tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-865494184012705718.post4443253110248469128..comments2008-01-24T10:59:01.647-05:00Anthony Palmer, Ph.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/00043374303541804437noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-865494184012705718.post-75264119039799144082008-01-24T10:59:00.000-05:002008-01-24T10:59:00.000-05:00Nikki,<BR/><BR/>You are also right in that Obama is indeed trying hard to stay out of the Clintons' mud pit. But I think Obama is so afraid of being swiftboated that he has no choice but to respond to the Clintons' attacks. It's sad, but it's also politics. New Hampshire voters had the chance to bring the Clintons to their knees in their primary two weeks ago, but passed on the opportunity. I am not sure if Obama is tough enough to beat the Clintons, but in a way, this is good practice for him because if he becomes the nominee, what the Clintons are doing to him now won't even compare to what the GOP throws at him in October and November.<BR/><BR/>Oh, and younger (Democratic-leaning) voters who might not remember so much about the 90s are probably looking at this fighting and are moving to Obama in droves.Anthony Palmerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00043374303541804437noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-865494184012705718.post-27073778888444507702008-01-24T10:23:00.000-05:002008-01-24T10:23:00.000-05:00Hey Anthony.......I still disagree even though the point may have been to contrast the differences in perception. I still think Obama is taking the high road and Hillary is not. It doesn't always come down to definition PC politics, sometimes it just is how it is. Sometimes there is NO injustice. I completely disagree. But it sure does make for a lot of comments first thing in the morning!!! hahaha<BR/>N :)Nikkihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06506161645223765063noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-865494184012705718.post-3392787093898736372008-01-24T08:32:00.000-05:002008-01-24T08:32:00.000-05:00Nikki,<BR/><BR/>I think you missed the point of Anonymous's first post. He was remarking on how similar behavior from two candidates is branded in two different ways. When Obama attacks Hillary, he's seen as a "gentleman." When Hillary attacks Obama, she's seen as a "bitch." I believe this is what he was talking about and has some merit, though I think other factors are involved.<BR/><BR/>-----<BR/><BR/>Schenck,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for the comment. Apparently this debate was the highest rated one in cable history. I guess Jerry Springer type debates are better for ratings than Meet the Press type debates. I must admit that it was good television even though I was really unhappy with the lack of substance at times.<BR/><BR/>-----<BR/><BR/>Andy,<BR/><BR/>You are right about Edwards. Seems like he would be a compromise candidate if you synthesized Obama and Clinton. But he seems to be suffering from "also ran" status in that his time may have passed. People know who Edwards is already, and they aren't in his camp even though he's already been in the limelight.Anthony Palmerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00043374303541804437noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-865494184012705718.post-81939913959100942792008-01-24T08:27:00.000-05:002008-01-24T08:27:00.000-05:00Hey Anonymous:<BR/><BR/>I support Obama. The difference between him and Hillary is that he tells the truth and she lies and deceives. It has nothing to do with sexism and everything to do with morality.Schenckhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11388487522026095619noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-865494184012705718.post-4754587213530250382008-01-24T02:51:00.000-05:002008-01-24T02:51:00.000-05:00This is where you are wrong. I don't like Obama's policies and I agree there are none and they are sticky sweet, however I do not see him playing as dirty as Hillary. That is my opinion. As far as you and your belief that I am a thwarter of civil rights and feminist ideals strictly on the basis of being conservative is ignorant and arrogant. I am sure the monopoly you claim on civil rights you actually believe so the discussion is of no value. And feminism you can have. I want no part of it.Nikkihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06506161645223765063noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-865494184012705718.post-37336476856380851842008-01-24T02:10:00.000-05:002008-01-24T02:10:00.000-05:00I mean that it is inappropriate for a Republican anything to even utter the word "feminism" without conjuring up decades of attempts to thwart gender equality and civil rights across the board... but that's another topic entirely.<BR/><BR/>I've come to the conclusion that it's probably not so much sexism as ignorance. Because you like Obama and the media has taught you to like Obama, Obama can do no wrong. Nevermind the fact that he speaks mostly in generalities and flowery rhetoric.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-865494184012705718.post-80285339553970985882008-01-24T02:01:00.000-05:002008-01-24T02:01:00.000-05:00The fact that you are a man lends you no more credibility. And I am not sure what "of all people" means but I am sure it means something demeaning. Which I am sure is OK for a democrat man to be a sexist to a republican woman, because democrats aren't sexist they only define who is and is not. You are the aggressor so you are a sexist. What am I?Nikkihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06506161645223765063noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-865494184012705718.post-62995364252260236372008-01-24T01:53:00.000-05:002008-01-24T01:53:00.000-05:00self-deprecation* evenAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-865494184012705718.post-67177352976741070692008-01-24T01:43:00.000-05:002008-01-24T01:43:00.000-05:00I'm actually not a woman, but I recognize sexism when I see it. Sexism is when a woman is aggressive and is called out while a man is similarly aggressive and praised. I'm clearly not going to discuss feminism with a woman Republican of all people. Talk about self-depredation. Lest we forget that you MISSED the debate as well.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-865494184012705718.post-48454480406897540542008-01-24T01:23:00.000-05:002008-01-24T01:23:00.000-05:00Not sexism......its called REALITY....I am a woman and a republican and it is as plain as day who the attacker is....I fail to see how this is sexism. Criticism towards Hillary is sexist? Interesting where the feminist movement has gone. To the role of victim no doubt. You said it yourself Obama is putting up with her attacks, obviously its NOT the same game. get off your "I am woman" high horse. Hillary doesn't represent all women. Just the ones who throw around terms of intimidation like sexist.Nikkihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06506161645223765063noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-865494184012705718.post-87725784794693218132008-01-24T00:44:00.000-05:002008-01-24T00:44:00.000-05:00I love how Obama is a "gentleman" for putting up with Clinton's attacks but she's apparently a mean bitch for playing the same game. What overt sexism.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-865494184012705718.post-539351934179985522008-01-22T18:17:00.000-05:002008-01-22T18:17:00.000-05:00Great analysis. You hit on it a little bit in the Clinton section, but I think last night probably helped Clinton in the long run. She pulled Obama down to her level, which isn't his comfort zone or where he probably wants to be. Overall, though, each candidate should be pleased. Obama did well defending most attacks, while Edwards looked above the fray and had very detailed policy points.Andyhttp://politicalrealm.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-865494184012705718.post-78233129648980127942008-01-22T17:16:00.000-05:002008-01-22T17:16:00.000-05:00and to clarify that the other party is NOT all wrong. not IS all wrong....sorry.Nikkihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06506161645223765063noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-865494184012705718.post-45633907964642570202008-01-22T17:14:00.000-05:002008-01-22T17:14:00.000-05:00Anthony I missed the debate but caught clips of it on CNN and Youtube.....Hillary to me looked very bad. Obama has put up with her attacks like a gentleman and I am wondering how long that will go on.......Though I did think Obama looked a little ill-prepared to answer some questions. He seemed to be searching for words most of the time. And little Rodney King errrrrr John Edwards was annoying. But he annoys me no matter what. The only dem I don't find annoying is Obama. I wish he would have grasped a little Reagan love and showed it. I would like to see one candidate say that the opposite party is ALL wrong. To me that is a red flag. Which is why I don't listen to Limbaugh or Hannity. To think that your party has a monopoly on what is right is a closed minded view and kool-aid consumption. I am wary of those people and I close my mind to them. Hillary would like to think she is the great American savior but we all know she talks out both sides of her face. Barack is too nice to stoop. Great post.<BR/>NikkiNikkihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06506161645223765063noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-865494184012705718.post-13823444807106586642008-01-22T13:27:00.000-05:002008-01-22T13:27:00.000-05:00Go Obama!<BR/><BR/>Good analysis, Palmer, I totally agree that Clinton is basically shafting South Carolina in lieu of Super Awesome Fantastic Tuesday. It will be interesting to see how Obama works his organization for the big day. I wish Kucinich was still in the debates; if Edwards is invited, so should he be. I wonder what the ratings were for last night's debate; I hope they were high, as I thought all of the candidates' true colors showed through: Clinton's twisting venom, Edwards' opportunism, Obama's honesty (I'm biased, but it was nice to see him stand up for himself against the machine), but I missed the line, "None of our hands are completely clean;" hope the MSM doesn't pick up on that.<BR/><BR/>WINNERS: Obama, McCain, Kucinich<BR/><BR/>LOSERS: the rest of the Republican candidatesSchenckhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11388487522026095619noreply@blogger.com