How To Win The Presidential Argument: Democrats Don’t Get It

Go Away, You Fucking Idiot!

Go Away, You Fucking Idiot!

I have maintained for years that Democrats, in general, have been historically good at governing, but terrible at framing. When a Democrat has been good at both, he has been able to achieve the White House and stay there for the full amount of time allotted to him, unless tragedy has cut his life short (as in the case of John F. Kennedy). However, this combination is so rare that only one President since FDR has achieved it: William Jefferson Clinton. His wife, Hillary Clinton, also possesses that combination, and even more strongly than he. But alas, her own party wanted someone different, someone who possesses a Red-Sea-parting penis, who could bring them new voters and kick the old, non-Whole Foods-going, non-computer-using Clinton Democrats to the curb.

How’s that strategy working out for them so far? Well, let’s see. McCain is kicking Obama’s ass in the Western and Southern states that Obama was supposed to turn blue. The swing states, which Hillary easily won in the Primary, are starting to move towards McCain. So, as we Hillary supporters all have been saying for several months, Obama’s proposed “New Democratic Party” and “New Electoral Map” were vaporware.

For being aware of these facts, and for knowing that Obama is illegitimate, unqualified and unelectable, I personally have been accused of being stupid, angry, a liar, immature, hateful, a Rush Limbaugh devotee, and a Republican by people who do not know me. People who do know me have been telling me I’m wrong and I should listen to Gloria Steinem and Hillary Clinton when making my choice. Why? Am I not allowed to do my own research and make up my own mind?

Apparently not. Because here’s something else we Democrats suck at: Winning an argument.

If you have watched a lot of debates, you have probably noticed that being right on the facts and issues doesn’t make you a good debater. What does, is a mastery of framing and the ability to read the question behind the question. If you are able to understand the reason why the question is being asked, and to turn the question into a frame through which your stance on that particular issue is seen in a favorable light, then you will win the argument.

What Not To Do: “Because There’s Something Wrong With You!”

Here is a typical example of how Obama and his devotees argue. Yes, it’s the Great Orange Satan. Unfortunately, we must go into the belly of ObamaNation in order to understand it.

What McCain and Palin offer is a chance to indulge in the ugliest aspects of small town culture. It’s a heady opportunity to sneer at the achievements of those who have excelled. It’s an open offer to stand at the political podium and throw trash at those leftist extremists who actually think that everyone is just as American and just as patriotic as Jane and Jimmy Middleamerica. It’s an exciting enticement to wallow in public hate flavored with the forbidden spice of racism.

In its own way, it’s a testimony far louder than any delivered by Bill Cosby that this kind of small town culture — that conservative culture — is just as dangerous, and just as endangered, as any in this country. When you look at something like the web page of Levi Johnston with it’s proud declaration of being a red neck and it’s joyful talk of “kicking ass,” you’re looking at a culture that’s sick. When a candidate for vice-president denigrates the value of community service, you’re looking at a culture that’s sick. When you drop in on a GOP meeting and find boxes of “Barack Waffles” decorated by racist stereotypes and buttons bearing phrases like “If Obama is president, will we still call it the White House?” you’re looking at a culture that’s sick.

The person who wrote this is called “Devilstower.”

I would like to know what “Devilstower” thinks is the purpose of an argument. And yes, this is a serious question. Is it to call the other side childish names? Is it to “prove” your intellectual and moral superiority over the other side? Or, is it to win the person you are arguing with over to your side?

When Obamans take this approach to trying to beat McCain/Palin, they are merely playing into all the stereotypes that Republicans have used against Democrats for years. Yes, this is liberal hatred. Yes, this is liberal elitism. Yes, this is dismissiveness and disdain for our fellow Americans. And from the outside looking in, it’s an extremely ugly sight.

I ask you, where is Obama’s positive argument that people should vote for him instead of McCain? Where is the re-framing, the back-and-forth, the meat-and-potatoes discussion about plans and issues? It’s nowhere to be seen. Instead, Obama simply states that the other side is horrible, and that anyone who’s anyone knows that. 

Obama’s latest ad, to which I linked above, is a textbook illustration of this point. It makes the point that McCain is out of touch and doesn’t email or use the computer. Putting aside that the ad is misleading, because McCain has his wife email for him due to his injuries, what meat-and-potatoes issue is this addressing? The economy? The war? The Constitution?

[cricket cricket cricket]

This ad, like all of Obama’s campaign, is only aimed at true believers. And that brings me to the second point.

What Not To Do: “Fine, We Don’t Need You Anyway!”

Obama’s campaign, and his followers, have done nothing whatsoever to reach out to the Americans who refuse to worship at the altar of Obama, even those in their own Party. In fact, they have done everything in their power to further alienate us. Throughout the campaign, we recalcitrant Clinton Dems, Independents and Republicans have gotten the message loud and clear: Go The Fuck Away.

When you argue that you don’t NEED to win the argument, that means you know you have already lost. And the people you are arguing with know it.

What To Do: Take a Page from Hillary’s Book

Study Hillary’s campaign. Study every debate she was in, which she won hands-down. This woman has got it down to a science. If someone asks her a question she doesn’t like, she either doesn’t answer it, or re-frames it to showcase her in a good light. If she likes the question, she answers it in clear, concise bullet-points that show her absolute mastery of the topic. But never, NEVER does she accuse the questioner of being stupid or sick, or petulantly claim the question shouldn’t be asked. She understands that politicians need the voters in order to win elections, and that debating is a critical skill in the quest to win them to your side.

And if you don’t win the voters to your side – if you let the Republicans win the argument – then you lose the election.

Perhaps in 2012, our National Party will have the brains to recognize a winner when they see one, and overlook the fact that the best man for the job turned out to be a woman.

The PUMA Un-Party didn’t form soon enough this year, and only had a few months to try to force the DNC to nominate Hillary. Our successes were remarkable nonetheless – had the delegates been allowed to vote their consciences, Hillary would be well on her way to the White House by now. But after McCain wins in November, we will have four years to make this argument and win it, my fellow Americans.

Who’s with me?

Cross-posted at The Confluence


38 responses to “How To Win The Presidential Argument: Democrats Don’t Get It

  1. Count me in, Madam.

    Your reference to petulant claims that a question shouldn’t be asked reminds me of the Obama Fan Base’s hysteria, and the puerile behavior of Obama himself, after Hillary kicked his ass in the Pennsylvania debate.

    As for needing the voters, Obama behaves as if he believes that the presidency can and will just be handed to him, same as the Democratic nomination.

    And if national Democratic leaders are demonstrating a change of outlook by 2012, it will because the current leaders have been ousted. That can’t happen soon enough for me.

  2. Great commentary – thanks!

  3. CognitiveDissonance

    I’m with you all the way, madamab. And I would suggest that we also use the 4 years to get rid of the undemocratic frauds who got us into this mess in the first place.

  4. The idea that Hillary is more or less electable than Obama, and that she would be the second coming of FDR , is light years beyond laughable. Both of them are barely liberal DLC centrists with enormous amounts of baggage.

    Sorry — there are only two conceivable explanations for why you, or anybody that self-describes as a liberal Democrat, is still peddling this line.

    1) You have a problem with African-Americans.


    2) You’ve lost your mind.

  5. @gregoire:

    Could you possibly prove my point any more?


    Way to win your argument.


  6. @ gregoire:

    And I used to think the Republicans were masters of projection!

    Oh wait. They still are.

    It’s just that now so many of them are calling themselves Democrats, if not libertarians (= Republicans who own bongs).

  7. republican in seattle

    Hey now, we aren’t all bad.

    I have someone I’m debating daily who insists that all PUMAs are just Republican operatives. When she produced her “proof”, all it was was a couple of blogs where one stated R said he was aligning with the PUMAs and another PUMA stated she was voting for McCain. That’s all the proof my progressive Obama supporter could muster. And yeah, that’s pretty typical. Democratic supporters typically don’t know how to debate effectively. You’re quite right about that, Madama. I hope you guys can figure out a way to accomplish your aims of getting the party back on track and kick out the corruption Palin style. I say this as someone who still definitely wants Rs to have power in government for a long time, but also as a pragmatist who is more interested in both parties being honest over simply winning for the sake of winning (and usually not having a plan for afterwards).

  8. Republican in seattle – It is so great to hear from you. Thank you for your input.

    I, too, would like the corruption kicked out from both Parties. In fact, I’d like a lot more Parties, eventually, and proportional representation. That’s the kind of crazy liberal gal I am.


    I find it so hilarious that the Obamans just assume anyone who doesn’t want to vote Obama is racist or crazy. I mean, earth to idiots, I’ve voted for many AA’s in my lifetime of voting Democratic. And probably, a lot more than I know of, since a lot of times I just clicked off all the D’s!

    And I doubt my AA stepmother would say I was racist, either.

    Like I said: Not winning the argument, Exhibit A.

  9. I wonder if many of the white Obama supporters have ever voted for a black candidate for anything in their lives. The concept seems like such a novelty toy for them, like a new ipod.

    I live in a major city where virtually all the politicians running for local office are black. So I’ve voted for a lot of black candidates over the last 35 years, on city, county and even state level. Since it’s not an exciting novelty, I did with Obama what I do with all candidates, black, white and other – examine their records and what I can infer about their characters.

    So, sorry, Obama just comes up short. Pointing out the deficiencies of McCain/Palin doesn’t make him (or Biden for that matter) one whit better. It just depresses me that we have crappy choices for both major parties.

  10. For the life of me, I can’t figure out why the media is reporting on only the two major parties. There are other ‘Independent’ party candidates who are seriously worthy of a bit of ink or tape as well. With the split in the Clinton Democrats and the split in the Paul Republicans, this year could be the year of the Independent which would represent a major upheaval in Washington should one of them be elected instead of BO or McPain.

    Frankly, I’m a bit tired of all the slime, mud-slinging and talk of who may or may not be qualified to run on day one. Now they’re both proposing ‘change’ … but ‘changing what’ … neither one is being all that specific. Regardless, both are proposing spending programs that are unachievable given the current size of the national debt, the budget deficit and the out-of-control spending on an ill-advised, pre-emptive war the Bush Administration got us into.

    Instead of voting Democratic at the top of the ticket this year, I intend to vote for Libertarian candidate Bob Barr … and I hope a lot more Americans will consider doing the same. If you really want ‘change’ … then you need to change who you’re sending to Washington!

  11. Terry C - Obama/Biden 2008

    YOU don’t get it.

    You want to elect someone whose running mate is against birth control and abortion.

    Palin is a younger version of Phyllis Schlafly, for crying out loud.

    How does that help women?

    Bad enough that you are cutting off your nose to spite your face but you want everyone else to suffer as well.

  12. I see the Atriots have decided come here to insult me…and prove my point once again.

    Tell me how electing Obama and Biden will help women, Terry C? Present an affirmative defense of Obama and his wonderfulness? Refute my points about Obama being unqualified, illegitimate and unelectable? No, just call me names and tell me I’m an idiot. Democratic arguing 101. Surprise, surprise.

    And stop the scaremongering about Palin. Roe v. Wade ain’t going nowhere. The Republicans and Democrats don’t want to lose their greatest bargaining chip.

    Present an argument or go away. In fact, you had your chance. Just go away. Go back to your little echo chamber. I’m sure you’ll be more comfortable where your dismissive, disdainful and inaccurate accusations are confused with intelligent discourse. This is my house, and people who poop on the carpet and expect applause for it are not welcome.


  13. I’m curious, madamab (and other PUMAs who may wish to respond): have you decided to vote for McCain? Or to sit this one out? Or are you still undecided?

    And if you have decided to vote for McCain, can you give some reasons why you would do so? In other words, what are the justifications for a liberal to support McCain/Palin?

    I’m genuinely curious.

  14. Sinfonian – That comment was directed at Terry C, not yourself. I am happy to answer respectful questions like yours.

    Personally, I am voting McKinney, but many PUMAs are voting McCain/Palin. I don’t know if they consider themselves liberals or not.

    The PUMAs who are voting McCain/Palin have the following reasons, from what I’ve gathered:

    1) They are in a swing state and need to in order to defeat Obama.
    2) They agree more with McCain/Palin than Obama/Biden on the issues.

    For more details on us PUMAs, please see Riverdaughter’s excellent post of this morning.

  15. 1) They are in a swing state and need to in order to defeat Obama.
    2) They agree more with McCain/Palin than Obama/Biden on the issues.

    Thanks for your response. I totally understand (although naturally I don’t agree with) #2, but I must admit that I don’t get #1 unless they also are in #2.

    I do agree with Sen. Clinton, who said when she spoke here in Boca Raton that “if you supported [her], you have far more in common with Sen. Obama than you do with Sen. McCain.” (As you may recall, madamab, those posts are what got you and me discussing this topic in the first place.)

    I started to recite all the areas where Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama agree (health care, choice, etc.), but you and your readers know all that. I guess I’ll just have to admit that I may never understand the PUMA perspective.

    Anyway, thanks again for responding. Hope you and Mr. madamab are well.

  16. Tell me how electing Obama and Biden will help women, Terry C?
    100% NARAL rating versus 0%
    Supports equal pay laws versus Opposes
    Lists Ginsburg as favorite SC Judge versus Lists Scalia.

    Biden authored the Federal Violence Against Women Act.
    Palin charged rape victims for investigations.

    Endorsed by every well known feminist – versus endorsed by Phyllis Schafly and Dobson

    You tell me.

  17. Rootless-e – Obama refused to pick Clinton for his VP. Clearly, he does not care at all about the historic nature of this election for women.

    McCain picked a woman for his VP. Clearly, he does care about the historic nature of this election for women.

    Your turn.

  18. Thanks, Sinf! Hope you and the kids are well also.

    I would like to try to explain a bit further on the “issues” argument. We do not believe that Obama and Clinton are the same on them at all. I wrote a post about this a while back, called “Promises, Promises: Why PUMAs Don’t Trust Barack Obama.”

    Also, I forgot to include one key argument for voting McCain/Palin, which is the 30% Solution. But I’ll be posting on it tomorrow if you’re still interested.

  19. She made several comments that were unconscionable. I could overlook when she lied about being shot at, and then said she was tired and misspoke … of course, that does beg the question of whether or not I want her answering the phone at 3 a.m. But her use of the AP poll to inject race into the debate, and her bringing up Bobby Kennedy (with apologies to Lloyd Bentsen, she’s not Bobby Kennedy) on the eve of the 40th anniversary of his death, were inexcusable.

    Ah, the reading of the litany. Too bad it’s all Obamabot spin, not to mention a pretty stupid basis for choosing Obama over Clinton. There is, in fact, an intelligent basis for choosing Obama that, while I did not agree with, I respect. But silly “gotcha” lies are for Republicans.

  20. I can’t state it any clearer than I already have:

    Come here to insult me, and you’re deleted.

    I think it’s pretty clear that people who respectfully disagree with me are not deleted.

  21. madamab:

    The state of alaska had to pass a law to prevent Wasilla under Mayor Palin from charging women for “rape kits”. How is appointing a mamzer like that to high office going to help women or children or anyone else for that matter? How can anyone be so cold and mean-spirited as to tell raped women to pull out the credit card or get lost?

    You have some grand abstraction. I’m too dumb for that. I look as equal pay, taking violence against women seriously, appointing judges who don’t think that the Catholic church owns my daughters womb, and other simple concrete things as the important issues.

  22. So, sorry, Obama just comes up short. Pointing out the deficiencies of McCain/Palin doesn’t make him

    Since I was not an Obama supporter, I have no trouble agreeing that he comes up far short. So does Hillary Clinton, who couldn’t even accept the mantle of liberal but rejected it outright. And McCain/Palin are even worse, but I agree that fact alone doesn’t make Obama a better candidate, just better than them.

    It’s a democracy, your wisdom doesn’t always get accepted by others. If it did, Dennis Kucinich would be the nominee. So you get what you can and work with it.

    Besides which, you shouldn’t be placing all of your hopes and dreams on the shoulders of a president. Democracy requires your participation. You are responsible to yourself for yourself. Blaming politicians is another way of shifting your blame to another.

  23. McCain picked a woman for his VP. Clearly, he does care about the historic nature of this election for women.

    War isn’t much of a future. Nor is it a pleasant past.

  24. rootless-e – I don’t think Obama will do anything whatsoever to help women. If he took our concerns seriously, he would have picked Hillary as his VP.

  25. —-
    I don’t think Obama will do anything whatsoever to help women. If he took our concerns seriously, he would have picked Hillary as his VP

    I disagree, but I don’t think it matters because we only have two choices and there is no question that McCain/Palin will hurt women specifically. Are you ready to take moral responsibility for the actions of VP or President Sarah Palin or President McCain?

  26. Rootless-e – It DOES MATTER. You are utterly missing the point of what I’m saying.

    Obama’s action was a complete “fuck you” to people who supported Hillary Clinton. That’s at least 5 million people, at last count, who heard that message.

    After Obama failed that Presidential test, picked the wrong VP, and lost forever any chance of unifying the Party behind him, McCain took the opportunity to show that he DOES favor equality of opportunity for women.

    Let me ask you this: What has the Democratic Party done for women in the past 30 years? Do we have the ERA? Do we have stronger, or weaker work-life balance laws? Stronger, or weaker choice laws? What have they done for me lately?

    Let’s not forget that with the exception of Hillary and Patty Murray, none of these Democratic Paragons, including Barack Obama, have lifted a finger to try to prevent Bush from declaring that some forms of birth control are now abortifacients.

    SHOW ME SOME ACTIONS, not some bullshit celebrity endorsements.

    And I absolutely do not believe that McCain/Palin will hurt women specifically. Show me one piece of legislation enacted by McCain OR Palin that does that. (And please stop with the rape-kit nonsense. There is no way that is anything but a typical Kossian “zomg she referenced Bobby Kennedy so she wants Obama dead” smear.)

    And I’m sure you know enough about the functioning of American government to realize that laws do not come to pass by themselves, nor do judicial appointments. Do you really think that if McCain/Palin do try something crazy, we shouldn’t be able to count on Congressional Democrats to protect us? If we can’t do that, then why do we even have two parties or divided government? And why do they deserve my votes?

    Obama himself is terrible on choice. He wants to restrict access to third-term abortions and thinks a woman should talk to her pastor or husband before she has one. Do I want a person like that to have full control over the Congress?

    No thanks. If the Democrats ever want womens’ votes again, they will have to prove they deserve them by standing up for our rights against anyone, Democrat OR Republican, who tries to abridge them.

    It’s called democracy.

  27. After Obama failed that Presidential test, picked the wrong VP, and lost forever any chance of unifying the Party behind him, McCain took the opportunity to show that he DOES favor equality of opportunity for women.

    I’m sorry, madamab, but that point is where you lose me. Merely choosing a woman as one’s running mate is NOT evidence of favoring equality of opportunity for women, any more than the converse proves that one DOESN’T favor equality.

    It’s not just about choosing a woman — it’s about choosing the RIGHT woman. And Sarah Palin believes in the subordination of women, in the “barefoot and pregnant” stereotype, if you will, and she certainly doesn’t believe in equal pay for equal work, which is a primary plank in the Obama platform.

    This is what I was afraid of — that the PUMAs were going to support (or at least consider) McCain merely because he chose a woman running-mate. And clearly McCain wanted that, too — because there obviously was no other consideration when he made that selection, since Palin is so utterly unqualified in every pertinent respect.

    Please don’t succumb to the belief that McCain/Palin supports the equality of women. The Republicans didn’t suddenly come around in an instant to see that women ought to be treated equally. It’s smoke and mirrors, my dear — and it’s a trap the GOP cleverly set, hoping to catch the disappointed Clinton supporters. I do hope their trap won’t work, because if it does, millions of women will find that they were hung out to dry.

  28. Hello, madamab. Obama’s campaign and many of his supporters seem unable to set forth reasoned, positive arguments as a means to win people over. Instead, there has been a pattern of put-downs, insults and threats.

    Moreover, if Obama had a proven track record of supporting women’s issues, I might be convinced that he will help women. Instead, he has casted votes of “present” on important legislation, equivocated at a faith forum, and failed to speak out against the Bush administration’s attempt to reclassify certain types of contraception as abortifacients. He even refused to select a female VP or even to promise to appoint an equal number of men and women in his potential cabinet. See Dr. Long’s article for those details:

    Oh, and Palin does not appear to be opposed to birth control:,0,1923582.story

  29. madamab: I’ve got a comment in limbo b/c of the links, I think.

  30. Neither Palin nor McCain opposes abortion when the life of the mother is at risk.

    McCain pays his female staffers better than Obama pays his:

  31. Neither Palin nor McCain opposes abortion when the life of the mother is at risk.

    That must be comforting.

  32. Snow(job) said ‘Barack Obama is voting for an equal pay law. McCain is voting against it.’

    Hm, is this like his “vote” against the war – when he was not even in Congress to place a vote? BZero also pays his female staffers well below what he pays male staffers.

    Snow(job) said ‘Barack Obama will give you dignity, opportunity and respect.’

    Now I know you are joking – right? BZero personally as well as MO savaged Hillary Clinton, her marriage and her acheivements on a daily basis. BZero flipped her the finger, brushed her off his shoulder and wiped his feet – for anyone in public office to behave in such a manner is undignified and unacceptable. Have you been sleeping during this primary political season or are you mainlining kool aid?

    ‘McCain will not give you dignity, opportunity, or respect; but he will pander to you by giving you a woman.

    I know these may be troubling, but you need to face them.’

    Snow(job) – you demonstrate the same poor judgement as your messiah – you chose to post lies on someone’s blog who disagrees with you based on facts. I suspect YOU are very very troubled right now because what millions have been telling the DNC et al is now coming about. BZero will lose because of his own behavior and lack of experience, lack of knowledge, lack of policy and a habit of squandering money and still not able to close the deal.

    I find you boring and not worth notice – Poof -be gone back to your echo chamber. We have no interest in your words. Short of a brain transplant – you hold no promise for intelligent discourse. Bah bye!

  33. Sinfonian said: “Please don’t succumb to the belief that McCain/Palin supports the equality of women. The Republicans didn’t suddenly come around in an instant to see that women ought to be treated equally.

    John McCain pays the women who work in his office the same (actually a little more) than the men. Barack Obama goes with the standard 77% rule. Words are lovely. Actions count.

    rootless-e said: “I disagree, but I don’t think it matters because we only have two choices and there is no question that McCain/Palin will hurt women specifically.

    There’s your problem, Vern. We do NOT only have two choices, unless we are so propagandized by the celebrity media that we can no longer see reality. We have several choices, of which McCain and Obama are only two. The other choices include McKinney, Barr, and Nader. The “two-party system” is not written into our Constitution. If you’d been paying attention in your HS civics class (or whatever they call the subject now), instead of texting your friends, you would know that. With Clinton out of the picture, I prefer McKinney — I get to vote for not ONE, but TWO women on the ticket, AND I get to vote for an AA, and someone with a credible liberal record. But of course, your precious media has so marginalized McKinney (as they have Nader, and Barr, and Paul, and Kucinich and…well anybody that doesn’t send tingles up their legs) that you will turn your nose up at even considering her.

    In the end, madamab, I’m kind of tired of justifying my voting preference to a bunch of snot-nosed little brats who are still throwing temper tantrums 18 years after they should have been toilet trained. Yikes! Other people’s children!

  34. Sinfonian –

    I completely disagree with you.

    I’m sorry, madamab, but that point is where you lose me. Merely choosing a woman as one’s running mate is NOT evidence of favoring equality of opportunity for women, any more than the converse proves that one DOESN’T favor equality.

    Yes, it is, and yes, it does. If Obama wanted to address the concerns of PUMAs, which are real, factually based and clearly strong enough to turn off millions and millions of die-hard Democrats, then he should have backed up his words with actions, which he never. Ever. Does.

    We owe him nothing. He needs to convince us to vote for him. He has not done so. Whose fault is that – his, or ours?

    It’s his. Deal with it. Deal. With. It. He is such a bad candidate that millions of Democrats REFUSE TO VOTE FOR HIM. Yes, people who voted every Democrat for 50 years WILL NOT VOTE FOR HIM. You Obamans need to ask yourself why that is. There has never been a successful political party that blames the voters for its own failings. That’s where the Democrats are now. How’s that working out for us?

    And you need to realize that we are not misled, not stupid or clueless to the fact that McCain is pandering to us. We are simply unconvinced by Obama. And no one can convince us but he. His last chance for me was whether or not he would honor Hillary Clinton’s historic achievements in the primaries by choosing her as Vice President. He didn’t. He failed. So McCain went right in and honored her by picking Sarah Palin.

    And please, stop talking about her lack of qualifications. It’s just ludicrous on its face. Obama is the least qualified presidential candidate in recent memory. The VP on the Republican side has more governing experience than the Presidential candidate on the Democratic side.

    I think this is enough now. I appreciate your contribution and your thoughts, but we should probably take it off-line if we want to continue.

    Thanks very much.

    As for Snow and rootless-e, if you post lies here, you will also be deleted. You have to understand that you are presenting a contrary view to the blog, and if you spread lies and smears, it won’t be tolerated.

  35. Pingback: The Politics of Fear? « Oooh, nuance!

  36. Pingback: The Politics of Fear? « The Confluence

  37. So McCain went right in and honored her by picking Sarah Palin.

    Well, I’m quite sure he didn’t choose Palin as a means of honoring Hillary Clinton or her many accomplishments.

    Anyway, you’re right — we’ll just have to agree to disagree.

  38. Sinfonian –

    Just for your reference: McCain and his surrogates have been meeting with Hillary Clinton’s supporters and reassuring them that women would be properly honored and respected in his administration.

    He has backed up his words with actions. The 30% Solution is non-partisan, so electing a woman to the Executive Branch for the first time in history IS a feminist victory. And no, feminism is NOT just about abortion. I highly recommend Dr. Violet Socks on this issue.

    Do I think honoring Hillary was the only reason McCain picked Palin? No. But it certainly was A reason.

    Sorry, Sinf, you don’t get the last word on my blog. You can have it on yours though!