Read more, see excerpts of the Kelliher call...
A Posting for Women for Obama:
Check out this article on Women's enews, and sign up for their email news list.
http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/3633
Here is an extract of the introduction and lead-in:
After a bruising Democratic primary some Hillary Clinton supporters are mulling voting for John McCain. One of Clinton's staunchest supporters, EMILY's List, argued against that yesterday, calling a vote for the GOP candidate a vote against women.
(WOMENSENEWS)--EMILY'S List, the political action committee that churned out money and support for New York Sen. Hillary Clinton until the last gasp of the Democratic primary campaign, urged disgruntled supporters on Wednesday away from the GOP candidate.
A vote for Arizona Sen. John McCain would be "unthinkable," Ellen Malcolm, EMILY'S List president, said in conference calls with reporters yesterday to counter the McCain campaign's efforts to woo disappointed Clinton supporters. EMILY's List supports only Democratic, pro-choice female candidates. McCain has consistently voted against pro-choice and anti-discrimination legislation in the U.S. Senate.
http://www.mercurynews.com/localnewsheadlines/ci_8417812
"The working Democrat likes Hillary a lot better," said Ellen Malcolm, head of the EMILY'S List, which works to elect Democratic women, including Clinton. She also believes Clinton has been the subject of sexist reporting and commentary in the media, reinforcing male stereotypes of women leaders.
And campaign supporters make no apology for the laser-focus attention Clinton has given to women voters. In virtually every primary, women voters are the majority who vote in Democratic primaries.
How can people like Ellen Malcolm encourage the storyline that Clinton is the subject of sexist reporting, when Clinton has decided to accept the support of organizations like International Profit Associates, which is currently facing criticism and a lawsuit from 103 female employees who claim they were sexually harrassed?
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/02/29/718538.aspx
It seems a little weird to me. Hillary Clinton can laugh with the best of them, and her easygoing attitude toward sexism shows clearly that she's used to the "boys club". But as Barack Obama has said, do we need a leader who's mastered a broken system? Or do we need someone to change the game?
I don't think that Hillary Clinton will change things. For example, in 1995, Hillary Clinton was silenced by Chinese leaders during a speech on human and women's rights. She didn't change anything. She was cut off. In 1993, Hillary Clinton was on a mission to push universal health care. She alienated herself from people like my US Rep, Jim Cooper. Her healthcare initiative failed.
Hillary Clinton deserves some credit for badgering her husband in 1998, when Ted Kennedy and Orrin Hatch worked together to create the Children's Health Insurance program. But it wasn't her program. She takes credit for it, but it wasn't her plan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Children's_Health_Insurance_Program
And moreover, the SCHIP program hasn't helped to reduce the number of uninsured children in middle class families that are 200% or more above the poverty line.
http://www.vimo.com/reports/uninsured.pdf
Barack Obama helped to insure 150,000 more children in Illinois while he was in the state Senate. He pushed through legislation to change the approach to death penalty cases, and to insure that interrogations are videotaped. He worked across the aisle with Tom Coburn of Oklahoma to create more transparency in government. He worked across the aisle to create ethics reform legislation in the US Senate.
Barack Obama knows how to respond in a crisis. He knows how to get things done. And he is changing the tone in politics.