I am pleased and proud to announce that NONE of the "worst possible VP picks" included in my DKOS poll http://www.dailykos.com/... was actually selected. In order of unpopularity, we successfully prevented the naming of:

Hillary Clinton (21%)
Geraldine Ferraro (15%)
John Edwards (12%)
Evan Bayh (12%)
Carrot Top (10%)
Jesse Jackson Sr. (9%)

and seven other truly terrible posibilities. Can the netroots use collective power to blackball candidates? YES WE CAN!

Congratulations, Joe, and thanks, Barack, for listening!

Also posted at my blog.

I'm writing this in response to Kos's latest blog post about Geraldine Ferraro's continued bid to become the Phil Gramm of Team Hillary.

Dear Geraldine: Shut up already.  

Racist Geraldine Ferraro is happily constructing new glass ceilings for women politicians. In short, if they're not named "Hillary Clinton", they don't deserve VP consideration.

She's apparently still bitter that Obama had such an advantage being black with a middle name "Hussein". Who could ever overcome an opponent named Hussein in modern day America?

What's amazing is how other prominent women are piling on.

Marcia Pappas, who heads the New York state chapter of the National Organization for Women, believes that Clinton supporters “would be outraged to know she was not given that right of first refusal.”

“She is the only woman in history who has ever garnered this much support,” Pappas continued. “She is the only woman in history who was able to raise the kind of money one would need to run a presidential campaign.”

Pamela Sumners, who directs the Missouri chapter of the abortion-rights group NARAL, added that Clinton “is now seen as the reigning dean of the women’s movement. It’s sort of Moses gets all the way to the mountain and doesn’t get to the promised land — and I think there would be people really angry about that.”

Here I thought Clinton's run was about shattering glass ceilings. Turns out it was the scaffolding for a new one.

That thought ran through my head last night as I spent two pleasant hours reading some old magazines I recently found in an upstairs bedroom. They are mostly 1920s vintage women's magazines like The Modern Priscilla and McCall's, with a scattering of other random titles.  I plan to sell them on ebay for my mom, and while assessing their condition, I was often distracted by some of the articles. Follow me below the fold for some examples:

Like the rest of us, Barack Obama learned from the media that Hillary Clinton will announce the suspension of her campaign for the Democratic Party's nomination for President this Saturday.  And while there is all sorts of gossip about what will happen next, for now the drama continues.  

Just last week, Bill Clinton complained that he'd "never seen a candidate treated so disrespectfully just for running."  Well look again, Bill.  Because your wife just succeeded in performing a 10-point-perfect double-dis against Barack Obama.  First she stiff-armed his historic claim to the party's nomination with her "victory" speech on Tuesday night.  Then the next day she ignores the most basic courtesy of telling her party's nominee she is dropping out of the race.  She even passed up the opportunity to do so in person at the AIPAC conference.  What a class act!

All's not well in Hillarywood.  

womenforfairpolitics.com is the web site Lanny has set up where one can sign the petition advocating Hillary Clinton to be vice president.  The whole site, petition and all, is pathetic and narcissistic.  Yes women historically and now have been held back and our country's social structure values the work women do less than the work men do.  That is clear.  But since Hillary Clinton has not suffered these slings and arrows, the site is besides the point.  It is in the same vein as all that David Horowitz stuff where he claims all these privileged conservative people have suffered so much on college campuses for being themselves.  Perhaps so. Maybe.  Possibly. But not him.

Anyhoo, I went on the web site and instead of signing the petition I sent an email recommending Geraldine Ferraro for the Vice Presidential slot -  she truly speaks more eloquently and genuinely for the purported community served by Lanny's website. (Obvious snark suggestion: the suggestion cited her having been vetted for the position already, her superior bitterness, and her palpable resentment)

I've had an interest in history and politics for as long as I can remember, but the 2008 Democratic Primary was the first primary ever in which I cast a vote and the first one of which I paid attention to the actual nominating "process." So, I did not learn until a few months ago that there were such monsters as "super" delegates. After observing the process, reading the great information here at DailyKos, and doing my own research, I've come to the conclusion that the role of "super" delegates in the Democratic Party nomination process isn't...well...democratic! So, when the time comes for the Democratic National Committee to do whatever post-election voodoo it does, I think the whole concept of "super" delegates need to go the way of the "compassionate conservative." I welcome a spirited discussion and debate about this issue, but I'm the stubborn type and have put much thought and research in this diary.

Since I'm an educator in my chosen career, let me start with a brief "history lesson" for those of you who, like me, may not have been so familiar with this process before I go into the "meat" of my opinion. Thanks in advance for the patience of those who may know this information for those who may not!

A MESSAGE TO OBAMA SUPPORTERS.... If you come across angry Hillary supporters or McCain snarky trouble makers, please do not engage them in name calling or snarky attacks.  We must fight them with insight and educate them with clear and thoughtful information.

I’m sure Obama would prefer that we dispel rumors and other disinformation campaigns without acting ignorant.  

Let me preface this by saying that I am indeed white, upper middle class and Young.
From paying close attention to this panic inducing primary season it has been cemented within me the fact that White people all over are starting to loose it. I am not sure where, when or how it started to every where I turn I see another white person exposing this ridiculous notion that they are being discriminated against. You can witness it nearly every time Sean Hannity speaks. It has become an ever constant talking point for hillary clinton's supporters. They say that working white people are afraid Obama will make them slaves and that's why they wont vote for him. Geraldine Ferraro pops her head up every now and again to say that the only reason why Obama is where he is is because of affirmative action.

Regardless of who we're supporting in the Democratic Primary, I think most of us can agree that this has been an extremely unique and interesting process, not just becaue we've been given two extremely competent candidates, but also because of the deep look at American society and the media that this campaign has exposed.

To me, one of the most interesting things is the by product between of having an African-American and a Woman running for president - an extended look at racism and sexism in our society.  

To compare the two directly, I think that sexism is more widespread in our society (and is unfortunately considered acceptable in some circumstances), but racism continues to be a greater problem, partially because of the total lack of vocabulary to describe racism.

In South Africa we have a saying:

"Strike a woman, strike a rock."

It is amazing the litany of excuses Clinton supporters use for why she lost.  Non of them ever have anything to do with the poor campaign she run.  The amazingly incompetent strategy.  The amazingly incompetent mismanagement.

I want to use this diary to review the The Shorenstein Center and the Project for Excellence in Journalism's new report on press coverage of the primary election.

First... I don't want to be a poor winner.  But, I refuse to pander to Clinton supporters and pretend I'm not jubilant in victory.  Progressives have been shut out of every national election in my life time.  We have for the first time in my life time a progressive as presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party.  This is a time to celebrate.

I know there are those among Clinton's supporters who are good progressives and good feminists who legitimately don't trust that Obama is a progressive and a feminist.  

I think there has to be healing from Clinton's spin.  When politicians try and create a false reality and false consciousness out of whole cloth, recovering from those lies means exposing the facts as can best be determined through the best scientific methods available.  

One of the most bizarre and deranged editorials in a long time was just written by Geraldine Ferraro.

In an editorial written by Geraldine Ferraro and published in the Boston Globe, the former Democratic Vice-Presidential candidate continued and extended her spate of bizarre comments on race and gender.

In an editorial in the Boston Globe Geraldine has a new line of attack;

Here we are at the end of the primary season, and the effects of racism and sexism on the campaign have resulted in a split within the Democratic Party that will not be easy to heal before election day. Perhaps it's because neither the Barack Obama campaign nor the media seem to understand what is at the heart of the anger on the part of women who feel that Hillary Clinton was treated unfairly because she is a woman or what is fueling the concern of Reagan Democrats for whom sexism isn't an issue, but reverse racism is.

I feel that Geraldine Ferraro may well have something to say, but her comments today in the Boston Globe seemed (perhaps due to judicious editing, the vestigial remains of a liberal conscience, or just the thought of Nancy Pelosi personally kicking her ass) somehow unclear.  So I've taken the liberty of making a bigot to English translation.

Now I finally understand the hateful tone and--dare I say, bitterness?--behind Geraldine Ferraro's divisive comments throughout this election. In her op-ed piece today in the Boston Globe,  "Healing the wounds of Democrats' sexism," she says a whole bunch of ridiculous stuff. Most of it we've heard before, from her and from others.  

But there was something new in this piece--something that instantly sent any lingering respect I had for her swirling down the drain of division and past the point of no return in American politics.  It also sent a message, loud and clear, about Ferarro's real motivations for speaking out in this campaign.

Here's the scary, scary thing that Ferarro says: she claims to speak for "Reagan Democrats," (later calling identifying this group as "white") and says that when Barack Obama "said in South Carolina after his victory "Our Time Has Come" they believe he is telling them that their time has passed."  

The Boston Globe has very interesting contrasting Op-Ed pieces today from Geraldine Ferraro and Ellen Goodman. They are trying to address one of the same issues, sexism and the campaign. But their tone and where the issues lead them could not be further apart.

Geraldine Ferraro's "black obsession" is on display again.  This time on the op-ed page of the Boston Globe.  Half the column is devoted to the claim that Clinton was the victim of sexism.  I'm not concerned with that claim right now.  More revealing is Ferraro's renewed claim that, in effect, whites, specifically "Reagan Democrats," were the victims of the Obama campaign's utilization of the "race card."

As for Reagan Democrats, how Clinton was treated is not their issue. They are more concerned with how they have been treated. Since March, when I was accused of being racist for a statement I made about the influence of blacks on Obama's historic campaign, people have been stopping me to express a common sentiment: If you're white you can't open your mouth without being accused of being racist. They see Obama's playing the race card throughout the campaign and no one calling him for it as frightening.

http://www.boston.com/...