Hillary Clinton: Good for White Feminism, Bad for Racial Justice

[Bonobo]

http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2015/04/12/hillary-clinton-good-for-white-feminism/
Today in New York City, Hillary Rodham Clinton announced that she is officially a candidate for the 2016 presidential campaign. While many people are excited about the prospect of the first woman president, I think that a Hillary Clinton presidency will be another in a long series of triumphs for white, corporate feminism and defeats for racial justice.

Here’s a very incomplete, yet still telling, run-down on Clinton’s résumé to date:

*Despite trumpeting her work on behalf of “mothers and children,” she and her husband worked to reduce federal assistance to women and children living in poverty. In her book, Living History, Clinton touts her role: “By the time Bill and I left the White House, welfare rolls had dropped 60 percent.” This 60% drop was not due to a 60% decrease in poverty. Instead, it was a reduction in federal benefits to those living in poverty, many of them working poor, like those employed at Wal-Mart.

*Clinton sat on the board of Wal-Mart between 1986 and 1992, where she says she learned a lot from Sam Walton, and she remained silent while the corporation fought the unionization of its workers.

*In Michelle Alexander’s book, The New Jim Crow, she notes that it was Hillary Clinton who lobbied Congress to expand the drug war and mass incarceration in ways that we continue to live with today, and that have a significantly more harmful impact on black and brown people than white people. According to The Drug Policy Alliance, people of color are much more likely to be stopped, searched, arrested, convicted, harshly sentenced and saddled with a lifelong criminal record due to being unfairly targeted for drug law violations. Even though white people and people of color use drugs at about the same rates, it is black and brown people’s bodies that continue to fuel the machine of mass incarceration.

*As Secretary of State, Clinton left a legacy that included both a hawkish inclination to recommend the use of military force coupled with “turning the state department into a machine for promoting U.S. business.” This does not bode well for black and brown people in other parts of the world, since the US is not likely to attack Western Europe under a (second) Clinton presidency, but some region of the world with people who do not have light-colored skin tones.

[uponit7771]

1. All the candidates records on stand for good, none of them have taken money from white supremacist

... groups like the GOP has.

There's no way any progressive worth their salt are going to take seriously that any of the candidates have a GOP size issue with POC...

There are people who look like they have a Tin ear towards issues people of color face but that's not Hillary

[Bonobo]

2. As POTUS Obama pointed out recently...

Simply having a receptive ear, not saying the "N" word and spouting sensitivity to the issues of people of color does not make up for enacting policies that are deleterious to the very people that one purports to be serving.

That is the kind way of saying "Money talks, bullshit walks".

If there were not more black people in prison as a result of the Drug War imposed by the Clintons (Yeah, I know it was Bill, I also know that Hillary was not a stay at home cookie-making mom and likes to boast of her strong influence.), more dead brown people (in the millions) as the result of war and embargoes, then I might be inclined to just leave it at "Yup, she's real nice to black folk!"

That isn't the case though. Policies matter.

[uponit7771]

3. Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton are two different people why conflate the two?

[Bonobo]

4. I reject the idea that Hillary takes credit for the good accomplishments

but sneaks out of the bad ones.

A strong woman like her would surely make it clear how opposed she is to her husband's policies if that was how she felt, no?

[uponit7771]

22. I reject the strawman that she takes credit for the good accomplishments, when has she done that? ti

[Exilednight]

27. She touts her role as First Lady as part of her experience.

She argued in 2008 that she told Bill NAFTA was a bad idea, then switched positions and suddenly she was for it, and in 2008 she had yet another epiphany and quickly turned against it.

IN her own words, “By the time Bill and I left the White House, welfare rolls had dropped 60 percent.”

Sounds like she's taking credit to me.

[uponit7771]

29. That's good, doesn't mean she was Bill Clinton as the article intimates in its conflation of the

... two beings.

She's her own person and of course I'd tout the good things

Clinton was a damn good presidents as have all liberal presidents I know of in the last century have been.

I pray she doesn't go the way of the Gore campaign and distance herself away from the good her husband and Obama have done...

That's stupid...

She should be running next to success which is what the last two democratic presidents economically have been for the most part

[Exilednight]

37. Bill's economic "success" is part of the reason

We are in the economic mess we are in today. He rode a bubble that burst beneath him just as he was getting ready to leave office.

Everyone complains of Bush's economic failures, but I truly believe that Bill would have pushed the housing bubble too.

She should be running next to success which is what the last two democratic presidents economically have been for the most part

Is she running as her own person and on her own achievements, or running next to Bill's success? You can't have it both ways.

[uponit7771]

41. ...riiiiight, Bill gave Ol George Bush a mess... Clinton raising taxes on the rich had nothing to...

... do with the deficit changing and a stronger dollar

sigh...

...and now Clinton ecomically is worse that Bush or on par!?!?!?

This is not redstate.com

There is no "both ways" she can be her own person while touting the success of people who think like her

[Exilednight]

47. Two for the price of one, ready on day one is her motto.

[RufusTFirefly]

5. WaPo from 2007: Hillary Clinton Embraces Her Husband's Legacy

Maybe you should ask her

Hillary Clinton Embraces Her Husband's Legacy

CONCORD, N.H., Dec. 21 -- After months of discussion within her campaign over how heavily she should draw on her husband's legacy, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is closing out her Iowa and New Hampshire campaigns in a tight embrace of Bill Clinton's record, helping fuel a debate about the 1990s with Sen. Barack Obama that she thinks she can win.

...

Both Clintons are making the case that theirs was a co-presidency -- an echo of Bill Clinton's controversial statement during the 1992 campaign that voters would get "two for the price of one" if they elected him. At times, the former president has seemed to cast the current race as a referendum on his administration.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/21/AR2007122102588.html

[uponit7771]

23. ...and that still doesn't mean they're the same being. This line of thinking is crazy, the article..

...conflates two people and intimates they're of the same mind which is stupid.

Hillary Clinton can make policy without Bill Clinton... who, btw... like all liberal presidents, was a damn good president

[okasha]

114. Let's call this line of thinking what it is: sexism.

A wife has no existence apart from her husband. If he thought X, clearly she thinks X, too.

[merrily]

9. For one thing, they sold themselves that way. For another, they are NOT that different. For a third,

she's approved of his Presidency and many of his individual policies. For a fourth, they've worked as a team. See also,
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12778412

This whole notion that they are entirely different is a fairy tale.

[uponit7771]

24. Any intimations they're the person is irrational at best. Conflating one with another as if they're

... a damn hive mind is laughable and Clinton was a damn good president as most liberal presidents are and had his warts as most people do.

Hopefully she'll do 90% of what her husband did as a liberal president while changing a thing or two to make things better.

[merrily]

25. The post to which I linked you does not say they are the same person.

It's a lot better reasoned and better supported than your conclusory claims that they're very different, though. And nothing in that post was irrational.


They sold themselves as a team, as getting two for one. They are still sometimes sold that way. And, since repeating the same claim seems to be the order of the day, she also endorsed a lot of his policies, like NAFTA. Sorry they don't get to be very different only when it's convenient and "two for the price of one" when that's more convenient.

[uponit7771]

26. Then who gives a damn, I agree with 90% of what Clinton did too and I'm not married to the

... guy.

Stupid article, Clinton being a damn good president I pray that she does do some things that Bill did and take out the bad learning from the past.

A husband and wife have to "sell" themselves as a team, damn well better be a team... I'd not want to vote for anyone who has a life partner that fights against them when they get the chance!!!

Even if they weren't sold as a "team" (whatever that means now) you expect her to come out openly against every policy he enacts at that time so she can distance herself from the ones she doesn't agree with arbitrarily?!

This line of thinking seems nonsensical at best...

Clinton = Damn good president, like most of the liberal presidents have been

This seems to be picking fly shit from pepper

[merrily]

28. Boy, you sure did a180.

[uponit7771]

31. This is false, Clinton was a damn good liberal president and Hillary and Bill are a team (hopefully)

... but not the same person.

What, she's now going to have to check with her husband or something in making policy!?

I don't like this article at all

[merrily]

36. AGAIN, I never said they were the same person. Please stop repeating hyperbolic talking points that

have nothing to do with what I actually posted.

[uponit7771]

43. Strawman, no one said you did. The article conflates the two beings and so do itimations

... that they're a "two for one" deal as if they were supposed to be a two headed hydra or some shit.

They were a team HOPEFULLY, they were supposed to go into the white house as a team...

The article is being redundent at best and stating somethings that's normal as an issue of sorts

[merrily]

46. Yet, you keep posting that comment to me, not to the OP. I did not write or post the article.

However, I very much doubt the OP article says they are the same person, either. That is, as I said, a hyberbolic talking point.
's

[Divernan]

30. Merrily,that's an awesomely researched & powerful OP!

I have done a lot of research for my various jobs (over 4 decades) as NIMH Felllow & researcher, sociology & law professor and trial and legislative attorney. If you were briefing the issue, as in Brief in Support of Motion that HRC endorsed and enabled her husband's actions as POTUS, any judge would rule in your favor.

I am thankful for the time and efforts you put forth on DU to shine the light of truth on the debate between the Sanders and Clinton supporters. Your fact-based and thoroughly documented posts stand in stark contrast to the increasingly desperate posts by HRC supporters, which are at best exaggerated and at worst totally undocumented wishful claims.

While those few hundreds of us who post on this primary struggle will not likely change each other's commitments, there are thousands of undecideds, uncommitted people reading our posts, and I expect their choices will be based on facts presented in OPs like yours!

[merrily]

34. Wow, I didn't know you were all those things. Thanks for such kind words, but it didn't take much

research. The campaign buttons were all on ebay when I wrote the post. (I hope they're still showing up. I didn't checked.

I think those buttons also suggest they were planning to go for first woman President for a long time. And, when she ran for Senate, some of her campaign buttons said New York, but some said Hillary for America.

I hope we help make up some minds, but mostly, I'm preaching to the choir. They may be able to make use of some of those facts in the real world.

Thanks again for your kind words. Very much appreciated.

,

[jwirr]

110. Yes, they are and it was well known that she was one of his most influential advisers. This she can

be asked what her advise was on various issues. Indeed much of it is known already.

[merrily]

7. She used race against Obama in 2008 again and again.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/12/obama-camps-memo-on-clint_n_81205.html

She said her constituency was "hard working white people."

Her fake Southern accent when she speaks to predominantly African American audiences doesn't do much for me either. Neither did her comparing being a United States Senator to working on a plantation.

Sorry, denial on the part of her fans doesn't do it. There are news stories and videos out there a-plenty.

[Bonobo]

8. I would post the fake accent video, but I just ate chili... nt

[marble falls]

18. I'll do it for you:

[stonecutter357]

6. you seem desperate!

[merrily]

10. To be fair, when you lift up women, you lift up all women.

For example, white women are by far not the only ones who need, and should have, control over their own bodies.

[gollygee]

11. To some extent

but this is a common and fair criticism of feminism. Historically white (and particularly wealthy) feminists were helped while their nannies and housekeepers were left out.

[merrily]

14. I agree. It's to an extent. But, when you fight for equal pay for women and control of women's

bodies, you are affecting all women. When you fight to save the last abortion clinic in a state, you are affecting all women in that state. And so one.

Obviously, I am not a Hillary supporter, but I am trying to be fair. The women's issues she champions affect all women.

[gollygee]

15. I agree that some women's issues are about all women

and I don't know what the breakdown is, as far as if the women's movement ignored women of color (as it did for a long time) how much women of color would be helped vs. how much they'd be left behind. I just know I've read a lot about this issue, and it's not an uncommon or unfair criticism.

[merrily]

16. I didn't say it was an unfair criticism. My post is in the context of this thread, again,

just an attempt to be fair to Hillary. AFAIK, at no time did she distinguish between white women and other women.

[gollygee]

12. After reading this and your thread in AA

it sounds like you are uncomfortable with the coalition many women and many people of color have built.

[Exilednight]

32. What coalition of women?

I have yet to hear a unified voice from women. I am the only blood born boy in my family on my mom's side after my grandfather. 3 aunts, 17 female cousins and 4 sisters, all born and raised in Chicago; only two of which would follow Hillary's idea of feminism. Not surprisingly, those 2 are the same demographic ad Hillary - white, female and late 60s.

[gollygee]

40. You must have reading comprehension issues

or you would have seen the word "many."

[Exilednight]

44. Not at all. You said "the coalition many", did you not?

If you did, then my question stands.

[gollygee]

58. I said "many women and many people of color"

have formed a coalition. That is an explicit statement that it isn't all women or all people of color.

[Exilednight]

66. Again, what coalition? Please show me these

Coalitions that are speaking for women and PoC.

If you're using words like coalition, you need to quantify it, or at least qualify it with organizations.

[gollygee]

69. You're playing games with the defintion of "coalition"

But it's a game, it's not the standard defintion of "coalition," and you know exactly what I mean. Polls show that majority of women, and a majority of people of color, are going to vote for Clinton. I am a woman who is not part of that voting block, but I still recognize it exists. Pretending it isn't there isn't helping you or Sanders.


co·a·li·tion (kō′ə-lĭsh′ən)
n.
1. An alliance, especially a temporary one, of people, factions, parties, or nations.
2. A combination into one body; a union.
3.
a. A long-term cooperative alliance among a small number of male lions or cheetahs, especially to gain access to females or territory.
b. A transitory association of animals of the same species in which members join forces against another animal or animals to defend against an attack or gain access to a resource.
[French, from Medieval Latin coalitiō, coalitiōn-, from Latin coalitus, past participle of coalēscere, to grow together; see coalesce.]

[Exilednight]

70. Pretending that this imaginary coalition for Hillary

Exists isn't helping you or Hillary.

[gollygee]

112. I don't care if it helps her as I'm not voting for her

I'd vote for O'Malley first. I have no agenda other than reality.

However, I am a Red Wings fan.

[bettyellen]

72. there's been an informal one here for years, and it seems to piss off the op

It took me a long time to realize it put many of the most steadfast supporters of Womens rights happen to be POC. And vice versa. There's a bond in the commonality of experiences- and how many of those experiences are downplayed and minimized here. Funny that the OP would call himself out this way.
Anyway, this aligns pretty closely to my real life experiences- particularly at school and work as well. Not sure why this would surprise anyone?

[Exilednight]

75. You can say it exists all you want, but I'm not seeing it.

I literally only know two people supporting Hillary, and they have the exact same background as Hillary - white, female and privileged.

I have many friends who are PoC and active in politics, and not a single one says they are supporting Hillary.

Where are these people outside of DU?

[bettyellen]

85. You can downplay my life's experiences here-

And that's exactly why a bond exists- the shared experiences of having your experiences and issues downplayed. Feels like we're going in a circle. But maybe it's because you are viewing this through a Hillary lens?

I'm a product of very diverse and borderline impoverished enviornment where we were told were all we should finally have equal opportunity. We could see the pushback all around us. We could see a lot of people fighting to minimize our concerns and preserve the status quo. When you look around saying WTF? You notice others doing the same. Whether the OP likes it or not, there's a commonality of experience many of us speak from. He was never considered a second class citizen, and I am pretty sure he would like us to forget we were for far too long.

[Exilednight]

111. And no one has answered my coalition question.

Where is this coalition?

[bettyellen]

113. I get that none of what I said is real- or matters much to you.

Believe me I get it. Keep
Scratching your head when looking at voting patterns and wondering why. I don't need to.

[lovemydog]

119. It's called The Democratic Party.

[Exilednight]

122. That's not a coalition. The Rainbow

coalition is a real coalition.

So again, I ask, who is this coalition?

[lovemydog]

123. What is your final answer?

[Exilednight]

124. I keep asking and no one has the answer to this fictitious coalition.

[merrily]

45. Women are over 50% of the population. I would not set the standard of speaking with 1 voice.

[Exilednight]

48. Speaking with one voice is the definition of a coalition.

[1StrongBlackMan]

35. Bingo ... Trying to drive a wedge between women and PoC. n/t

[bettyellen]

64. Sowing division and distrust is a game he tried in the AA group.

It didn't go so well there either.
I was told (by another white guy- who also hates HOF- coincidentally!) I wasn't allowed to speak up for POC ever. I have had occasion to - particularly at work because I was a senior employee.

Fuck anyone who plays a game trying to bad mouth someone for doing the right thing.

Maybe if they ever stuck their neck our for someone theyd know how childish this argument is. Apparently looking the other way is better in their books. That explains alot.

[1StrongBlackMan]

98. I make a practice of following the very few ...

non-Black (I presume) posters that seem, by their posts, to "get" what the Black DUers have been saying, all along. I do so, in order to correct any misinterpretation. But, interestingly, I have had very little to correct. It seems that what we have been saying is not that hard to understand. Go figure.

[JTFrog]

77. Indeed. n/t

[shaayecanaan]

13. And yet, according to her supporters...

...minorities stand ready to clasp Hillary to their collective bosoms and to express their undying love to her by running through the streets singing hosanna to the highest.

[merrily]

17. that's not only her supporters. It's polls.

We read the news every day. Most people do not.

Even if they do, they don't necessarily break it all down as much as we do, or get articles from several sources on the same issue or event.

[JaneyVee]

19. And which of the other candidates would be better for black feminism?

[Bonobo]

20. I know which one would be better for racial justice.

Senator Bernie Sanders.

[merrily]

39. Which Democratic candidate would be bad for African American feminism?

[Cryptoad]

21. Take it to Red State dot com,,,,,geez

[1StrongBlackMan]

33. Intersting article and interesting website ...

unsurprisingly, the site's operators view "social justice" through an economic primacy and individual rights perspective, condemning HRC, not for her positions she takes today; but, for things her husband did and what she didn't do 30 years ago (e.g., welfare reform, the war of drugs, her seat on Walmart's board).

And oh yeah ... Why are you being divisive; trying to drive a wedge between women and PoC?

[sufrommich]

38. OP has a long history of "concern" for feminists.

[LanternWaste]

53. The sincerity of his concern drips like melted ice cream...

The sincerity of his concern drips like melted ice cream...

[Starry Messenger]

68. Hahahahahaha

Agreed.

[Romulox]

73. Speaking of hahaha...."Socialist"...for Hillary?

[Starry Messenger]

74. Letting the USSC fall to conservatives will

bring labor to its knees. So yeah, preserving our ability to collectively bargain is a priority of mine.

If Bernie gains the candidacy, I will eat any hat of your choosing. I wish we lived in a country where he wins. I don't think we do.

[Romulox]

76. We haven't had primaries, yet, remember? You're supporting Hillary over Bernie while you still have

a choice.

Supporting the corporatist candidate over the socialist, at this juncture, speaks for itself.

[Starry Messenger]

78. And?

There are a metric shit ton of Bernie supporters here who have never given a shit about unions or socialism before this year. Things that make you go hmmmm

[Romulox]

79. We all have a right to "evolve". But you support the corporate candidate over the more progressive

one.

[Starry Messenger]

80. Your opinion.

I disagree. Wavy bye bye.

[Romulox]

81. Reality. You support the $2.5 *BILLION* candidate. Over the socialist. nt

[Starry Messenger]

83. Yeah, I'd like my candidate to win.

I believe I stated that Rom. Your grasp of the obvious is impressive.

[Romulox]

84. There are no atheists in a foxhole, I guess. nt

[Starry Messenger]

88. Great, glad we got that cleared up for you.

Stick to your area of expertise, I always say.

I know who my union allies are here, and several posters here who support another candidate have been most vocal trashing teachers unions for years. Speaks volumes.

[Romulox]

90. You're a regular revolutionary for the status quo.

And btw: my comments, all those years ago, were that teachers (such as yourself) shouldn't expect support from workers, if teachers won't support other workers (e.g. by supporting corporations' candidate over the more progressive candidate.)

And lookee here! You're supporting the candidate from Goldman Sachs because you (wrongly) think you'll be rewarded for betraying your fellow workers. So who was right, and who was wrong?

[Starry Messenger]

92. When the USSC strips collective bargaining

from labor next year, I'm sure we will see your full-throated OPs on the subject. I'm sure you will show us all how it's done.

[Romulox]

93. Supporting Wall Street's candidate (while we still have a choice!) doesn't help that.

Seriously. You need to rethink your positions.

[Starry Messenger]

94. Yeah, seriously.

When I believe Bernie has a chance in heck of stopping the erosion of working class gains by getting elected, I will do that. I don't right now.

When I see his supporters actually support labor and social justice, two cornerstones of any serious push for socialism, I might take his campaign seriously.

[Romulox]

95. Have the last word, if you like. Just disappointed to see another not walk the talk. nt

[Starry Messenger]

97. I know who walks the talk around here.

[Beacool]

115. As a Trekkie, I'm still laughing at this.

[merrily]

42. Her actions over many years were kind of consistent with each other. To me, they are far

more telling than campaign rhetoric.

Funny, her supporters thought an essay Sanders wrote 43 years ago was more telling than his 100% record during his entire political career.

[1StrongBlackMan]

51. Funny ...

BErie supporters feel the need to inject him and/or attacks on HRC (or her suppoters) in every single post, as if that gIves more credence to their post.

I was referring to the OP, and the OP only.

[merrily]

52. And I responded to your post. Funny, rather than address what I said about Hillary, you attack the

fact that I mentioned Bernie because the double standard was so glaring. For Hillary, we can't look past campaign rhetoric. For Bernie, we can go back 43 years and ignore everything after that. And, if I may, that's a odd reply from ror someone who's undecided.

That said, I still made a point about her careers. It speaks louder than campaign rhetoric.

ETA: You do know that I am an individual, right? I am not posting in concert with anyone. And I've made tons of posts without mentioning both candidates. If you have something to say about me or my posts, fair enough. I am not the poster child for all Bernie posters though.

[JTFrog]

82. But it's ok for you to refer to Hillary's supporters as a single entity?

And you do this what? 60 times a day or so?

Pffff...

[merrily]

87. Actually, I don't do that anywhere near in every post. That's false.

Moreover, if you count how many times Bernie's supporters have been referred to on this board vs. how many times Hillary's supporters have been referred to, you will probably find that the former happens much more, even though Hillary's supporters seem to be a minority on this board.

And, while it's flattering to have so many of you want to comment on my post, it really is better if you focus more on substance than on your fellow posters.

[JTFrog]

89. Oh there you go again, doing to others as you hate done to yourself.

Good on ya...

Keep on Keeping on...

Whatever floats your boat....

[merrily]

91. Try again. My Reply 42 had relevance to the thread topic.

Every reply to me since then, including yours, has had zero relevance to the thread topic, just comments about me.

[JTFrog]

96. Good thing about discussion boards....

Everyone can see the way the discussion actually unfolded.

This is the post you replied to:

Intersting article and interesting website ...

unsurprisingly, the site's operators view "social justice" through an economic primacy and individual rights perspective, condemning HRC, not for her positions she takes today; but, for things her husband did and what she didn't do 30 years ago (e.g., welfare reform, the war of drugs, her seat on Walmart's board).

And oh yeah ... Why are you being divisive; trying to drive a wedge between women and PoC?

This was your reply:

Her actions over many years were kind of consistent with each other. To me, they are far more telling than campaign rhetoric.

Funny, her supporters thought an essay Sanders wrote 43 years ago was more telling than his 100% record during his entire political career.

Quit playing innocent. You got back what you gave. It happens. Sometimes others will come along and point out when it does.

[merrily]

103. There was an on topic comment in that post. Not so any post since.

[JTFrog]

104. You are hilarious. n/t

[merrily]

99. Come to think of it JTFrog, I cannot think of a single post of yours to me that was about any topic

except me. I'm flattered, but try posting on the thread topic more. Who knows? You might like it.

[JTFrog]

102. I will post however the fuck I want.

And you really shouldn't be flattered.

[merrily]

105. Sorry, I ten to omit the sarcasm emote when I think any reasonable reader could figure it out.

[JTFrog]

106. Oh, I've figured it out just fine. n/t

[LanternWaste]

55. No doubt the irrational mind allows a handful of examples to act as the standard.

"Funny, her supporters..."

No doubt the irrational mind allows a handful of examples to act as the standard. Well, irrational or simply biased; but I repeat myself...

Funny, part two.

[merrily]

57. Neither irrational nor biased. There is no reason on earth that I would have started out

biased against Hillary. I have three reasons why she is not my candidate, and none of them are the result of anything but her own acts and omissions.

[Adrahil]

60. Easy there...

Another broad brush treatment of "her supporters."

[merrily]

61. The broad brush of Bernie's supporters was OK with you, though?

By the way, my statement was accurate as far as DU. A search of DU will tell you that.

[Adrahil]

62. Nope, I criticize that too, though there are plenty of others...

... to deal with it in this thread.

But are you really trying the "everybody else is doing it" defense? I don't accept that from my teenage daughter. She's old enough to know better.

I prefer Hillary as my candidate, but will support Bernie as best as I can if he gets the nomination.

[merrily]

63. So, your response to my pointing out YOUR highly selective double standard is condescendingly

comparing me to your teenage daughter? LOL!

I recommend you post on the thread topic instead of about me.

[shaayecanaan]

117. And we all know that people who care about economic justice are racists (nt)

[1StrongBlackMan]

118. More bullsh!t from the peanut gallery. No one has said that. n/t

[NCTraveler]

49. Here.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026634558

[DemocratSinceBirth]

50. ...

[SidDithers]

54. +1...nt

Sid

[DemocratSinceBirth]

56. ...

[SidDithers]

59. ...

Keep trying.

Sid

[Autumn]

65. A very interesting article.

Highly recommended.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

67. .

[Romulox]

71. Actually, Hillary style triangulation/corporatism is horrible for women and children. nt

[HooptieWagon]

101. Yes. Puts increasing numbers in poverty...

...and closes the door further to upward mobility.

[joeybee12]

86. These posts are getting more and more ridiculous...nt

[L0oniX]

100. Haiti. n/t

[obnoxiousdrunk]

107. Benghazi !!! n/t

[Thinkingabout]

108. Yes, Hillary is a strong advocate on women's issues, all over the world and I am very happy someone

like Hillary is speaking up on these issues. She has also worked hard for Civil Rights and though it may surprise some, she has the ability to handle more than one issue making her very qualified to be president.

It wasn't until the seventies women was given the opportunity in many states to get jobs once reserved for males. It was in the fifties integration started happening in the south and more in the sixties.

[ismnotwasm]

109. Well I'm glad to see you finally care about feminism

I hope for your support in the future. White feminism is indeed a topic that needs scrutiny--next time I start a thread on it in HOF, feel free to add your voice.



Meanwhile Clinton's campaign to help women and girls all around the world is in full swing. I hope for your support with this as well seeing how you care about women and women of color.

No Ceilings is also focused on hearing directly from girls and women about the progress and challenges they are seeing in their own lives. In 2014, No Ceilings launched the No Ceilings Conversations and the No Ceilings Survey to hear as many voices as possible and discuss the diversity of challenges that girls and women face in all aspects of society. In addition, No Ceilings is helping close gaps through CGI commitments, including the Collaborative Harnessing Ambition and Resources for Girls’ Education (CHARGE), which aims to advance girls’ secondary education around the world. CHARGE includes more than 30 partners, including companies, civil society organizations, multilaterals and governments, and has committed more than $600 million dollars to reach 14 million girls over five years.

- See more at: https://www.clintonfoundation.org/our-work/no-ceilings-full-participation-project/programs/background-no-ceilings#sthash.jN4uQEuz.dpuf

[Beacool]

116. Well, this is what he thinks of Obama.

In response to my post about Hillary Rodham Clinton the other day, several people — including Rebecca Spiff, in comments here — wrote to remind me that President Obama has been pretty terrible on a number of racial justice issues. Fair enough. I thought it was worth taking a look at some of what Obama’s done and what the landscape of racial justice looks like as he leaves office.

http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2015/04/14/racial-justice-after-obama/

[Bonobo]

120. Yes, and? nt

[McCamy Taylor]

121. Read "Women, Race and Class" by Angela Davis

rather than this pathetic little bit of divide and conquer.