- 2008 PROGRESS OR PANDERING
Pennsylvania Primary results threw a scare into the BO campaign and its
supporters. Before, callers to talk radio and TV programs warned
of "trouble" if the Super delegates chose HRC over BO.
Then the Pennsylvania
exit polls showed that more than a third of the supporters of HRC would
NOT vote for BO. No threats here, no mob action -- just a peaceful
protest for good reasons.
But on hearing that,
the Obambots went ballistic. "There will be terrible repercussions
if HRC is the nominee." "We will leave the Democratic
Party!" "Blacks will not vote in the General election"
and so on, threat after angry threat.
Their point is
that BO must win no matter what happens. Some callers threatened
violence and anger permeated the airways. They
insist that the coronation go forward.
Women are the majority
of Democratic voters and have always been taken for granted. Most
support HRC and most will not vote for BO, and they are angry. They
differ from BO supporters in that they have reasons for their anger.
You won't hear much of this from the mean-stream media but it is all over
Reason # 1: Topping the list is Florida and Michigan where HRC won
a majority in both Primaries. One can argue that the DNC did not
allow these delegations to be seated or counted at the coming Convention.
Howard Dean has promised that once the candidate is chosen, he will allow
the delegations to be seated and vote -- but of course not for the candidate
they want to vote for -- HRC.
HRC was for a do-over
of both Primaries but BO blocked this solution. He knew that she would
win both again and would tie him and he wasn'[t about to let this happen.
Reason #2: The collusion of the media and the DNC to derogate HRC
and ignore any deficit in BO's experience and character. This bias
also contributed mightily to the huge amount of contributions coming in
to his campaign.
Thanks to Blogs
that kept slogging out the truth, finally, some real light was shone on
BO and he reacted by whining, blaming HRC and using more negative advertising
while denying that he was doing this.
He sure had the
money for PA and spent $10.63 per vote. HRC won 55 to 35% and spent
$2.40 per vote. Who would you chose to manage the money of your country?
Reason #3: The many pejorative, sexists' remarks from the
media directed at HRC. They come at us all the time and most women
feel the sting and unfairness of the continuous slams against our gender.
It is directed at us, our gender and it angers us. Just to mention
- Clinton "look(ed)
like everyone's first wife standing outside a probate court."
- "[w]hite women
are a problem, that's, you know -- we all live with that."
- "a scolding
mother, talking down to a child."
- "trying to
run away from this tough, kind of bitchy image
- "when [Clinton]
comes on television, I involuntarily cross my legs
- "sort of alternately
soppy and bitchy.'"
Then there were
the many times it has been said, by pundits to raucous laughter, that if
BO took HRC as his running mate, he would need a food taster. They
do not say this when commenting on a BO-HRC ticket.
But the final
straw was a universal misogynist slap down of women when BO publicly flipped
the bird to HRC, urged on by the roars of his supporters.
"The way Hillary
has been treated and sexist language affect women deeply and they will
write in Hillary on the ballot if she does not get the DNC nomination."
-- this is a frequent Blog comment.
Much has been written
and commented on concerning the high regard and loyalty of BO's supporters.
But now the DNC and media-spawn-of-Cthulhu, will be forced to recognize
the regard and devotion of women for HRC and face the consequences of their
2008 Renee T. Louise and Ruth M. Sprague, Ph.D. These articles may be republished
for noncommercial use only, provided that they are copied intact, and that
this copyright notice is attached. Address all queries to: email@example.com.
n d e r G a p p e r s T