Her racist slur against "Obama boys" discredits her, and she has never apologized for it:

http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2008/04/14/obama_supporters/

Salon should fire her or have her issue an apology.

This issue isn't going away.

We are changing the whole world.

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

breathe

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Jesus god, you're precious. Blogging is you and your 12 friends chatting up each other about how great you are. Even St. Glenn Mao von Greenwald and his minions of weed addled antisemites are really just the same 5 dozen people who go to his book signings.

I spoke to a real live Obama campaign volunteer today, a young man, not entirely attractive but very polite and earnest who was going door to door asking for donations. I'd take one of him vs 10000 blaawgurrs any day.

or something called BlogHim, for that matter

although the word "Broadsheet" seems to have lured me in

"B: But why did Gore and Pelosi show up for Netroots and not BlogHer when BlogHer was a gathering of women with the power to communicate to millions?"

Good question.

Good piece, Rebecca, but the last paragraph doesn't do it justice, imho...the many good details get lost in generalities that don't reflect the BlogHer - or blogging - community that I know and participate in.

I've gone to BlogHer and written for the site for three years. Stephanie and Heather are extreme examples who define success for some but definitely not for all. I read Heather, not Stephanie, just because I didn't know about her before this summer.

The point of the conference and the site in the first place is that it is NOT (or should not be) a boys' world. It is a world, where women want to write and connect with others who do the same, who want to share ideas and influences. Politics was PLENTY present at BlogHer. Anyone who'd like to know just how much should check the agenda, which is still available online.

I would hardly classify the many and varied brilliant women writing as spinning their wheels and losing traction here. And packing it in and heading to any corner? Absolutely not. Drop into the next event (men, and clearly even reporters, can come) and let me know if you can find an empty space.

Oh, and I'll be at the DNC on assignment with my journalism program. BlogHer will be there too. I'm there because I'm a writer engaged in covering the political process of my country, and I'm at BlogHer for the same reasons...just add because I love it, it makes me a better writer and a more informed and engaged human being.

I'm wherever I want to be, and that's the point. It's pretty simple, and pretty great, no?

This article goes along way to explain why so many think American feminism is a joke. The reason the NYtimes covered the Netroots Nation like it mattered and basically ignored BlogHer is rather basically simple and is the reason why a large chunk of the population ignores feminism. The people behind Netroots Nation actually do shit to make themselves matter while feminist blogs expect to be taken seriously with out doing anything. Yearlykos was able to attract big name politicians because they where able to show that they could influence elections and the news. Daily Kos fought to be taken seriously by the mainstream press by breaking stories and raising a shit load of money in a short amount of time. Politicians and news responds to large sums of money and influence. That is why the Christan Right has had a seat at the table for the last 30 years because they raised money and votes for candidates meaning they could not be ignored. Feminist have not learned this lesson yet. Take Emily's list for example that actually has too much influence based on their results but never the less is not really taken all that seriously because they have a track record of losing when they should be winning see 2006 mid terms.

If the bloggers that attend BlogHer could break stories that matter or actually influence policy in any way they would be taken more seriously, simple as that. Politicians know that they have to win a large number of women in order to get elected so they are not going to ignore a women's group that actually has some power. So if the feminist blogs could raise a half million dollars for a congressional seat in 2 days they will be taken seriously.

Here is another bit of truth. The reason why women issues are placed in the style section is because women, with exceptions, don't read the front page or the world news section. Women again with exceptions read the lifestyle sections if they bother to read the paper, notice when the WSJ wanted to reach more females they added a lifestyle section and more personality type pieces. If women want to be taken seriously by the editors of the large newspapers and have their issues covered more need to put down the US Weekly and pick up the Times or Insert local daily here. Start picking up the economist or mother jones or any other political weekly that will show an increase number of female readers. The papers will follow, hell they will do almost anything at this point to keep up circulation.

To sum it up if you want to be taken seriously you need to be serious and work hard for it don't just expect it to be handed to you.

The 1950s is calling. It wants its ideology back.

Now I will trundle off to read the comics (although not that Doonesbury one--too political! Goodness gracious and mercy me!) and look at my make up.

Then I will vacuum in my high heels. ha. I wonder what Ward will want for dinner.

Why is that any person of a certain approximate age and ethnicity, with a certain tubular appendage that protudes from that particular person's pelvis, who also incidentally supports a certain candidate, get tagged as an "Obama Boy" by Traister?

Traister sometimes seems to be stuck somewhere between tragic and really trite.