Do we live in a society rife with racism and mysoginy? Of course. The 2008 Democratic party is a "progressive" party. Mysogyny might prevent Hillary from getting the Republican nomination, but it was her lousy campaign and Mark Penn that sunk her chances for the Democratic nomination.

And complete bullsh*t.

There is misogyny in our world, however misogyny was not the reason for Hillary's defeat. There are plenty of reasons to dislike Hillary, being a woman is not one of them. In fact, in my opinion, her status as a woman actually helped her chances. Seriously, the misogyny angle is just excuse making, the actual reality is that Hillary did not run a good campaign and her obvious pandering was just too much. That and the fact that she is a Clinton and people are not into another Clinton Presidency. We've had enough of Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton domination for one lifetime. Obama, even if he turns out to be a disaster as a President, is at least a breath of fresher air, he at least gives us a chance to have something to look forward to.

@Parson Jim.

Quod erat demonstrandum.

If you can't disprove it, swear at it.

When does she have to be accountable for her behavior and her campaign's behavior? this is bull****.

She said the campaign exposed people's misogyny. Not that that would bother you! Everyone already knows YOU hate women.

If you cannot prove it, just say it is true anyways.

Try not to get so worked up, eh? We do not hate you. Just because one does not choose to vote for a candidate who is a woman does not mean one hates women. For some, the appeal of a candidate goes beyond their gender.

You're not gonna like this, but I can't read the words Clinton and dark stain in that article and not think blue dress. Misogyny cuts a lot of ways; the vast-right-wing-conspiracy mantra that Bill Clinton was/is a serial rapist is hard to completely ignore if one tries to stay objective. Hillary's high negatives have a lot to do with the many (mostly unfair) attacks on her husband's presidency, but I know a lot of progressive and women-supporting people who have a hard time swallowing (sorry! it's hard to use common English words once the images of Bill's shenanigan's have made a distinguishing mark in your brain) her candidacy, and are happy to Move On to Obama. It sucks (sorry) for Hillary, but that's reality.

how much of it was due to her being a woman and how much of it was due to her being a Clinton.

With Hillary Clinton, you have admit there is a little Chicken Egg questions with regard to Misogyny.

Yes people took the low road with her, a lot! But was that low road taken because she was a woman, or because she was Hillary Clinton and carried a great deal of Dragon Lady baggage with her from the start.

It doesn't excuse the low road, but it takes some of the sting off it.

People have used colorfull discriptives of Hillary Clinton, but colorfull discriptives have been used for George Bush, and Al Gore, and every politician of all stripes genders and orientations.

That uniquely feminine colloquialisms were used for Senator Clinton has about as much to do with her being a woman as uniquely male colloquialisms used against male candidates. People may have called her a B, but people call the president (and the VP) a D on a regular basis (infact the Daily Show has a running gag on the subject).

So yes, there is a lingering highschool mentality in our society, but we are also (as Senator Clinton has shown us) a rather racist society as well, and yet Barak Obama has risen largly above it to inspire people. So perhaps there is something to think about in that as well.

I call shenanigans.

This is from the same columnist that steadfastly accuses Obama of playing the race card to this day, even after West Virginia and all the shucking and jiving before it. The fact that the member of one tribe feels oppressed without remote cognizance of the larger context, including oppression by her own tribe, is really highly very unimpressive. Unless you're merely applauding the prose, I suggest you find a less monomaniacally dim individual to pass judgment on the culture.

The article had so many examples that it can't just be swept under the rug.

However (and this isn't meant to sweep it under the rug, I swear!) I think a lot of people fall back upon tired old insults for people because they don't have much imagination. And our society has different insults for men and women. Women are rarely called "assholes" or "bastards" for instance. They are also rarely called "dogs" or "pigs."

So when people wanted to insult Senator Clinton, they very unfortunately used women-specific insults to do so. Maybe that doesn't expose "I hate women!" so much as "I have no imagination when it comes to skewering a politician."

Then again, most of the examples cited are just flat out misogyny.

Politics is a rough game. Crying every once in a while doesn't help.

After the game, any trash talking that occurred is all in the past.

Most of the "misogyny" the rant/article describes is just political gamesmanship, nothing more, nothing less.

Hillary "I am a WHITE woman" Clinton is her own worst enemy, and a gift to the Republicans.

Say of me what you will, but I read the article and all I could think was 'what a whiner'. Grow up, politics is a full contact sport and if you can't take the fact that people fight mean, then you should probably find a different career.

The complete unwillingness of people, such as many posters here at Salon, to even entertain the idea that misogyny still exists and has been aggravated by Clinton's run in the campaign proves the fact that not only does it exist, but it will continue to do so because those most guilty of it choose not to believe they are sexist.