Amen.

As if tears had anything to do with strength and the power to lead and get things done. In a man, it's seen as deep meaning. Look, he cried. It must REALLY mean something deep. In a woman, it's seen as capitulation, weakness or, of course, manipulation. Deep meaningful experience or stress for the woman is rarely thought of.

Speaking of manipulation, the champion of manipulators by tears is the male physical abuser. He cries every time begging the woman not leave, that he'll change, etc. Only to do it again and again. Now that's manipulation far beyond any woman's use of it.

Yeah, like we'll see another woman with this much opportunity to be President again...in the next 20-40 years.

So inspiring to any little girl!

And I'm sure there will be protest to this. Of course, there are women in office, blah, blah, blah. But the woman has to have the sheer workhorse energy that Clinton has, and yes the ambition, and the backers and the name to have come this far and get this close. There will be others during this time, but the deciding factor is this, will they make it THIS FAR? Not probable considering statistically the odds are stacked against them in number of men in office. A reality that most women who go on about there being other women who will get to be President don't even consider. Get a grip.

Sorry, this will be a missed opportunity for most women everywhere to have a woman president (a Democratic one that is) in their lifetime. If Clinton doesn't make it, it's a done deal for a long, long, long time.

So, very inspiring.

The evil man can seen openly for the manipulative racist/sexist bastard he is. Can't wait for the misstep. It will come.

That's because there has been little negative campaigning AGAINST Obama....YET!

That's because he wears the mesmerizing effect of being a black Kennedy and MLK wrapped up into one as a perfect idealistic shield from our past against anyone really scrutinizing him seriously. Anyone criticizes that, they're racist.

Someone said something a while back about Hitler and while I in no way would equate him to that horrible man, the propaganda that Obama uses and the technique of mesmerizing people into by using MLK's voice and the promise of that dream, and people just turn loyally and follow, ignoring anything of substance that could possibly be brought to bear against him.

Anybody who symbolizes those great things of course is given a free ride without objection. As a matter of fact, ANY objection, even it be rational or factual, is denied out of hand.

Sorry, but that's manipulation at it's most frightening. When people cannot even see it because they're lost in the idyllic dream of what Obama knows they want to see.

I really don't see how you can compare Kate Michelman or Katha Pollit's piece to Robin Morgan's in any way shape or form. Morgan piece is beyond powerful and speaks to the ongoing and constant struggle that women have had just to survive as human beings. She nails it on the head with concise force and eloquence. That is a piece beyond measure!

"Goodbye to the HRC nutcracker with metal spikes between splayed thighs. If it was a tap-dancing blackface doll, we would be righteously outraged—and they would not be selling it in airports. Shame."

..."Women have endured sex/race/ethnic/religious hatred, rape and battery, invasion of spirit and flesh, forced pregnancy; being the majority of the poor, the illiterate, the disabled, of refugees, caregivers, the HIV/AIDS afflicted, the powerless. We have survived invisibility, ridicule, religious fundamentalisms, polygamy, teargas, forced feedings, jails, asylums, sati, purdah, female genital mutilation, witch burnings, stonings, and attempted gynocides. We have tried reason, persuasion, reassurances, and being extra-qualified, only to learn it never was about qualifications after all."

Michelman and Pollit sound like high school essayists in their little "feel good" pieces. Do either one of them speak to any substance that stands behind what Obama is going to stand for, for women. Do they make any concise points as to how he is going to help women's causes? Nope. It's just more "he makes me feel good" fluff. Ah, isn't that nice... No real thinking here. Sorry, just like good little women ought...

You have to wonder what Michelmen and Pollit do care about when it comes to women candidates and women's role in the world. Here's an electable woman candidate, democratic and progressive, ready to stand up for women and woman's issues, who will work her ass off to make a difference in the world but they pooh pooh her because she's just...not...quite...PERFECT. She just doesn't have that "dreamy" quality that Obama's got.

This is the probably the last opportunity for a Democratic woman for the next 20 to 40 years considering the statistical improbability of a the number of woman politicians compared to men, who could make it as far as Clinton has. Does that click on any lights in any body's brain here? This is it! For a long, long time.

It's not that I begrudge Michelman and Pollit their choice as individuals, or anyone, but when they speak as if speaking for women as in women's group and in feminist causes, I would think a little more circumspection might be in order when it comes to this grand opportunity for women as whole. It's totally lost on them. And that to me speaks loudly as to how far women have NOT come.