nytimes.com — "The idea that women are going to race off to vote for any candidate with the same internal plumbing is both offensive and historically wrong. Hillary Clinton didn?t run for president as a symbol but as the best-prepared candidate in the Democratic pack. Palin?s nomination feels, in comparison, like a step back."
Aug 30, 2008 View in Crawl 4
jbenson2Aug 30, 2008
It is not a gender issue. It is her capabilities and her beliefs: conservative, pro-life, pro family, pro military, strong on national defense, pro 2nd amendment, pro property rights, pro free market, pro energy exploration and has an outside the beltway Reagan attitude.
neptunezenSep 1, 2008
Why does everyone assume she was picked because of her gender? Couldn't be because of fight against corruption in Alaskan politics? Or about her strong economic policies? Everyone on commenting here seems to think she was elevated above other "more qualified" people, did it ever occur to you guys that maybe those people didn't fit in with McCain's stances on the issues?
paintgrlSep 1, 2008
I agree 100% with this article. I can't believe that Mccain would pick someone so totally unqualified for the job. Of course he seem not to think about things, instead he reacts from the gut bypassing his brain all together.
snfgSep 2, 2008
Introduce her to the Green Party, then. They've got a black woman Presidential and hispanic woman VP ticket.
kmom5Sep 2, 2008
If you say so! LOL!!
Closed AccountSep 2, 2008
Drunk before 9:00am again? There are 18 million reasons Hillary's backing is important. Consider also that her clearest path to the Presidency is after a McSame first term.
omegaredSep 2, 2008
ya but does that the same value of bush comparing to chimp compared to obama is different. If you don't understand what symbols mean and the value worlds can hold than well your slow. So i guess you don't think all the old cartons were blacks are soon as apes is racists either. Good for you, you're a idiot.