Let me quote from a recent letter:

"You are truly sad and pathetic. I have read your racist attacks on Obama, and your even sadder attempts to defend those racist attacks by talking about how you do "social work" Is that what they now call giving out $20 hand jobs at the truck stop in Midland?"

What kind of horrible vitriol is this?

I voted for Sen. Clinton, but I'm not gung ho about her.

I DO notice that for every racist comment or attack letter about Obama on these boards, there are 6 attacking Clinton.

How often have we heard her called Shillary, or Billary...how many times has someone called Obama a name (I seem more name calling of Obama SUPPORTERS, and I DEPORE THAT, TOO!) You can't call someone a racist, and then attack them as a whore. That's sexist, misogynist, and basically discourteous.

I DO care about racism, and I AM worried about the African American and youth vote. I love their enthusiasm.

What I do NOT respect or care for is people who SAY they are supporting a candidate who will not do "business as usual", who SAY they are supporting a candidate who will be above personal attacks, and then turn around and are nasty, negative

and totally uncivil towards anyone who disagrees with them.

Here's the trick -- if you care about others, want compassion and love in the world -- you try and struggle to be respectful to a person EVEN when that person is being racist, sexist, homophobic or disgustingly uncivil themselves. You name their behavior and denounce it; you do not attack their character or undermine their value as a human being.

I want a democrat in the White House because the Republicans, and their multinational rich compatriots are systematically destroying the world.

Clinton and Obama are both decent democrats. I don't think either of them support queer marriage, nor are as radical as I would like, but both would make fabulous presidents compared to McCain.

Susan McGee

Cary,

The woman who is telling her boyfriend she had unprotected sex need not be afraid of him unless he is a batterer. She doesn't need a police officer or a friend there.

You do ask if he has a history of violence, which is a good question. If he does, that's a whole other scenario.

But normal men do not "lose control" and physically assault their partners/girlfriends because of infidelity.

It is only those who have chosen to use violence to control their partners who are dangerous.

Battering is not about losing one's temper at bad news. Battering is a choice to use violence to control one's partner.

It is instrumental not impulsive.

Susan McGee

Right..the IMPORTANT people are the ones who command the armies and slaughter the oppressed, right?

Here is another example of how some of the progressive left get away with misogyny.

We COULD list all the important or famous women.....or we could note all the male "inventors" and "scientists" who stole their wife's work, or their female students' work...or we could look at all the anonymous poets who were actually women, or we could look at the authors and poets who wrote under men's name or who used initials so they could be published...

OR we could redefine who's "important" ahd what important work is....maybe growing things and tending children is more important than killing people.....

"Regarding the "Fatal Attraction" comparison, wasn't that a week or two ago? Why is McCain's camp bringing it up now? I remember hearing that commentator's Glenn Close comparison and knowing it would backfire. I didn't expect it to get dredged up after all this time though."

said one poster....

This is a joke, right?

I can't really believe someone would say something said that was incredibly sexist a "week or two ago" is no longer germane to the campaign?

The sexism is rampant.

And what do we expect of Sen. Kennedy? He has (like many other Kennedys) consumed and used women his entire life. Something few bring up about the Kennedys. Their use and abuse of prostitutes, their constant infidelity is all about "private lives." Right.

Susan McGee

The whole deal is about getting rid of the republicans!

I don't like Sen. Clinton's hard working white people comments, and I was very, very upset about her statements about obliterating Iran.

I think many posters here have revealed themselves again and again, attacking Joan Walsh and Sen. Clinton in veiled and in blatant sexist comments -- and it's happened repeatedly. That does not mean that supporters of Sen. Clinton haven't been racist.

If Sen. Clinton had won the nomination, I would have been very worried about youth and African Americans being turned off. I would have counseled Sen. Clinton to treat Sen. Obama with the utmost respect, and invited him to be on the ticket or in her administration. I would have asked her to speak out against racism and the anti-Arab religious crap Sen. Obama has had to endure, and to plead with her supporters to actively challenge racist comments. I would have counseled this because a) it's the right thing to do and b) it would increase the chances of winning (given that we must win because the Republicans are destroying the planet).

Now that Sen. Obama has almost certainly won the nomination, I am worried that working class white people, and women of all colors, ages, and classes have been turned off. I therefore counsel Sen. Obama to treat Sen. Clinton with the utmost respect, and invite her to be on the ticket or in his administration. I ask him to speak out against sexism and to plead with his supporters to actively challenge sexist comments. I counsel this because it a) is the right thing to do and b) will increase the chances of winning. (given that we must win because the Republicans are destroying the planet).

Susan McGee