A Gender Fender Bender

You guys were waaay easier on Dubya!

Please, no more Clintons in the White House! That also goes for the Bush and Kennedy families. We need to elect representatives who are...of, by and for the people.

Regardless if Hillary was playing the gender card or not,so what?? This isnt an election for a seat on the PTA school board This is for the presidency of our country.This is playing hardball with the big boys. Using gender is a far more subdued political tool than a personal attack on another candidate such as the rant by Rudy the other day demeaning her in what could easly be seen as attacking her for her gender. Rest assured, that as Obama and Edwards fall further behind,as they surely will,they will use any words or deeds they can to get ahead making Hillarys tactics the clear high road in this campaigne.

Those who support her also feel like victims, as she does, and will do anything including manipulate their way to the top. It shows lack of self respect. Women have come a long way, but with Hillary using the victim card and changing her mind each step of the way, she has not only lowered the standards of women she has projected no ability to lead a country, let alone develop feasible plans that would be succesful. Time for her to cut and run.

That one woman, Kate Michelman, isn't just a bystander who is commenting. I read in Time that she works on Edwards' campaign.

Your article makes clear how the media create something from what is nothing.
Candidate Clinton herself not once said that she felt politically attacked due to being a woman.
Your article "suggests" that somehow Clinton is playing a "race card", when in fact it is her opponents and detractors who keep making that claim in an attempt to create something negative to throw at her.
I do not support Cliinton for president and will not be voting for her in the primary. But, that is due to my political reason not because of her gender.

Your article makes clear how the media create something from what is nothing.
Candidate Clinton herself not once said that she felt politically attacked due to being a woman.
Your article "suggests" that somehow Clinton is playing a "race card", when in fact it is her opponents and detractors who keep making that claim in an attempt to create something negative to throw at her.
I do not support Cliinton for president and will not be voting for her in the primary. But, that is due to my political reason not because of her gender.

Can you please report on real matters? These artificial stories are so tiring. Bottom line is, Hillary is, in fact , a woman, and she is, in fact, entering the boy's club. She is, in fact, in unchartered waters. So, in stead of drumming up false controversy and stupid unimportant stories, can we deal with the real, important issues? PLEASE!!!!!

I am a woman and I found the whole victim thing to be a stupid move for Hillary. i cannot imagine Nancy Pelosi stooping to such tactics and this is how pelosi became the most powerful woman in Washington. By acting the same as Obama does with his race. The whole situation makes Hillary look weak and whiney and like a spoiled child. Oh, and now the Clinton's have chaged tactics. Now it's swiftboating. oh please!

I agree that Ferraro perhaps misinterpreted the situation. However, I don't quite see how the Clinton video, "The Politics of Piling On," is an attempt by Cher campaign to play the "gender card." She's right, it could very easily be a statement on the general insecurity of the other candidates as Clinton is after all winning!

Did Hillary really "lose" the debate? She did a heck of a lot better than many of the other candidates. Because she's the frontrunner, does her not doing as well as she usually does (and completely trouncing the other participants) mean that of all the candidates, she's the one (or one of the ones) who "lost"? (Okay, perhaps the rules do say that the participant that does the best wins and all others lose.) Apart from those two issues (immigration and the Clinton library docs), she handled the questions with her usual mastery. But, the Obama's-betraying-the-politics-of-hope thing is wearing thin. If she's ready to be president, she should be more than able to respond and then some. The criticisms made by Edwards and others are legitimate. I know she's preparing for the general), but I wonder if primary voters are getting that message... Will they overlook that come January 3rd?

Hillary is a joke. She "wants" to be seen" cowering because "all the men are picking on me". Sheesh...give me a break. Is THIS the person you want in charge of our military might? She despises our Armed Forces.

I don't see how you can say that Hillary "lost". Although it is possible for the debates to have one winner (which has been Hillary up until this one?), those that "lose" do so relative to how the other participants faired. The point is that Hillary did a heck of a lot better than many of the others. How would any of them have faired under such fierce attack? Clearly she could have provided a more convincing response to the Clinton library issue and she could have handled the immigration question with her usual mastery (though it was one of the last questions after more than an hour of attack, attack, attack!), but for most other questions, she was convincing and presidential (that's not to say others like Edwards and Dodd didn't do equally well). As for their "Obama is criticizing the politics of hope" routine, yes it's wearing very thin. Hillary needs to hit back with real answers to their criticisms and then some. The criticisms made by Edwards and Obama and others are legitimate. So, why isn't she? She's ostensibly preparing for the general. But, how many primary voters understand that and are willing to overlook it?

Hillary is a liar. She isnt graceful in the least. How much money she make off her porkbelly investment? Everyone not named Clinton went to jail over Whitewater. She is disingenuous, look up the word. It fits her to a "t."

As confused as I am aboujt the candidates, I cannot help but believe Hillary Clinton would bring honesty back to the Whitehouse, and by extension, politics itself.. at least more than anyone else would.

This again shows the fundamental flaws of believing that Hillary Clinton would make a good presidential candidate. What will happen when she has to deal with Iran's President toe to toe? Or figure out how to handle Pakistan's governmental woes with it's leader? Will she change policy midstride on Social security when it benefis her? Is anybody seeing these red flags waving? As Obama said, this country doesn't need this type of leadership. It definitely needs so much more.

Those who support her also feel like victims, and will do anything including manipulate their way to the top. It shows lack of self respect. Women have come a long way, but with this HIllary move mentioning gender as a factor, she has lowered the standards of women. She is OUT.