president to have this divine right?), no matter her positions on policies, no matter how poorly she can her campaign, no matter how nasty and divisive her campaign was, no matter how she exploited racism or endorsed the Republican candidate over the Democratic candidate, no matter anything, she was apparently "owed" the nomination just because she has a vagina, just because she is a woman. Does that make any sense at all? And just because the Democratic Party chose another candidate over her that means that the Party "stabbed her in the back"? (Which is quite ironic giving how often Hillary has sided with the Republicans in stabbing her own party in the back) Perhaps the millions of Democratic voters who voted for Obama, Edwards, Richardson, Kucinich, Dodd and Biden didn't get the memo that they weren't actually supposed to exercise independent judgment, they were just supposed to vote for Hillary because she is a woman. So now apparently all Democrats who didn't vote for and support Hillary are traitors. We are all a bunch of Judases running around ruining a divine plan we had no part in crafting, all based on identity politics. But are we at all surprised that they would attack those who didn't support her as traitors, when Hillary and Bill and their surrogates have consistently disparaged everyone who doesn't support them as naive, stupid, latte-sipping, elitist, black, or from the wrong states? No, this is par for the course for the Clintons and their supporters. It is all "us" vs "them" to them, and the facts or the issues or what is best for the whole doesn't matter. Nothing matters to them besides Hillary and making sure she ascends to her proper place on the throne, because that has apparently been ordained by some higher power as what is "right". And again, notice that the Hillary supporters want nothing to do with NARAL now, they refuse to support NARAL in any way, after NARAL endorsed a very pro-choice candidate for the general election against an anti-choice Republican, just because it wasn't the "right" candidate in their minds. The "right" candidate that should have been endorsed was the candidate who mathematically cannot win, and who more certainly won't be our nominee against John McCain. So yes, that makes sense for supposedly pro-choice supporters, attack a pro-choice candidate and attack a pro-choice organization and commit yourself to starving it of support and money, because how else would you show your great commitment to the issues, instead of the candidate? What hypocrites. Here is a shorter comment, there were some of those:

Shame on you. Senator Obama has no record to speak of.

So this is a common assertion, that Obama has an empty record, or no record, of supporting women's rights and reproductive rights. This is very much false, and is a direct result of Hillary's lies and false attacks against Obama throughout this campaign (and the attacks by allied pro-women groups who chose identity politics over policies and honesty). So first, despite all the outrage and distortions, Obama has a strong and consistent record on these issues, every bit as strong and consistent, as Hillary. Obama and Hillary BOTH have 100% ratings from both NARAL and Planned Parenthood, and Obama has a 100% rating from the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association, but wait, Hillary only has a 93% rating for 2005-2006, that's actually LESS than Obama's rating. But..but...how can that be? I thought Hillary was the Rambo of reproductive rights and all things women! I thought Hillary was a perfect crusader, and so much better than that no-record woman-hating Obama! Well that is the power of facts my friends. It turns out when you look at the facts, Obama is at least as committed as Hillary to reproductive rights (and thus every bit as deserving of NARAL's endorsement, if it is based on policy, not simply who has a vagina), if not MORE committed. Now I won't read too much into those numbers, because I see no point in trying to put down Hillary to slightly elevate Obama, because we should be able to agree that they are both strongly committed to these issues. I can admit that, and the facts are on my side, so why can't these rabid Hillary supporters start acting like adults and just admit the truth, that Obama and Hillary are BOTH strong advocates of reproductive rights and women. And then acknowledge that this wasn't even a contest between Hillary and Obama, it was all about Obama vs McCain, or Democrat vs Republican if you want to look at the big picture. Why can't they open their eyes and recognize that? Why do they have to act like irrational children?

And they also often mention Obama's "present" votes in the Illinois legislature on a couple abortion bills. Hillary purposely distorted these votes and deceived voters into thinking that Obama made those present votes as a cop-out, when she knew damn well this wasn't the case. Her attacks conveniently left out the fact that his "present" votes were actually part of a larger strategy conceived by Planned Parenthood to defend other legislators from political attacks based on their votes on the issue. Indeed the pro-choice community has come to his defense:

A letter from Planned Parenthood/Chicago Area President and CEO, Steve Trombley:

I’m here to set the record straight about Barack Obama’s record on reproductive choice. Barack Obama has always been committed to a woman’s right to choose. He has a 100% pro-choice voting record both in the U.S. Senate and the Illinois Senate.

Barack Obama has NEVER wavered.

You wouldn't know this from Illinois NOW's recent statements on Obama's record. The fact is that it is NOT Obama who has wavered, Illinois NOW is the one who’s changed its mind.

When Obama was an Illinois state senator he worked with Planned Parenthood to develop a strategy combating a series of extreme anti-choice measures designed to paint pro-choice legislators into a corner. Obama and numerous other state senators voted "present" on these bills in order to protest the politicization of the health and safety of Illinois women. Illinois is one of the few states that allows legislators to voice their objections to legislation through a "present" vote. These "present" votes are counted in the official roll call of the bill, and they DO affect the outcome. For all intents and purposes, they are a vote against the bill. As a matter of fact, Senator Obama wanted to vote "no" on these bills. But, he stood with his colleagues in protest against the anti-choice extremists who controlled the Illinois Senate at the time.

During his time as a state senator, no major pro-choice organization questioned Obama's present votes. Instead, Obama received endorsements from Personal PAC, NARAL of Illinois PAC, the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council, and, YES, EVEN Illinois NOW.

That’s right! Illinois NOW endorsed Barack Obama in his elections in 1998 and 2002 AFTER he voted "present" on several bills. As Illinois NOW officials have stated, they were aware of the "present" vote strategy, and they still endorsed him. They also endorsed several other prominent Illinois politicians who voted the same way.

It is only after years have past that Illinois NOW has changed its mind. Apparently, these days they don't agree with the strategy that they originally endorsed. Why didn't they think that in 1998 or 2002?

I don't know why Illinois NOW has changed its opinion of Barack Obama since his record has remained the same and since his time as a state senator, he has only demonstrated a full and steady commitment to choice.

I don't take issue with Illinois NOW having a preference for a woman candidate for President. However, I do take issue with their distortion of Obama's record.

My organization has not made an endorsement yet because we have two solidly 100% pro-choice candidates running for President. However, we feel it is important to defend Senator Obama (or any candidate) who has stood with us to protect our precious reproductive freedoms.

If we don't defend people who stand with us, how can we ever expect them to be there when the going gets tough?

The CEO and President of Illinois Planned Parenthood at the time has also came to Obama's defense:

There is a presumption, if one is not familiar with the mechanics of the General Assembly, that a present vote is a 'duck.' I think it's not well-based...I think it's somebody who doesn't understand how the legislative process works.

But of course most of these rabid Hillary supporters who are attacking NARAL now know nothing about that, because they are ignorant of the issues, because they get their distorted information directly from Hillary. She lied about Obama, she demeaned his dedicated support of women and reproductive rights, she threw mud on his reputation, and despite the fact it was all proven to be a bunch of lies, people still believe it, just like the outrageous Muslim smears...the power of a lie is hard to eradicate.

And one last thing. In 2006 South Dakota conservatives tried to pass an abortion ban, and pro-choice groups sent out a call for help to pro-choice senators, and only ONE came to their aid, and that was Barack Obama, NOT Hillary Clinton. Where was this purported ultimate crusader of women's rights when it really counted, and when it might be a politically dicey situation? Who knows, but Obama was there, he was the only one who came to the aid of reproductive rights in South Dakota when it really mattered. So what if he was about to run for president, he took a chance, didn't worry about the political consequences, and stood up for what he believes in, he stood up for women when no one else would. And yet these people have the audacity to say he has no record or commitment to reproductive rights?? And why didn't Hillary come to the aid of women? I can't speak for her, but I can look at how she relates to other controversial issues, and that is that she panders, she does what is politically expedient, she doesn't take chances, she tells people what they want to hear, she plays it safe, she doesn't lead. The LGBT community recently took note of that fact that while she professes to care about LGBT issues when she is speaking directly to the LGBT community (even though she can hardly bring herself to say the word "gay"), she never mentions LGBT issues when she isn't pandering, she never mentions them to the people who actually NEED to hear about the issues. Obama on the other hand has consistently brought up LGBT issues when talking to straight voters. He has even repeatedly condemned homophobia in the African American community, while speaking to BLACK CHURCHES! He tells people what they need to hear, even when it is hard, even when it is uncomfortable, even when it isn't politically safe, yet he takes a stand and does it anyway. Hillary won't. She didn't in South Dakota, she didn't with LGBT issues, she doesn't on a wide range of issues. So, all summed up, Obama is EVERY BIT as deserving as Hillary for this endorsement, even if it was a contest between them, which it isn't. Again, and I can't make this clear enough, this wasn't about Hillary, it was about the Democrats (Obama) vs the Republicans (McCain). I know I'm beating the dead horse here, but somehow many people seem to fail to grasp this fairly obvious and simple concept. Case in point:

your orginzation disgust me, i have canceled your emails and cut ties for life

Need I say more? Let's move on, last but not least:

You have now officially lost me as a supporter- and my husband as well, and our friends and associates. If the Democratic Party is so criminally negligent as to nominate Obama, given the many, many questions as to his background, affiliations, and patriotism, we will leave the Democratic Party as well- and do EVERYTHING in our power to see that John McCain- a veteran and patriot- becomes President of the United States. Yes, we are Pro-Choice- and I had an abortion at 19, so I've definitely "walked the walk"- and we are also more than "one issue voters". Obama is patently NOT presidential mataerial on ANY level, and for you to make this decison after Hillary won West Virginia yesterday by a landslide is unfathomable.

Wow, now take a look at that fine specimen. Rush Limbaugh would be proud. Here you have the most extreme type of insane vitriol being slung at NARAL, and this is anything but an isolated case I'm afraid. Here you have someone obviously far too stupid to understand that this endorsement has nothing to do with Hillary, and was completely post-primary. They also seem to know nothing about Obama's record, nothing whatsoever. This is a most extreme example of someone so blinded by their devoting to Hillary that they willfully gobble up all of her spin and lies and commit it to their hearts, and they won't let anything stand in the way of their artificially constructed reality of Hillary the perfect Queen and the lowly worthless Obama who dared challenge her magnificence. Beyond that, this person employs Republican attacks (notice, the exact same ones borrowed from the Republicans by Hillary) to judge Obama based on "his background, affiliations, and patriotism". I'm actually surprised that this person would ever support a Democrat, because they sound straight out of the Fox News camp, both in terms of ignorance and values. But the most shocking part is this: "we will leave the Democratic Party as well- and do EVERYTHING in our power to see that John McCain- a veteran and patriot- becomes President of the United States." Now they go from baseless attacks on Obama, to attacking the whole Democratic Party, and praising anti-choice John McCain as a patriot, and who they will do everything in their power to make president. Yes, they are sooo committed (apparently) to reproductive rights, that they will leave the Democratic Party because they nominated a strongly pro-choice, pro-women candidate, and do everything in their power to make sure that the anti-choice, anti-reproductive rights Republican nominee wins the presidency. This is someone who wants abortion made illegal, someone who has aid that they would support the criminal prosecution of doctors who do abortions, someone who wants Roe v Wade overturned, and would as president be in just the position to make sure that happens. This is a candidate who would deal a devastating blow to the women's movement and set reproductive rights back decades. And yet this purported "pro-choice" woman is so out of whack that she would attack NARAL and the Democrats for supporting the pro-choice Democratic nominee, and make it her personal mission to make sure that the anti-feminist candidate wins the election. That is the definition of insanity. And this person is not alone. Granted these are the most hardcore of Hillary's supporters, but there are many of them, and they are so out of touch with reality that they would support John McCain over Barack Obama. This is what her constantly playing the victim and filling her supporters full of lies has resulted in. Her incredibly divisive and negative campaign has brought us to this point, where her most loyal supporters are so worked out they loathe Obama, and praise McCain as their savior, just because their candidate who they feel has some divine right to be president was denied the nomination by the democratic process.

It is insanity...and I don't know what else to say. I think their comments, their irrationality, their ignorance and their hate speak for themselves. This is what we are dealing with in this election. These people are just as out of touch with reality as hardcore Republicans are. They even believe some of the same right-wing propaganda. They all share a complete contempt for facts, for reality, for intellectualism and knowledge. They are blind, just like the 20-some percent of hardcore Republicans who still support Bush no matter what he says or does. These are Hillary's core supporters, and they have lost their damn minds, and their reaction to NARAL's endorsement proves this remarkably well.

So please, visit NARAL's site and show your support for them, because they are currently being overwhelmed by the wrath of these fanatical Hillary supporters. They need to know that there are still sane pro-choice Democrats out there who can see past the lies and distortions, and who know that NARAL and the Democrats made the right choice in supporting Barack Obama for president.

Note: I want to make it clear that I'm not attacking all Hillary supporters here, I'm just referring to her hardcore loyalists who are represented by the people attacking NARAL for its endorsement. While I may still have differences with many of the less-fervent Hillary supporters, I don't think they are crazy, rabid, or completely without sense. I know most of us can come together when this is all over (pretty much starting with Indiana-North Carolina), but I know the types of people I highlighted in this blog are way too out there to bring back to reason in time for November. I think they are lost causes, but call me cynical.

Update: Ben Smith brings us another example of this pro-Hillary fanaticism. Apparently an Ohio-based group of mostly women 50 and older has been created to "work actively against Sen. Barack Obama if he becomes the nominee" in critical swing states because they believe that Hillary "has been the subject of 'intense sexism' by party leaders and the media." And apparently this is their payback. Now there have no doubt been a few sexist comments to come out of the media about Hillary, but there have been just as many, if not more, racist comments come out against Obama. Does this mean the Democratic Party is to blame? No. In fact I can't think of a single instance of any Democrat saying anything sexist about Hillary, let alone Obama. So essentially they are using sexism, excuse me, "intense sexism" (I think that is overstating it just a little bit) as an excuse to punish Obama for winning, even though he never made gender an issue in this election.

But really this is about the same thing as the attacks on NARAL are about, not the issues, not women's rights, but a cult of personality around Hillary and a strong, unjustified sense of entitlement. These women want the Democratic Party to pay for what they perceive as "outright discrimination" against Hillary. I would love a SINGLE example of this "outright discrimination". It seems that they are just angry that Hillary was opposed at all, they for some reason feel that Hillary was "owed" the presidency, just because she was the first viable female presidential candidate. What a pathetic excuse to use to justify such anger and such a nasty attempt to stab your own party in the back for some perceived injustice, all because Hillary wasn't given a special free pass to the nomination that no other candidate in election history has even received. Why exactly did we owe that to her? Because she was in the Senate for a term after being married to a former president? Is that why she should get special treatment, and why is "sexism" and "discrimination" suddenly to blame when she didn't get special treatment?

They also said: "We have been vigilant against expressions of racism, and we are thrilled that the society has advanced that way [in accepting Obama as a serious candidate]. But it’s been open season on women, and we feel we need to stand up and make a statement about that, because it’s wrong." Did you hear that? They have been vigilant against expressions of racism, even though their holy Queen of perfection and her campaign exploited the hell out of race in order to marginalize Obama, and they continue to do it even now that the primary has been decided. And yet the don't fault Hillary for these tactics, but they fault Obama for things he never did, and was never accused of doing. And since when has it been "open season on women"? Again, I would like a SINGLE example of how Hillary has been so persecuted. From where I'm sitting Hillary has gotten a huge free pass from the press this entire campaign, and she has had huge support from the Party establishment, an advantage that she had held for a year and a half, up until just a few days ago when Obama finally passed her in superdelegates. How is that for sexist Party leaders? The deck has been stacked against Obama from the very beginning, and she is playing the victim? Give me a break.

This has nothing to do with sexism, and everything to do with Hillary's sense of entitlement, and her hardcore supporters inability to transition from the sense of inevitability that they had for the first year of the election. And now with growing calls for Hillary to withdraw from the race the group says women feel like "we’re being told to sit down, shut up, and get with the program." This might be news to you, but this has nothing to do with sexism. They aren't telling Hillary to drop out because she is a woman and they hate women, they are telling her to get out because the math makes it IMPOSSIBLE FOR HER TO WIN!!! Idiots. Seriously. I'm sorry but how stupid can you get? There is a good reason why people are saying it is time to quit, because it is over, she can't win, period! On top of that she has ran an incredibly divisive and negative campaign, a campaign that has done a lot of damage to Party unity, as this example illustrates perfectly, which is why it is even more urgent that she leave and leave soon. But of course they act as if Hillary has run the most dignified campaign ever, and the entire campaign has seen men from all sides attacking her ruthlessly. I wonder if they were watching the same campaign I've been watching for the last year and a half. Urg, I'm just sick of this kind of nonsense from ultra-loyal Hillary supporters, it is ridiculous. And they are going on Bill O'Reilly tonight to attack Obama. Classic.