hillary and mccain have a lot in common: gas tax, kind words for Gordon smith, Iraq war vote...

Darlene,

Remember that $250 I sent you just before you decided you'd rather have a cushy job in a Clinton administration than run against Mike Erickson again?

I want it back.

WW endorsed Obama today.

What did it mean to the women of Great Britain to have Maggie Thatcher as their prime minister? They lost their jobs, their unions, and their national assets.

What did it mean to the women of Great Britain to have Maggie Thatcher as their prime minister? They lost their jobs, their unions, and their national assets.

As hooley endorsed greg, I will be voting for Kroger.

Regarding the "Why I Support..." articles in the Oregonian, I found the two articles telling. These two people each had an amazing opportunity to use this free almost 1/4 page newspaper space to reflect the attitude and ambitions of their candidate's platform.

Gretchen Kafoury used this gift to complain and attack Hillary Clinton. What a waste of my time.

Rep. Darlene Hooley used this gift to outline Clinton's plans, share some of Clinton's resume, and truly tell us why she is supporting Hillary Clinton for President. Hers was well worth the read.

if Hillary wants to truly demonstrate her commitment to Oregon issued, she will campaign against Gordon smith.

Corbell: "There are really only two ways that women have achieved high office in nations that still harbor any popular misogyny and gender inequality (which the USA certainly does). One is for the woman to be a Margaret Thatcher-style conservative; the other is for a woman to be related to a man of power."

Counter-examples:

--Michelle Bachelet, the president of Chile, is a woman and a socialist. She is not "related to a man of power". --Angela merkel, the chancellor of Germany, is a woman, a Christian Democrat; I think describing her as a Thatcher-style conservative would be ludicrous.

But here's what I find especially disturbing about Mr. Corbell's implication that it is just fine and dandy for Hillary Clinton to be running for president as some sort of de facto successor to Bill Clinton: We have something in the US known as term limits for presidents. Two terms and you're out. But Hillary and Bill Clinton make no bones whatsoever of their attitude that they're some sort of team, and that Hillary Clinton is in effect running for "their" third term as president. And many of Hillary Clinton supporters, including Mr. Corbell, also portray HRC's campaign as nothing short of a run for a third term.

There are lots of talented women in politics, lots of potential female presidential candidates. Look north and south from Oregon: two female senators from California, and in Washington, two female senators and a female governor. All of them Democrats, and NONE of them won election on the basis of being either "related to a man of power" or a "Thatcher-style conservative".

Chris Corbell,

You link to ProgressivePunch to validate Hillary's progressive credentials. That group's rankings [the group is actually three guys from California] make me wonder. For instance, they rank Chuck Schumer above Bernie Sanders and Harry Reid above Ron Wyden, Ted Kennedy, and Russ Feingold. By the way, according to their rankings, neither Clinton nor Obama are particularly progressive among Democrats. Diane Feinstein, hardly a warrior for the people, ranks above both presidential candidates.

Damn, Cynthia McKinney is looking better all the time.

There are really only two ways that women have achieved high office in nations that still harbor any popular misogyny and gender inequality (which the USA certainly does). One is for the woman to be a Margaret Thatcher-style conservative; the other is for a woman to be related to a man of power. --Chris Corbell

Last time I checked, Switzerland didn't even give women the vote until 1972 and they elected a woman President. India isn't famous for treating all women well, but they elected a left-leaning woman President.

A few women elected Presidents include: Pratibha Devisingh Patil or Mary McAleese or Tarja Halonen or Vigdís Finnbogadóttir or Agatha Barbara or Mary Robinson or Mary McAleese or Ruth Dreifuss or Vaira Vike-Freiberga. None of these women were elected heads of state by being related to anyone or playing the arch-conservative card.

This has to be one of the dumbest things I've read at Blue Oregon. If you want more examples, look around at the Governors, Senators, and House members--most of them are NOT arch conservatives.

Didn't Darlene Hooley earn her position instead of being born to it or marrying into it?

Well then, Mr. Corbell, please tell me, is Hillary Clinton NOT running for the third term of the Clinton co-presidency? Will she be the greatest president of your lifetime, or the greatest co-president? Sorta makes a difference to me, at least.

Chris,

Generating rankings mathematically does not insure they are objective or relevant. All votes are not equal, and many votes are cast because that is what the caucus leader wants, not out of personal conviction. Your comparison of Pelosi and Kucinich is a good illustration. Pelosi is progressive when it's cheap and easy. Kucinich remains so when it draws blood.

I think Hillary has more supporters in Oregon than anyone suspects. We'll find out in just a few short weeks!

well, if there are many in my community, they are keeping their heads awfully low. i have yet to see a clinton yard sign anywhere in town.

obama signs, on the other hand, you can't swing a cat without hitting.

hrm. could it maybe have something to do with obama's campaing opening an office here?

naa. must be some other reason.

Oh, and God damn the United States for being so retrograde. There, can we smear Hillary with that now?

We need to take a poll to figure out whether to smear Hillary with that, or someone else. Let's put Mark Penn on it.

t.a.,

I think Hooley became progressively more progressive through the sessions she served in Congress. I too would have rather her be more outfront, but she did well for a Democrat in a majority Republican district, IMHO.

Chris & Chris>

All the women I mentioned were ELECTED as heads of state. They weren't the daughters or wives of other politicians. Nor were they anything like a Thatcher conservative.

There are really only two ways that women have achieved high office...

I strongly object to Chris' message that the only way for a woman to succeed is by marrying well, being born well, or being a conservative. I think that's sexist BS and young women hear enough of that crap from the media. They don't need to come to Blue Oregon to see lowered expectations reinforced.

I am disgusted and angry that Hooley would support hillary's dirty rovian campaign.

Hillary Clinton is a disgrace to the Democratic Party and the worst possible example for women of my (which is her) generation. In the true corrupt spirit and tradition of the DLC, she has resorted to dividing working class base of our Party using racially divisive tactics AND has now resorted to Republican tactics of trying to disenfranchise voters through dirty tricks:

Same firm does voter contact work for robo-call group, Clinton campaign http://www.southernstudies.org/facingsouth/

Darlene Hooley has been an utterly forgettable, exceedingly weak Congressperson for our district. It is fitting self-tribute that she ends her failed career rolling in the muck with Clinton. She and Hillary will not be missed from the political scene.

As a right of center NAV, I can't weigh in during the primary (not gonna do the Rush switch to Dem for the primary), but I am watching Hillary take on O'Reilly at the FauxNews. Obama better think about how he is gonna speak to the Reagan Democrats and other Indys, as well as some moderate Democrats, instead of just focusing on the SF / Hyde Park (I lived there when going to U of C) / Cambridge crowd... latte liberals. Plays well in Portland, he can win the D nomination, and lose the nation, unless he swings more to the center.

Hooley supports Hillary... so does TeddyK (the same guy who sucked up to the Statutory Rapist), as well as other practical Democrats. Politics is Darwinian... these people know who will survive. They are telegraphing that Hillary will survive.

What do they know that you don't? Remember, cockroaches will survive the nuclear war. Will you?

As a right of center NAV, I can't weigh in during the primary (not gonna do the Rush switch to Dem for the primary), but I am watching Hillary take on O'Reilly at the FauxNews. Obama better think about how he is gonna speak to the Reagan Democrats and other Indys, as well as some moderate Democrats, instead of just focusing on the SF / Hyde Park (I lived there when going to U of C) / Cambridge crowd... latte liberals. Plays well in Portland, he can win the D nomination, and lose the nation, unless he swings more to the center.

Hooley supports Hillary... so does TeddyK (the same guy who sucked up to the Statutory Rapist), as well as other practical Democrats. Politics is Darwinian... these people know who will survive. They are telegraphing that Hillary will survive.

What do they know that you don't? Remember, cockroaches will survive the nuclear war. Will you?

Dear harry,

Guess you misses Obama on Fox this weekend with Chris Wallace. Try to keep up.

I never 'misses' Obama, but I did have too much Pinot Blanc, hence the double click - double post.

Hillary still has my vote. No vitriol to spew on her immediate opponent unlike most of his ardent supporters. No, I just happen to believe that Clinton is the better candidate of the two. What a concept.

Hillary is fighting back. All the negative campaigning on here is just an example of how people will simply bring her down in order to make Obama look good.

Hillary still has my vote. No vitriol to spew on her immediate opponent unlike most of his ardent supporters. No, I just happen to believe that Clinton is the better candidate of the two. What a concept.

Substitute "Obama" for "Clinton" and you capture my opinion. Geez Louise, an adult disagreement. What a concept.

Why must we have our intelligence repeatedly insulted with this silly claim that this is "the last chance for a woman president in our lifetime"? Unless you are over 80 or in very poor health indeed, there should be plenty more chances. Besides, it's more important to me to have a good president than to have a woman one (or one of any particular race/looks/religion/ethnic group etc) -- I'm female and 44 and I think this is true of most women my age and younger. This obsession with getting a woman president and getting one now at any cost appears to be mostly a Boomer fixation. Cut it out already, it's doing no one any favors, least of all women.

Harry,

If you mean Kennedy by "TeddyK", he endorsed Obama in January. Perhaps you should cut down on the pinot blanc consumption.

And to all, why the extreme vitriol for Hillary Clinton? She is far from my favorite politician, but in a world with Dick Cheney and Shrub Bush in it, Hillary looks downright angelic. If you all need to vent anger, those two fellows would be much more deserving of it.

Hillary is smart, articulate and ready to continue to serve our country. Obama is smart, articulate and ready to continue to serve our country. Let us not lose sight of the fact that BOTH of our candidates are patriots.

I happen to believe that this country has an awful history of how it treats any minority and women, though they make up 51% of the population, have been included as minorities. It is shameful the way Democrats are attacking one another over this election; either candidate would bring honor back to the White House and it is high time we stop blaming the Republicans for taking away the White House and have some self reflection!

I do think Hillary is the better candidate - not because of her spouse and not because she is a female but because I agree with her positions!

Most who know me would say I'm as left as you can get so they are bewildered to find out I'm supporting Hillary Clinton. The reality is this: I believe she is more capable of doing the job right now. I think America needs jobs. I think America needs to be respected again. I think we need to fix our economy. I think we need to work for our environment.

My vote will go to Hillary in the upcoming primary and I would urge every voter to look over BOTH presidential websites, compare proposals and how they will be paying for those proposals but please don't base your vote on a campaign speech or a faux patriotic ad. And quit focusing on your fellow Democrat - we are not (or at least shouldn't be) our enemy.

I do think Hillary is the better candidate - not because of her spouse and not because she is a female but because I agree with her positions!

That's perfectly reasonable and I respect that. What I have a great deal of trouble with, however, is the fact that not only many avid Hillary Clinton supporters, but Hillary Clinton herself, have decided to make the argument for her candidacy on the basis of her spouse's administration. They've turned this into a campaign for the third term of the Clinton co-presidency. I object to this for two reasons: one, we have presidential term limits in the US Constitution; two, quite frankly, I consider Bill Clinton's administration a huge disappointment. He got my vote in 1992, but not in 1996.

Hillary is fighting back. All the negative campaigning on here is just an example of how people will simply bring her down in order to make Obama look good.

Too bad the fighting back is being couched by male supporters in terms of "testicular fortitute" and not being a pansy.

Yeah I'm not too worried about the general election when you factor in poll numbers of Dem vs. Repub the Dem candidate is killing the Repub candidate. I'm fairly certain that if either Hillary or Barack ends up the nominee we're going to see a big win for the Dem ticket. If Hillary is the nominee she's going to have a backroom deal to get the nomination. I doubt that's going to fly with the millions of independants that have been flocking to Obama. With Barack we have a chance to change this party and our country. I'm sick of winning by 51% and having the other 49% of the country hating the President. That's all Hillary represents to me. I'm ready to move on.

McCain is a decrepit old man. He's going to look it during the debates and he's probably going to pop off at some point at a reporter or during a debate when someone asks him about his health care plan or lack there of.

TypePad used to refuse to post. Now it tells you it has not posted, but does so anyway. The program seems to be taking on human characteristics. Shall we call it Hal?

Hillary Clinton herself, have decided to make the argument for her candidacy on the basis of her spouse's administration

Yes, Clinton has made the claim that she has experience due to the fact that her husband was in office and I see that you are concerned about a "third Clinton term". I disagree that the US would see a third Clinton term under Hillary and I would submit that any candidate puts forth their resume based upon where they have served our country. Hillary did serve our country in historic ways during her husband’s terms in office.

I believe the media has gotten it wrong, I do not believe she wants to let her husband run the country nor will she be a president that lets him do so rather she is putting forth her resume and asking that the people see it for what it is. People are rarely offended when a vice president does this. Is it not the same thing when Bush Sr. took office? There were no complaints from the Democrats when Gore ran for election. He was also part of the Clinton government so my question is: Do we have a problem with anyone from a former administration?

There were no complaints from the Democrats when Gore ran for election. He was also part of the Clinton government so my question is: Do we have a problem with anyone from a former administration?

A couple of comments:

--Al Gore did not insinuate that Bill Clinton would be playing a central role in a Gore Administration. Hillary Clinton has insinuated that Bill Clinton would indeed play a central role in her administration. --Gore did not run on the record of the Clinton Adminstration. He was faulted on this by some people, but evidently Gore figured that too many people were just tired of Clintonian scandals (or pseudo-scandals, if that's your judgment). Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, has run her campaign primarily on the record of the WJ Clinton administration, and only to a rather minor degree on her record as a US senator.

I'm distinctly uncomfortable with the way Hillary Clinton has framed her entire campaign. Other people are not. Having Bill Clinton on-board as co-president is highly attractive to some people; to me, it is not. Your choice.

And, of course, let us not forget that HRC would have the nomination long since wrapped up if she had "renounced and rejected" her vote to authorize the Iraq war, instead of saving "renounce and reject" for Louis Farrakhan. A lot of people are willing to forgive a mistake, even a big mistake, if the person making the mistake takes responsibility. Pig-headedness is a lot harder to forgive.

joel dan walls' last post is right on target.

Chris Lowe | Apr 30, 2008 9:01:04 PM However, the lowered expectations point has limits, doesn't it? If the U.S. is behind the door in electing the many more well-qualified women that it doesn't, and probably thereby electing in many cases men who aren't as good as some of the missing women, how do we understand it and how do we change it? If we can't identify that there's a problem it gets hard to analyze where it comes from and what to do about it.

I think we’re looking at different aspects of discrimination. A phrase like Chris C’s “There are really only two ways that women have achieved high office [through relatives or arch-conservatism] …” is a stereotype with a very negative subtext.

Another example of insidious prejudice would be: “Only 1% of Congress are Asian-Americans and many Democrats want to push them out.”

Everyone has some inherit prejudices. Being able to tell the difference between judgement and prejudgement are part of who we are. I don’t believe that Chris C is a rank sexist. He is stating what he believes to be true. At issue is whether that shows an unconcious prejudice and how that might distort his outlook.

An additional problem for Hillary Clinton would be the insidious biases of her own campaign workers. I believe she’d be much further along now if they’d done a better job separating the woman from the wife, the Senator from the First Lady. Instead of showcasing her talents and accomplishments, they used old style political tactics that worked for her husband. This undermined her message and hurt her run for the White House.